在这些文章里涉及了社会历史、天文、文学等多个领域的内容，究竟又会为大家奉上怎样的“盛宴”呢，就请大家自己来品尝一下吧。
一、目录
[2013.06.01] Urbanisation: Some are more equal than others
[2013.06.01] Drawing the battle lines 保守派vs.改革派：划分战线
[2013.06.01] The strange rebirth of liberal England自由主义怪异重生
[2013.06.01] Martian space flight: Red dreams 火星之旅
[2013.06.01] Killer drones: Out of the shadows 无人机杀手
[2013.06.06] Why so little Chinese in English? 英语的汉语借词太少
[2013.06.08] Lexington: The China syndrome 中国综合症
[2013.06.08] Too much of a good thing 领导人优势过多
[2013.06.08] America’s non-banks: The anointed美国金融机构封神榜
[2013.06.08] Palaeontology: A heroic find 古生物学史诗般的发现
[2013.06.08]Democrat or sultan? 土耳其的抉择：民主还是王权?
[2013.06.08] Luxury in the Arab world 阿拉伯奢侈品市场
[2013.06.08]Turkey's troubles:Democrat or sultan?土耳其受难记
[2013.06.08] Turkey erupts: The new young Turks 土耳其新一代的年轻人
[2013.06.15]Secrets, lies and America's spies 监控网络错在哪
[2013.06.15] Surveillance: Look who’s listening 揭开监控黑幕
[2013.06.15] AIDS in India: The cost of living 生命的价值
[2013.06.15] Europe’s reluctant hegemon 心不甘情不愿的欧洲盟主
[2013.06.15] Energy: Tilting atwindmills 德国能源：无的放矢
[2013.06.15] Online privacy: How to disappear 如何抹去线上痕迹
[2013.06.22] Persian power: Can Iran be stopped? 难道伊朗已经无人能挡
[2013.06.22] China's Bank: the Shibor Shock 中国央行坐视钱荒加剧
[2013.06.22] The start of history 中日战争，历史的开篇
[2013.06.22] Cement industry: Ready-mixed fortunes 水泥业复苏在望
[2013.06.20] The Big Mac Index goes to North Korea 巨无霸指数走进朝鲜
[2013.06.22] Henry Cecil 悼～传奇驯马师亨利·塞西尔
[2013.06.22] Money and happiness: Buy buy love 买来的“爱”
[2013.06.29] Mediobanca: A little less tangled 意大利中期银行
[2013.06.29] Defining financial bigotry: Disparate times 金融偏执的认定
二、文章内容
[2013.06.01] Urbanisation: Some are more equal than others
中国的城镇化
Urbanisation
城镇化
Some are more equal than others
有些人比其他人更“平等”
China’s need for a new urbanisation policy reaches a critical point
中国亟需新的城镇化政策
Jun 1st 2013 | SHENZHEN |From the print edition
FOR many migrants who do not live in factory dormitories, life in the big city looks like the neighbourhood of Shangsha East Village: a maze of alleys framed by illegally constructed apartment buildings in the boomtown of Shenzhen, near Hong Kong. There are at least 200 buildings, many of them ten storeys tall (see picture). They are separated by only a metre or so, hence the name “handshake buildings”—residents of neighbouring blocks can reach out from their windows and high-five.
上沙东村坐落在毗邻香港的深圳，发展迅猛。违章建造的住宅楼鳞次栉比，迷宫般的小巷夹杂其间——对许多不住在工厂宿舍的农民工来说，他们在大都市的生活便莫过如此。这些楼房至少有200幢，许多高达十层(如图)。它们只有一米左右的间隔，因此被称为“握手楼”——相邻楼房的住户可以探出窗口，击掌问候。
The buildings are China’s favelas: built illegally on collectively owned rural land. Rents are cheap. An eight-square-metre (86-square-foot) flat costs less than $100 a month. They symbolise both the success of the government’s urbanisation policy and also its chronic failures. China has managed a more orderly system of urbanisation than many developing nations. But it has done so on the cheap. Hundreds of millions of migrants flock to build China’s cities and manufacture the country’s exports. But the cities have done little to reward or welcome them, investing instead in public services and infrastructure for their native residents only. Rural migrants living in the handshake buildings are still second-class citizens, most of whom have no access to urban health care or to the city’s high schools. Their homes could be demolished at any time.
这些违章住宅矗立在集体所有的农地上，是中国棚户区的缩影。房租很便宜。八平米(86平方英尺)的一间房月租不到100美元。这些住宅既象征着政府城镇化政策的成功，也象征着它的慢性失败。与许多发展中国家相比，中国的城镇化进程更加有序，却成本低廉：亿万农民工蜂拥而至，建设着中国的城市，制造着中国的出口商品;而城市却极少回馈或欢迎他们，只顾着为本地居民改善公共服务和兴建基础设施。住在“握手楼”里的农民工依然是二等公民：他们中的绝大多数无法加入城镇的医疗体系，其子女也无法接受城市的高中教育;他们的住所也面临着随时被拆的危险。
China’s new leaders now say this must change. But it is unclear whether they have the resolve to force through reforms, most of which are costly or opposed by powerful interests, or both. Li Keqiang, the new prime minister, is to host a national conference this year on urbanisation. The agenda may reveal how reformist he really is.
现在，中国的新领导人宣称：这种情况必须改变。但尚不清楚他们是否有决心推进改革，毕竟大多数改革或代价高昂，或受到强大利益集团的反对，或同时面临这两大难题。新任总理李克强今年将主持召开关于城镇化的全国会议。从会议中，我们或能看出他是否真的是一位改革者。
He will have no shortage of suggestions. An unusually public debate has unfolded in think-tanks, on microblogs and in state media about how China should improve the way it handles urbanisation. Some propose that migrants in cities should, as quickly as possible, be given the same rights to services as urban dwellers. Others insist that would-be migrants should first be given the right to sell their rural plot of land to give them a deposit for their new urban life. Still others say the government must allow more private and foreign competition in state-controlled sectors of the economy such as health care, which would expand urban services for all, including migrants. Most agree the central government must bear much more of the cost of public services and give more power to local governments to levy taxes.
他会听到不少建言。一场异乎寻常公开的辩论已在智库内、微博上和官媒中全面铺开，辩论的话题是：中国应如何改善城镇化的方式。一些人提议：城市中的农民工应尽快获得与当地居民同等的、享受公共服务的权利。另一些人坚持认为：应首先允许准农民工出售他们的农地，这样，他们就能获得迁居城镇的储蓄保障。还有一些人建议：政府必须开放更多的私企和外企进入国有控制的经济部门(比如医疗)，这样城镇服务就能覆盖包括农民工在内的更多人。多数人认同一个观点：中央政府必须在公共服务上承担更多成本，并赋予地方政府更大的征税权力。
Any combination of these options would be likely to raise the income of migrants, help them to integrate into city life and narrow the gap between the wealthy and the poor, which in China is among the widest in the world. Such reforms would also spur on a slowing economy by boosting domestic consumption.
这些措施都可能提高农民工的收入，帮助他们融入城市生活，以及缩小贫富差距(中国是贫富差距最大的国家之一)。此类改革也将提振内需，刺激趋缓的经济增长。
Officials know, too, that the longer reforms are delayed the greater the chances of social unrest. “It is already a little too late,” Chen Xiwen, a senior rural policy official, said last year of providing urban services to migrants. “If we don’t deal with it now, the conflict will grow so great that we won’t be able to proceed.”
官方也知道：改革拖得越久，社会就可能越不稳定。去年，中国三农政策的高级官员陈锡文针对农民工享受城镇公共服务发表了看法：“已经有点晚了。如果再不做，矛盾就更大，压得我们做都做不动。”
Yet Mr Li, the prime minister, would do well to dampen expectations. The problems of migrants and of income inequality are deeply entrenched in two pillars of discriminatory social policy that have stood since the 1950s and must be dealt with before real change can come: the household registration system, or hukou, and the collective ownership of rural land.
然而，面对大家的热切期待，李总理可能会泼点冷水。农民工和收入不平等的问题深深植根于两大歧视性的社会政策之中：户籍制度(也即户口)和农地的集体所有制。如果不能触及这些始于上世纪50年代的政策，真正的变革将无从开始。
Who will pay?
谁来买单?
The hukou perpetuates a rigid caste system. Children of holders of rural hukou inherit their parents’ second-class status, even if they are born in cities. Many urbanites want to keep this system in place, to protect their preferential access to jobs, education and health care.
户口延续着僵化的等级制度。如果父母是农村户口，那么孩子也就顺承为二等公民，即使他们出生在城市。许多城里人都想留住这个制度，以保护他们在就业、教育和医疗等方面的特权。
City governments, meanwhile, cannot afford to extend public services to migrants. Zheng Zhijie, president of state-owned China Development Bank, estimated in May that cities would require 50 trillion yuan ($8.2 trillion) in investment by 2020 to accommodate 100m new migrants and provide increased benefits to those already there. Shanghai’s schools give a sense of the scale of the problem: the city had 170,000 students enrolled in high school in 2010, all holders of Shanghai hukou; more than three times that many children—570,000 migrant children aged 15 to 19—were living in the city in 2010 without Shanghai hukou, most of them unable to attend those schools.
与此同时，如果把农民工纳入城市的公共服务体系，政府将无力承担。今年五月，中国国家开发银行行长郑之杰估算：如果城市吸纳一亿新农民工并提高原有农民工的福利水平，那么它们就需要在2020年前投资50万亿人民币(8.2万亿美元)。上海的学校也形象地展示了这个问题的严重程度：这座城市在2010年有17万高中在校生，他们都持有上海户口;与此同时，57万(17万的三倍多)15至19岁的外来青少年也住在这座城市，但他们没有上海户口，绝大多数因此无法进入上海的高中学习。
The collective control of rural land by local officials also impedes social mobility, by allowing local governments and developers to dispossess farmers of the land they lease—and to pay them far below market value for it. Yu Jianrong, a researcher on rural China, calculated in 2010 that the government had expropriated 6.7m hectares (16.5m acres) of rural land over a 20-year period, paying farmers 2 trillion yuan ($326 billion) less than market value.
地方政府对农地的集体控制权也阻碍了社会流动性。集体控制权允许地方政府和开放商征收租给农民的土地，但农民获得的补偿却远低于市值。2010年，中国的三农问题学者于建嵘估算，20多年来，政府共计征收670万公顷(1650万英亩)土地，给农民的补偿却比市值少了2万亿人民币(3260亿美元)。
At the same time, housing prices in cities are increasingly out of reach for migrants. The central government has encouraged the construction of low-cost housing in cities with limited success, since only local hukou holders are eligible.
与此同时，面对城市的房价，农民工愈发有心无力。虽然中央政府鼓励城市兴建成本低廉的住房，但效果有限，因为只有持有本地户口的居民才能购买。
The discriminatory policies continue to take their toll on migrants. China has 163m migrant workers who have left their home township (another 99m people are classified as migrants even though they have only given up farming without moving away). A higher proportion of those were co-renting apartments with others in 2012 than four years earlier (19.7%, up from 16.7%), according to data released this week by the National Bureau of Statistics. And fewer migrants are becoming homeowners—0.6% in 2012, down from 0.9% in 2008.
歧视性的政策依旧伤害着农民工。中国离乡背井的农民工有1.63亿(另有9900万被归为农民工，即使他们只是放弃农作而并未离开家乡)。国家统计局本周发布的数据显示：2012年与他人合租住房的农民工占19.7%，比四年前的16.7%有所上升;2012年拥有自购房的农民工占0.6%，也低于2008年的0.9%。
Some scholars say a solution lies in the handshake buildings of Shenzhen. Tao Ran of Renmin University in Beijing says the government should legalise such buildings around the country—allowing rural dwellers near cities to develop them and rent out flats to migrants—and then levy taxes and fees to pay for expanding services. It sounds like a reasonable proposal that would increase the supply of affordable housing and help more migrants become proper urban residents.
一些学者表示，深圳的那些“握手楼”就是解决问题的契机。人民大学的陶然认为，政府应该在全国范围内将这些违章住宅合法化，允许城郊的农村房主扩建住房、租给农民工;政府可以从中征收税费，以补贴扩大公共服务所需的花费。这项建议听起来合情合理，或能增加廉价住房的供给，帮助更多农民工成为体面的城镇居民。
But local governments will have none of it, Mr Tao says, as they will fight to retain control over land, their chief source of revenue. Other vested interests, he says, will fight, too. The road to equality for China’s migrants will continue to be a hard one.
但陶先生也表示，地方政府不会采纳他的建议，因为他们会死守对土地的控制，这可是他们的主要财源;而其他既得利益者也会拼命反对。中国农民工的平权之路仍将荆棘满布。
[2013.06.01] Drawing the battle lines 保守派vs.改革派：划分战线
Ideological debate
意识形态之争
Drawing the battle lines
划分战线
A conservative backlash against a push for reform
保守派vs.改革派
Jun 1st 2013 | BEIJING |From the print edition
IN DECEMBER China’s new Communist Party chief, Xi Jinping, said something that encouraged advocates of political reform. No organisation or individual, he declared, had a “special right to overstep the constitution and law”. He was simply quoting the constitution, but some liberals were encouraged by his praise of the “mighty force” of a document the party often ignores. Officials are now warning optimists not to get carried away.
新任中共总书记习近平曾在去年12月发表讲话，政治改革派为此备受鼓舞。习宣布，任何组织或个人都不得有“超越宪法和法律的特权”。他仅仅是提到了宪法一词，但有些自由派人士因为他赞扬了宪法的“伟大力量”，于是备受鼓舞。因为中共往往无视宪法。现在，官员们在提醒乐天派不要得意忘形。
The constitution contains much that liberals admire. It makes no mention of the Communist Party, except in its preamble. It promises freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly and of religious belief.
中国宪法中包含许多自由派人士所称扬的内容，除了序文以外，它都没有提及中共。中国宪法保证言论、出版、集会及宗教信仰自由。
Liberal calls for “constitutionalism” mean that the document should be above any other law or party edict. In January journalists at a liberal-minded newspaper, Southern Weekend, staged an unusual strike over the censorship of an article in praise of constitutionalism. But some in the party are clearly concerned about attempts to promote a reform agenda using the constitution as a shield. Now constitutionalism has come under fire.
自由派要求“宪政”，即宪法应在其他任何法律或中共的命令之上。今年一月，自由派杂志《南方周末》的记者们不满中共对一篇称扬宪政的文章进行审查，发起了罢工，此举实属罕见。但是，中共党内有人明确表示，对有人试图以宪法为盾推进改革议程感到担忧。如今，宪政的概念遭到了批判。
The assault began on May 21st with an article in a leading party journal by Yang Xiaoqing of Renmin University. The main components of constitutionalism, it said, belonged to “capitalism and bourgeois dictatorship, not to socialist people’s democracy”. It said constitutionalism was “deceptive”: in fact only politicians supported by “big interest groups” could get elected.
5月21日，人民大学的杨晓青在某主要党内刊物上发表了一篇文章，对宪政的批判由此开始。文章谈到，宪政的主要内容属于“资本主义和资产阶级专政，而不是社会主义人民民主”。文章还提到，宪政是个“幌子”：事实上只有被“大型利益集团”拥护的政客才能当选。
On the following day Global Times, a Beijing newspaper, said that debate about constitutionalism was not just a theoretical one. It was being used, it said, to negate China’s political system and try to turn it into a Western one. Calling for constitutionalism was in fact unconstitutional.
接下来一天，北京的一家报纸《环球时报》称，关于宪政的争论并不只是一个理论问题。该报还称，这场争论被用以否定中国的政治体制并试图将其西化。呼吁宪政实际上就是违反宪法。
It is difficult to tell whether Mr Xi himself endorsed the attacks. He has not mentioned constitutionalism but seemed to keep the debate alive by referring again in February to the constitution.
很难说习近平本人是否认可这种批判。他没有提及宪政，但在2月又一次提及宪法，此举似乎是为了让这场争论继续下去。
However, it is highly unlikely that Mr Xi is on the side of the liberals. In January remarks widely believed to have been made by him in an internal speech circulated on the internet. He criticised unnamed people for suggesting that reform meant adopting “Western universal values”.
无论如何，习近平基本上不可能站在自由派这边。1月，一些言论在网上流传，大家普遍认为那是习在某次内部讲话中发表的。他对某些认为改革就是接受“西方普世价值”的人提出批评，但没有指明是谁。
But if the party hopes a few editorials will keep liberals quiet, it is likely to be mistaken. The tirades against constitutionalism have helped to fuel internet discussion. The word became a top trending topic on Sina Weibo, China’s equivalent of Twitter. “Protecting the equal rights [conferred by] one person, one vote: that’s constitutionalism”, wrote Ren Zhiqiang, a real-estate magnate, to his 15m followers on May 27th. Mr Xi may be ruing the day he brought up the subject.
不过，如果中共希望几篇社论就能让自由派人士保持沉默，那就可能打错主意了。批判宪政的长篇社论令网上的讨论愈演愈烈。“宪政”一词成为了新浪微博(中国的推特)上最热门的话题。“保护一人一票的平等权利，这就是宪政”，地产大亨任志强5月27日在微博上写道，他的微博有1500万粉丝。在提及“宪法”一词那天，习近平可能就后悔了。
[2013.6.1] The strange rebirth of liberal England自由主义怪异重生
British politics and the young
英国政治和年轻人
The strange rebirth of liberal England
自由英格兰的怪异重生
Young Britons have turned liberal, both socially and economically. Politicians need to get on their side
英国的年轻人在社会和经济方面已经转向了自由主义，政治人物需要迎合
Jun 1st 2013 |From the print edition
FOR the past 170 years The Economist has consistently advocated free trade, punctured government bloat and argued for the protection of individual liberties. It has also been consistently disappointed. Irksomely, political parties tend to plump either for economic liberalism or for social liberalism. Sometimes a small party boldly tries to combine the two—and is rewarded by becoming even smaller. In the United States our creed is so misunderstood that people associate liberalism with big government, when it advocates the opposite.
170年来《经济学人》一贯倡导自由贸易，刺破政府的膨胀，一贯主张保护个人自由。但得到的一直是失望。令人讨厌的是，政党选中的不是经济自由主义就是社会自由主义。有时，小有党派会大胆将两者融合，但结果是把自己变得更小。美国人误解了我们的信条，把自由主义和大政府联系起来，与我们倡导的正好相反。
Yet now Britain, The Economist’s home, the land of Adam Smith (on lead guitar), John Stuart Mill (bass) and William Gladstone (vocals), there is reason for hope. Young Britons have turned strikingly liberal, in a classical sense (see article).
但是现在的英国，这片《经济学人》的家乡，亚当•斯密(上图中的领衔吉它手)，约翰•穆勒(贝斯手)和威兼•格拉德斯通(主唱)这些人的故乡，在英国还是有理由展望的。从传统意义上说，英国的年轻人已经变得极度的自由了(见另文)。
They are relaxed, almost to the point of ennui, about other people’s sexual preferences, drug habits and skin colour. Although, like older Britons, they do not think much of mass immigration, they are tired of politicians banging on about it. As for the row over gay marriage, soon to trouble the House of Lords, they can hardly see the problem.
他们对他人性倾向，毒瘾以及肤色毫不关心，甚至到了倦怠的程度。跟老辈英国人一样，他们没有过多地考虑过大量移民的问题，但厌倦了政客的喋喋不休。人们对同性恋争议不断，英国上议院也会因此麻烦不断，但年轻人对此却是轻描淡写。
The young want Leviathan to butt out of their pay cheques as well as their bedrooms. Compared with their elders, they are welfare cynics. Almost 70% of the pre-war generation, and 61% of baby-boomers, believe that the creation of the welfare state is one of Britain’s proudest achievements. Under 30% of those born after 1979 agree. The young are deficit-reduction hawks. They worry about global warming, but still generally lean towards Mill’s minimal “nightwatchman state” when it comes to letting business get on with it: they are relaxed about the growth of giant supermarkets, for example.
年轻人不想让利维坦干涉他们的日常生活和房事。与老一辈相比，他们憎恨福利制度。70%战前出生的人还有61%的婴儿潮一代，这些人都认为英国的福利制度是最令人骄傲的创举。但1979年以后出生的不足30%的人同意此观点。年轻人是主张削减赤字的鹰派。他们担心全球变暖，但谈到商业与全球气候和谐发展之时，他们总体上倾向于米勒式的那种最小化的“守夜人国家”：比如他们对巨型超市的发展很淡然。
It’s only Locke ‘n’ roll, but I like it
虽然只是个游戏，但我喜欢
This is not just the young being the young. Rather, it is a generational change. In 1987 Britons aged between 18 and 34 were less likely than all other age groups to agree with the proposition that benefit cuts would encourage people to stand on their own two feet: now the young are more hard-hearted than most. They are also more socially liberal than were previous generations at the same stage of life.
这并不仅是年轻人保持活力的方法，而是一种代际变化。1987年，18岁至34岁的英国人比其它年龄段的人更不赞同削减福利的提议，福利削减会鼓励人们独立：结果现在的年轻人比大多数人更加的铁石心肠。同时，他们比同一阶段年龄段的前一辈更在社会方面更显自由。
There are several explanations for this commendable fashion. The young have grown up in a more mixed society. During their formative years they were exposed to the internet—an organ with an inbuilt resistance to government meddling. Perhaps most important, society has become less generous to them. In 1998 a new Labour government abolished student grants and introduced fees of £1,000 (then $1,656) a year. These have swelled to a maximum of £9,000. The loans are on such generous terms that this is still a form of welfare, but it does not feel like it. In 2010 the coalition government abolished the Education Maintenance Allowance, which had been paid to English teenagers from poor families to persuade them to stay in school. The old, by contrast, have been granted more generous pensions, and will shortly be protected against having to sell their houses to pay for residential care. Small wonder they treasure the welfare state.
这是一种可圈可点的时尚，对此有多种解释。现在的年轻人在一个更为复杂的社会里成长。他们在网络里定了型――网络又嵌入了对政府干预的抵制。但最重要的一点可能是社会对他们更加吝啬。1998年工党政府不仅废除了学生的奖学金制度，每年还要缴费1000英磅(1656美元)。上学的费用达到了9000英磅的最大值。贷款条款慷慨异常，现在仍是福利的一种，但并不受欢迎。2010年，联合政府废除了教育维持津贴，而这本来是给英国困难家庭鼓励其子女上学之用的。而老年人却给予了更丰厚的养老金，很快又受到保护，不致于卖房来支付家庭护理的费用。这样，他们珍惜这个发放福利的国家也就不足为奇了。
Young Britons seem unusual. In America the young are noticeably liberal on gay marriage but less keen on abortion (admittedly a subject where liberalism is harder to define). Some polls hint that young Americans are more inclined than their elders to think that the government ought to do more. A French poll suggests les jeunes are becoming less iconoclastic.
英国年轻人的外表非常寻常。美国年轻人对同性恋婚姻极度开放，但不太热衷流产(坦白地说在这个话题里更难定义自由主义)。有些民调显示美国年轻人比老辈美国人倾向更强，认为政府应该有更多做为。法国有份民调显示年轻人变得更加拘谨。
Britain’s teenagers and 20-somethings might turn statist when they have children, and more so when their knees give out. They might develop less tolerant views on sex and drugs when their offspring become teenagers. But they will not turn into their parents. Fundamental opinions about society are like bones: they are shaped in youth.
英国青少年以及20岁左右的年轻人――当这些人生了孩子后，他们可能会精打细算，当他们膝下儿孙众多时会更精采细算。当孩子长成之时，他们可能不会容忍自己的孩子对性和药物的观点。但他们也不会跟自己的父母一样。社会的基本观点跟人的骨架一样：在年轻之时就定型了。
The problem, for those who love freedom, is that the young lack political clout. The average MP is 50 years old; the average councillor is 60; the average member of the House of Lords is 69. The old vote, even in local elections. They dominate constituency associations. They are driving the most disruptive force in British politics: the fast-rising UK Independence Party (UKIP), which wants to return Britain to a prelapsarian state where immigration is low, marriage is heterosexual and Europe is on the other side of the Channel.
那些热爱自由的人经常想的问题是年轻人缺乏政治影响力。国会议员的平均年龄是50岁;市议员的平均年龄是60岁;上议院的平均人数是69人。老人投票决定，地方选举也是如此。他们主导选区协会，也驾驶着英国最具破坏性的力量：迅速崛起的英国独立党(UKIP)，此党想把英国带回人类坠落前的状态：人们迁徒缓慢，异性结婚，欧洲停留在英吉利海峡的另一侧。
Hope I die before I pay tax
死了就不用缴税了
Still, political parties should heed the young much more than they do. Although people’s fundamental political views do not change much as they age, their propensity to vote does. Today’s distracted libertarians are tomorrow’s dependable voter block. And, to the extent that people’s opinions do shift over their lifetimes, they tend to bend in one direction: towards the views of the young. Everybody has become calmer about homosexuality and more sceptical about welfare over the past few years. But the young were there first. They are political early-adopters and trend-setters.
政治党派仍需要更加关心年轻人。虽然人们基本的政治观点不随年龄的增长而变化，但投票倾向会变化。今天心在不蔫的自由主义者就是明天可靠的选民。人们的观点会随着经历的改变而变化，从这一意义上说，会转向一个方向：趋向年轻人的观点。大家在同性恋面前更加理性，但对近几年的福利制度却更加怀疑。但是年轻的人们是英国首批怀疑论者，政策早斯的采纳者，新潮的领导者。
Far from courting them, the big political parties are running in precisely the opposite direction. Spooked by UKIP, the Conservatives shuffle their feet when the subject of gay marriage comes up. They are preparing to fight the 2015 general election on an anti-immigration platform. Labour has social liberalism to spare. But it has opposed welfare cuts and rediscovered its historical enthusiasm for economic meddling, which it calls “predistribution”. The Chinese leadership quotes Adam Smith more often than Ed Miliband does.
那些大型的政党远不会讨好他们，而采用相反的方式。受到英国独立党的惊吓，保守党在同性恋婚姻的问题上裹足不前。他们准备好了，想在反移民问题的舞台上大战2015年大选。工党有社会自由主义以备用。但是却反对削减福利，又重新找到了对经济干预的历史热情，经济干预被称作是“初步分配”。中国领导人比埃德•米利班德还要更多地引用亚当•斯密的话。
The only politician whose views chime with the liberal young is the hedonistic mayor of London, Boris Johnson. Sterner sorts have a tougher time. George Osborne, the Whiggish chancellor of the exchequer, is loathed by Tories for his social liberalism and by Leviathan’s lackeys for his spending cuts. Nick Clegg, who has tried to steer his Liberal Democrat Party onto classically liberal ground, has even more foes. But these men are not wrong so much as early. They went into politics too soon. One change would help. If 18- to 24-year-olds voted as reliably as the over-65s, it would mean almost 2m more ballots, and politicians would have to pay attention. For the sake of freedom, the young should hurry to the polling station.
仅有一位政要的观点与年轻人的自由主义主张契合，他就是快乐论者伦敦市长鲍里斯•约翰逊(Boris Johnson)。那些主张实行严厉政策的人日子不好过了。辉格党财政大巨乔治•奥斯本(George Osborne)因为主张社会自由主义被托利党人憎恨，又因为主张削减开支被利维坦的走狗憎恨。尼克•克莱格(Nick Clegg)努力领导自由民主党转向经典的自由主义阵地，现在也树敌甚多。但是这些人没有错，只是牌亮得早了些。他们都过早地涉入政坛。有一个变化会有所帮助的。假如18至24岁的这些选民跟65以上的选民一样可靠，这就意味着有些政要以及将近200多万张选票必须得注意。为了自由，年轻人应当冲向投票站。
[2013.06.01] Martian space flight: Red dreams 火星之旅
Martian space flight
火星之旅
Red dreams
梦中的红
Mars has always been Shangri-La for space buffs. Two new private missions show that its lure is as strong as ever
火星一直是太空迷的香格里拉。两项新的私人航天计划表明火星的诱惑依然如故。
Jun 1st 2013 |From the print edition
ON JULY 20th 1969, when Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin set foot on the Moon, it capped half a century of extraordinary progress in aviation. In the six and a half decades since the Wright brothers’ Flyer had staggered into the air near Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, aeroplanes had shrunk the world, revolutionised warfare and created the modern travel industry. Technical records for altitude, speed and endurance had fallen helter-skelter.
1969年7月20日，尼尔•阿姆斯特朗和巴兹•奥尔德林踏足月球，为航空业半个世纪来非凡的进步画上个完美的句号。自莱特兄弟的飞机在北卡罗莱纳州基蒂霍克附近摇摇晃晃的飞上天空之后的六十五年中，飞机让世界变小，彻底改变了战争，还创造了现代旅游产业。飞行高度，速度和续航能力的技术记录就像坐上了旋转滑梯，不断被甩到下面。
For that reason, many of those watching the two astronauts on their black-and-white televisions could have been forgiven for thinking that going to the Moon was simply the first step in a human expansion into the solar system. Indeed, that had long been the dream of the space buffs who made the Moon missions possible. Wernher von Braun, the genius who designed the Saturn V Moon rockets—and who had been planning Mars expeditions since the publication, in 1948, of his book “Das Marsprojekt”—pitched a crewed Mars mission to then-President Richard Nixon soon after Armstrong and Dr Aldrin landed.
正因如此，对于许多在自己的黑白电视上注视着这两名宇航员的人来说，认为登上月球仅仅是人类在太阳系扩张的第一步也是情有可原的。实际上，这早就是实现登月任务的太空迷们的梦想。沃纳•冯•布劳恩是设计了土星五号月球火箭的天才，他在自己1948年出版的《火星计划》一书中便开始筹划火星探险，在阿姆斯特朗和奥尔德林博士成功登月后不久他便向当时的总统理查德•尼克松抛出了一份火星载人航天计划。
But it was not to be. The Apollo Moon programme was shut down early, and the world’s astronauts have spent the past 41 years pootling around in low-Earth orbit. Now, though, spurred by the rise of the buccaneering, private-sector “New Space” industry, which is offering access to the cosmos at prices far lower than government-backed rockets can manage, the old dream is enjoying a resurgence. Elon Musk, whose rocket firm SpaceX already flies cargo to the International Space Station (ISS), makes no secret of his Martian ambitions. Two privately run organisations in particular—Inspiration Mars, brainchild of Dennis Tito, an American tycoon who became the world’s first space tourist in 2001, and Mars One, run by Bas Lansdorp, a Dutch entrepreneur—have announced plans to send people to Mars without relying on the resources of a state.
但是该计划并未成行。阿波罗月球计划早早便被终止，全球的宇航员过去的41年里都在近地轨道中逡巡不前。然而，受到冒险的私营“新太空”产业----能以比政府背景的火箭的价格低得多价格进入宇宙----的出现的激发，现在旧梦正在重燃。艾龙•马斯科毫不遮掩自己对火星的野心，他的火箭公司太空探索技术公司已经在向国际空间站(ISS)运送货物。特别是两家私营机构----“灵感火星”(美国大亨丹尼斯•提托的创意，他于2001年成为世界上第一位太空游客)及“火星一号”(由荷兰企业家巴斯•兰斯多普负责)----公布了不依靠国家资源将人类送上火星的计划。
Mr Lansdorp admits that, on hearing about his plans, people’s first response is that he must be crazy. But both he and Mr Tito (who started his career as an engineer at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, JPL, in Pasadena, which runs NASA’s unmanned Mars missions) insist they are serious. Technical studies have been done, astronaut applications are being processed and deals are being signed with the firms that will build the spacecraft.
兰斯多普承认，人们在听到他的计划后，第一反应便是他肯定是疯了。但是他和提托(其职业生涯始于在喷气推进实验室(JPL)担任工程师，该实验室位于帕萨迪纳市，负责NASA的无人火星任务)均坚称自己是认真的。技术研究已经完成，宇航员选拔正在进行，与建造太空船的公司的协议也正在签署中。
Both men are motivated by frustration with government efforts, which have gone around in circles—and not orbital ones—for decades. It is the stated policy of Barack Obama’s government to send a crewed mission to Mars in the 2030s. But given the recent history of NASA as a political football (the George Bushes senior and junior both proposed similar missions that went nowhere), and given looming cuts to its budget, few think such a mission will actually happen. As Mr Tito put it when he announced Inspiration Mars: “the way we’re going, we’ll never get started.”
数十年来政府做了不少尝试，但却只是团团乱转而已(不是围着轨道转)，这两个人都是由此化失望为动力。巴拉克•奥巴马的国策便是要在21世纪30年代完成火星的载人飞行任务。但是考虑到NASA最近作为政治足球的历史(老布什和小布什都提出了类似的计划，但均不了了之)，再考虑到其预算即将被削减的情况，几乎没人认为这项任务真的可以成行。正如提托在其公布“灵感火星”计划时说的：“按照我们现在的行事方式，我们永远都不会有开始。”
Can-do talk aside, there are good reasons for scepticism. Sending people to Mars will be extremely difficult; far harder than sending them to the Moon. For one thing, Mars is much farther away. The Apollo missions took three days to get there, but flight times to Mars are measured in months. That would require an utterly reliable spacecraft. The vast distance imposes a communication delay, too. Whereas the Apollo astronauts could talk to their ground-based controllers more or less in real time, Martian astronauts would face delays of up to 40 minutes between asking a question and getting an answer.
乐观的言论只是一方面，还有好几点值得怀疑。将人类送上火星将会极其困难，比将人类送上月球要难得多。其一，火星要远的多得多。阿波罗计划的宇航员花了三天时间到达月球，但是到达火星的飞行时间是以月为单位的。这意味着需要非常可靠地宇宙飞船。而且遥远的距离还会产生通讯延迟。阿波罗计划的宇航员可以和自己的地面指挥员进行近乎实时的对讲，而火星宇航员则要面临长达40分钟的应答延时。
And spending months in deep space would expose a crew to a chunky dose of radiation. Information from the Curiosity rover’s flight to Mars, just published in Science, suggests a crew could expect a radiation dose close to the maximum lifetime limit for NASA’s astronauts. If the sun were to have one of its regular temper tantrums, known as coronal mass ejections, which produce huge bursts of ionising radiation, that limit might be far exceeded.
而且在外太空停留数月的时间会使宇航员暴露在超大剂量的辐射下。好奇号漫游车在其火星航程中获得的信息刚刚发表在《科学》上，表明宇航员将会受到接近于NASA宇航员的最大终生限值的辐射剂量。如果太阳来一次它经常性的暴怒，即所谓的日冕物质抛射，此时会产生巨大的电离射线爆发，将会远远超出该辐射限值。
When the stars are right
等待时机
Both missions hope to use SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy, a planned upgrade of its existing Falcon rocket. But even with access to cheap rockets, flying to Mars without the financial firepower of a government requires clever, and drastic, cost-cutting. In Mr Tito’s case, this means that although his astronauts will fly within about 140km (90 miles) of the Martian surface, they will not actually land. His mission calls for a two-person craft—possibly a variant of SpaceX’s Dragon capsule, which is already used to ferry cargo to the ISS—to be sent on a “free return” trajectory to Mars. By clever design of its orbit, the craft can be sent to Mars with a single burn of its rocket engine. From thereon in, gravity takes over. The craft will swing around Mars and emerge on a trajectory precisely calculated to have it re-enter Earth’s atmosphere several months later, with only minimal course corrections needed along the way. Orbital mechanics is one of Mr Tito’s specialities. Before he left JPL to become an investment manager, he designed orbits for Mars probes.
两项计划都希望使用太空探索技术公司计划中的猎鹰重型火箭----其现有的猎鹰火箭的升级版。但是即使可以得到廉价的火箭，没有政府财源支持的火星航天任务不仅需要聪明才智还要大幅的成本削减。对提托的计划来说，这意味着虽然他的宇航员会飞至距火星表面约140公里(90英里)的地方，但实际上并不会在火星着陆。提托的计划需要将一艘双人飞船----可能是太空探索技术公司的“龙”飞船的一个变体，该飞船已经被用来向国际空间站运送货物----送上一条通往火星的“自由返回”轨道。通过巧妙地设计其轨道，该飞船在飞往火星的过程中只需要使用一次自己的引擎，随后，动力将会转由重力提供。飞船将会绕过火星，然后出现在一条经过精确计算的轨道上，使其可以在数月后重新进入地球的大气层，期间仅需要最低限度的航线修正。轨道力学正是提托的专长之一。在他离开JPL成为投资经理前，他做的就是给火星探测器设计轨道的工作。
Removing the requirement to land simplifies the task enormously. No complex manoeuvring into a Mars orbit is necessary. No landing craft is needed, nor any survival gear for use on the Martian surface. That saves fuel and, more importantly, launch mass (the overriding concern for any space mission). Mr Tito’s team hopes to wring further savings by launching in 2018, in order to take advantage of a rare set of celestial circumstances that allow a gravity-powered trip to Mars and back in 501 days, instead of the two years that would normally be required. That keeps food and water requirements low.
没有了在火星着陆的要求大大简化了这项任务。不需要进行复杂的操作以进入火星的轨道。不需要着陆舱，也不需要任何在火星表面使用的生存装备。这不仅可以节省燃料，更重要的是可以降低发射重量(所有航天任务的头等关注事项)。提托的团队希望通过在2018年发射飞船来节省未来费用，此时发射能够利用一次罕见的天体环境，可以达成一次仅需501天的重力驱动的火星往返之旅，而一般情况下需要两年的时间。这使的食物和水的需要量保持在较低水平。
“There is nothing technically infeasible about Tito’s plans,” says Robert Zubrin, who runs the Mars Society, which lobbies for human trips to Mars, and who has spent decades thinking about exactly how such missions might be executed. Mr Tito’s team has plenty of technical nous, as well as a deal with NASA to develop technology. It plans to recycle as much kit as possible from the ISS, whose life-support systems have proved themselves reliable for more than a decade.
“提托的计划在技术上是可行的”，罗伯特•祖布林说，他是人类火星之旅的游说团体----“火星社会”的负责人，而且花费数十年时间来思考如何能恰到好处的执行这些任务。提托的团队拥有大量技术常识，还与NASA达成了一项技术开发协议，计划从国际空间站回收尽可能多的装备再次利用，国际空间站的生命保障系统经受了十多年的考验，证明了其可靠性。
Of course, saying that something is technically feasible does not mean that it is easy. Mr Tito’s mission will push the bounds of space flight. A year and a half is long time to spend cooped up in a craft the size of a motor-home, but Dr Zubrin points out that similar feats have already been achieved. Valeri Polyakov, a Russian cosmonaut, spent 438 days in space in 1994 and 1995. Four other Russian and Soviet missions have been over 300 days long. Mr Tito hopes to keep personal conflict to a minimum by sending a married couple—ideally one past child-bearing age, to eliminate the risks of accidental pregnancy and radiation-induced infertility.
当然，说一件事技术上可行不代表这事就简单。提托的计划将会推高太空飞行的极限。一年半对于封闭在一个车屋大小的飞行器中来说是很长一段的时间，但是祖布林博士指出，人类已经达成了差不多的壮举。俄罗斯宇航员瓦莱里•波利亚科夫于1994年至1995年在再太空中逗留了438天。其余还有四组俄罗斯(及苏联)宇航员的停留时间超过了300天。提托希望通过以派遣一对夫妻的方式将个人冲突降到最低，过了育龄的夫妻最为理想，以消除意外怀孕及辐射导致不育的风险。
The return to Earth could also be difficult. Inspiration Mars’s spacecraft will slam into Earth’s atmosphere at 14.2km a second, significantly above the 11km/s speed of Apollo. No existing heat shield could deal with such re-entry speed. But Taber MacCallum, the head of Paragon Space Development, an engineering firm, who is one of Mr Tito’s chief collaborators, says modern materials should be up to the task of making a new one.
返回地球也个难题。“灵感火星”的太空船将会以14.2公里每秒的速度冲进地球的大气层，比阿波罗飞船的11公里/秒的速度要高得多。目前没有防热罩可以应对如此的重返速度。但是提托的主要合作者之一，普拉根太空发展这一工程公司的老板，塔伯•麦克卡勒姆称现代材料可以承担制造新型隔热罩的任务。
Assuming the engineering questions can be solved, Mr Tito’s chief problems will then be time and money. His mission faces a hard deadline. If it is not ready by January 2018, the intricacies of orbital mechanics mean there will not be another chance of such a short trip until 2031. And even a stripped-down, Spartan mission that uses as much existing technology as possible and makes no attempt to land will be expensive. Inspiration Mars gives no official cost estimates, but Jeff Foust, the editor of the Space Review, an industry newsletter, thinks it could be done for “very roughly, around a billion dollars”, a sum that Mr Tito may try to raise through a personal donation, the sale of media rights, sponsorship deals and charitable appeals to his fellow tycoons.
假设这些工程问题可以解决，提托的主要问题接下来将是时间和资金。他的计划面临着一个严格的期限。如果到了2018年1月还没准备就绪，根据错综复杂的轨道力学，要等到2031年才会再出现这种短期旅途的机会。就算这是一个仅带必要设备的斯巴达式计划，尽可能多地使用现有的技术，且不尝试着陆，也会耗资甚巨。“灵感火星”并未提供任何官方成本估算，但是行业时讯《太空评论》的编辑杰夫•福斯特认为要完成这项任务“粗略估计需要约十亿美元”，提托需要通过个人捐赠，转播权销售，呼吁志同道合的大亨们慷慨解囊来筹集这笔资金。
It is a big task, and a dangerous one, but it is not beyond what technology allows. Dr Foust, for instance, gives Mr Tito about a one chance in three of succeeding. Even if everything does go according to plan, though, cynics might question the value of a billion-dollar, one-and-a-half year trip that comes within spitting distance of Mars but does not land. Dr MacCallum points out that even a fly-by would generate a great deal of publicity. “It would be a [Charles] Lindbergh” mission, says Dr Zubrin. “The point would be to prove it can be done.” (Though, since it would involve a pair of people making a hazardous journey for the first time, rather than a copy-cat, albeit solo, trip eight years later, a better comparison would be with Alcock and Brown, two British pilots who flew the Atlantic in 1919.)
这是一项艰巨且危险的任务，但是并未超出技术允许的范围。比如，福斯特博士认为提托有三分之一的机会获得成功。然而，即使一切都按照计划进行，也会有人语中带刺的质疑耗资十亿美元，花费一年半时间，只到达离火星一啐之遥的地方却不降落，这个旅行的价值何在?麦克卡勒姆博士指出即使只是低空飞越火星也会产生巨大的影响力。“这会是一项(查尔斯)林白”式的任务，祖布林博士称。“重点是要证明这项任务可以完成。”(然而，因为该任务需要两个人踏上一次前所未有的危险旅途，这与阿尔科克和布朗这两名英国飞行员在1919年飞越大西洋的壮举更为类似，而不是林白这个模仿者八年后的单人飞行。)
Marooned on Mars
火星放逐
Mr Tito intends to simplify things by not landing. The Mars One project intends to simplify them by not taking off. Its four crew members, if they arrive intact, will live out the rest of their lives on Mars. They will build a settlement from their spacecraft and from inflatable living areas covered with regolith (the crushed rock that passes for soil on the planet). Nor will this be a one-off. Every two years the Martians will be joined by four more refugees from Earth, with the eventual aim of building up a full-fledged colony. As far as possible, they will produce food, water and materials in situ, though regular cargo launches from Earth will supplement these.
提托想通过不着陆来让任务简单化。“火星一号”计划则打算通过着陆后不再起飞来简化任务。该任务的四名船员如果毫发无伤的抵达火星，则将会在火星度过余生。他们会用自己的飞船及覆有表皮土(在地球上被当做土壤的压碎岩)的充气式生活区建造一块拓居地。而且这种航行不会是一次性的。每隔两年就会有四名来自地球“难民“成为火星人，其终极目标是建立一块成熟的殖民地。他们会尽可能的就地生产食物，水和材料，尽管会由地球定期发送货物作为补给。
If Inspiration Mars is working to a brisk schedule, then Mars One’s plans seem positively frantic. The organisers aim to build a replica habitat, to be used for training, on Earth this year. An uncrewed supply mission will be launched in 2016, so that the first astronauts (who would arrive in 2023) will find useful kit ready and waiting. Robot rovers will be sent ahead as scouts to look for a suitable location for the homestead. The whole thing will be broadcast, so television rights—along with sponsorship deals, donations and possibly technology licensing—will pay the enormous cost ($6 billion for the first manned flight alone). At least, that is the theory.
如果“灵感火星”的计划还算靠谱，那么“火星一号”的计划则肯定太疯狂了。组织者计划今年在地球上建立一个火星拓居地的复制版来用于训练。一项无人补给任务将于2016年启程，这样第一批宇航员(将于2023年抵达火星)抵达后将会找到已经整装待命的有用设备。探路机器人还会被提前送上火星以寻找一块适合作为大本营的地点。这个过程将会全程播放，所以电视转播权----以及赞助协议，捐赠及可能的技术许可----将足以支付这笔巨额费用(仅第一次载人航行便要60亿美元)。至少理论上如此。
It all sounds like a science-fiction writer’s fever dream. But the basic idea is nothing new. Mars advocates have been pondering one-way trips since the early 1990s, because this drastically simplifies the mission. Dr Aldrin, a keen advocate of manned space flight and one of the few people with experience of flying in deep space, is convinced that it is the way to go. And although most people would balk at the idea of spending several risky months traversing a vacuum so that they can live out their days in a freezing, airless desert millions of miles from home, the lure of Mars is strong for some. Mars One says that, since it opened the application process in April, it has had almost 80,000 people express an interest in becoming one of its astronauts. (In keeping with the media-friendly theme of its operation, Mars One allows anyone to apply to become an astronaut, and plans to televise the astronaut-selection process.)
这一切听上去就像一个科幻作家的狂热梦想。但是其基本创意并无新鲜之处。火星之旅的倡导者从20世纪90年代开始便一直在构思单程航行，因为这会使任务大大简化。奥尔德林博士既是一个载人航天的热心倡导者，又是少数经历过外太空飞行的人之一，他确信这便是可行的方式。用数月时间穿过危机四伏的真空，然后在远离家乡百万英里，没有空气的酷寒沙漠中度过余生，虽然大多数人对此都会望而却步，但火星的对有些人的诱惑是很强的。“火星一号”称，自从于四月份开启申请程序起，已经有近8万人表示有兴趣成为其宇航员。(与其媒体友好的运营策略步调一致，“火星一号”允许任何人申请成为宇航员，并计划通过电视直播宇航员的选拔过程。)
Mr Lansdorp insists that his plans can work. “Whenever I talk to engineers, they say the engineering is doable, but what about the finance?” he says. “Then when I talk to the finance guys, they say the finance is fine, but are you sure you can make the engineering work?” Few others, though, are quite so confident. Dr Foust is polite. “Any one of the things they’re describing—flying people to Mars, landing on Mars, living on Mars—is very difficult,” he says. “Doing all of those at once is even more so.” Others, privately, are scathing: “It’s a real shame that something like this is getting so much publicity,” says one such anonymous expert. “It gives the whole private space industry a bad name.”
兰斯多普坚信其计划可行。“不管我何时与工程师交流，他们都会说工程上是可行的，但是财务方面行不行呢?”他说，“然后当我和财务人员交流时，他们说财务上没问题，但你确定工程部分可以工作吗?”然而其他人可没如此自信。福斯特博士的言辞比较客气。“他们所说的每一件事----将人送往火星，在火星着陆，在火星生活----单独完成都非常之难，”他说，“想要毕其功于一役更是难上加难。”其他人私下里的言论就有点尖刻了：“像这样的事得到如此的关注简直是奇耻大辱，”一位不愿具名的专家称，“它会使整个私营航天产业蒙上污名。”
It is entirely possible—likely, even—that neither of these missions will happen. Mr Tito has the better chance, but there are many more ways for him to fail than to succeed. Mr Lansdorp’s plans look too ambitious to be credible. And NASA’s recent history suggests that its aspirations, too, will be blown off course by a future president. But all this will not deter true believers, who have been discussing how to run a Mars trip for decades. With the cost of space flight lower than ever, it seems unlikely that the dream will die. So even if the present crop of missions come to nothing, they will not be the last.
甚至说，两个计划无一可以成行也是完全有可能的。提托的成功机会略胜一筹，但是对他来说失败的可能性比成功要大得多。兰斯多普的计划野心太大，以致让人无法相信。NASA最近作为“政治足球”的历史表明，就算是它的雄心壮志，也会因一位未来的总统而偏离轨道。但这一切拦不住那些已经就如何进行一次火星之旅探讨了数十年忠实信徒。太空飞行的费用比以往更低，火星梦似乎不太可能消亡。所以就算现在两个计划颗粒无收，它们也不会是人类的最后一次尝试。
[2013.06.01] Killer drones: Out of the shadows 无人机杀手
Killer drones
无人机杀手
Out of the shadows
昭示天下
Barack Obama’s rules for drones could shape the new global laws of war
巴拉克•奥巴马无人机规定将塑造新的全球战争法则
Jun 1st 2013 | WASHINGTON, DC |From the print edition
WHEN it comes to lethal drone strikes against foreign targets, America’s government and Congress should be aware that “what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander”, says John Bellinger, for eight years a government lawyer charged with explaining George W. Bush’s global war on terror to allies.
说到无人机对海外目标的致命空袭，美国政府和国会应该想想John Bellinger (他做了八年的政府法律顾问，负责向美盟友阐释小布什的全球反恐作战。)的那句话“烹饪母鹅的作料也可以用来烹饪公鹅”。
China and Russia are just two of the powers that may soon launch their own fleets of unmanned aircraft against suspected foes. It is not too far-fetched to imagine a near future in which a Russian drone targets a Chechen radical based in neighbouring Georgia, say, who appears immune from capture while apparently plotting an imminent strike on Russian targets.
中国和俄罗斯这两个大国不久也将组建用来对付嫌疑敌的无人机编队。试想(而非遥不可及的遐想)在不远的将来，俄罗斯的无人机可向盘踞在邻国格鲁吉亚正在策划对俄的袭击但却又难以被逮捕的车臣极端分子发动空袭。
Experts such as Mr Bellinger have warned Congress in public hearings that unless America sets clear, internationally accepted rules for its own drone strikes, it can hardly condemn Russian or Chinese aerial killings with any credibility. Such advice has been echoed, privately, by diplomats from some of America’s closest partners, who fret about the legal underpinnings of Barack Obama’s war on terror. A few phrases passed by Congress days after the September 11th 2001 attacks give the president broad war-making powers in the name of self-defence.
包括Bellinger在内的许多专家就曾在公众听证会上向国会发出过警告：除非美国为自身的无人机攻击制定一个明确且被国际社会接受的规定，不然恐怕很难找到一个让人信服的理由去指责俄罗斯和中国的无人机空袭。这一提议得到了来自美国最亲密盟友的一些外交官的私人响应，他们为奥巴马反恐战争的法律基础感到忧虑。在2001年9月11日的恐怖袭击之后，国会通过了一系列法案授予了总统以自卫之名发动战争的广泛权力。
But such allies are worried not just about Mr Obama’s ability to stare down alarming, fast-rising powers such as China. The other reason why they want him to lead America back onto higher moral ground is that they fear for their own reputations, if they lend help to drone attacks. Even supportive governments face some hard choices about passing intelligence to America, when the ensuing drone strikes may leave spooks and spymasters facing public anger and even lawsuits.
但盟友们担心的并不只是奥巴马看住中国这样的后起之秀的能力。他们希望奥巴马把美国重新带回更高的道德水准的另一个原因是，假如他们为无人机袭击提供帮助，那么其自身的名声也令人担忧。在接连不断的无人机空袭或将特工和特工头子们置于公愤乃至官司当中时，甚至那些亲美政府也为是否向美国提供情报支持而犹疑不决。
On May 23rd Mr Obama moved to answer both hostile critics and anxious friends. In an hour-long speech, he announced tighter constraints on lethal American drone strikes. His aides hailed it as a pivotal moment, born of two years of inter-agency wrangling and reflection by the commander-in-chief.
5月23日，奥巴马回应了那些心怀敌意的批评者和忧心忡忡的支持者。
