您当前的位置:首页 > 网贴翻译 Tips:使用 ← → 键即可快速浏览其他文章
为什么印度不是北约成员国?
2020-01-30 大米 5 收藏 纠错&举报
原文标题:Why is India not a member of NATO?
原文地址:https://www.quora.com/Why-is-India-not-a-member-of-NATO
译文简介:第四,印度是一个核大国,排在美国、俄罗斯和中国之后的前五名,和平时期的总体实力与法国和英国相当,人口超过10亿,独自占据了印度次大陆的大部分。一旦发生战争,拥有核武器的印度也可以将其常规军事力量提升到前两者之上,因此根本不需要北约的保护,甚至不需要北约的支持来阻止任何国家(即使是中国)攻击印度。
Julien Philippe
Why is India not a member of NATO?
I’d rather ask…
Why would India be a member of NATO ?
From Indian security standpoint, it’d be plain absurd to join NATO, while from the NATO standpoint, it’s surrealist and “out of boundaries” :
Firstly, India has since its independence a tradition to lead an international policy that serves its interests first, which doesn’t equate well with NATO interests nor U.S interests. As a testimony of that, let’s remember that Jawaharlal Nehru’s India was (and India is still) one of the major nation part of the non Aligned movement, started in the late 50s and 60s, along Tito’s Yugoslavia, Nasser’s Egypt, and many other countries unwilling to align themselves on the United States or the U.S.S.R 
Secondly, meanwhile, NATO stands for North-Atlantic Treaty Organisation, and India is hence far away from the geographical scope of the Treaty, which stretches itself from North America to Turkey.
Additionally, culturally closer countries like Australia, New-Zealand (both part of the U.S “5 eyes” intelligence partnership) are not part of NATO, nor are Japan and South-Korea, of which the U.S assure the Strategical defense since WW2 (for Japan) and the Korean War (for South Korea.
India is anyway a too big deal to be swallowed by NATO, more populated than the 29 NATO countries all-together.
Thirdly, after the fall of U.S.S.R, the unofficial NATO goal beyond collective security became first to secure American (and German) grip on Europe, and then the American interests in the Middle-East.
India is not part of this plan, too remote from NATO formal and factual objectives, as are NATO plans and objectives for India. Instead, the U.S.A entertain a bilateral relationship with India.
Then, India enjoys long-lasting and friendly ties with Russia, and its predecessor State, the U.S.S.R, which regularly invested in India’s development and armament, this until today (India obtained a good S400 air-defense deal with Russia, for the sake of which India dismissed the U.S threats of sanctions if the deal went through).
Fourthly, India is a Nuclear power, ranking in the top 5 behind U.S.A, Russia, and China, and on par with France and U.K about overall power in times of peace, populated with more than 1 billions inhabitants, and occupying the major part of a subcontinent on its own.
In case of war, the Nuclear India can also level up its conventional military above those last 2 and hence doesn’t need at all NATO umbrella or even support to deter any country to attack India, even China. Worst, NATO and hence, the U.S.A, could become a problem and a threat to India’s military through the U.S relationship with Pakistan. That does not call for subservience nor obedience to any foreign interest.
Also, NATO is the “U.S Sphere”, and joining the U.S sphere would be absurd from the Indian current geopolitical standoff with Pakistan :
Firstly, the U.S.A, lead Power of NATO, showed some love & help for quite some times for its troublesome Pakistani neighbor :
The U.S.A are widely present in Pakistan (but that part might not be “only” a problem, because after all, better an U.S held boiling Pakistan than a crazy radical Pakistan without chaperon, the situation is already tense enough as it is).
But nevertheless, why would India suddenly join a team who is led by a country who plays an antagonist card in its immediate neighborhood, neighbor with whom some territorial conflict remains unsettled as of today ?
And… on its side, why would NATO, whose main goal is collective security & mutual-defense, would enroll a country which could be engulfed (again) in a major conflict in the decades to come with one of its neighbors, especially with both equipped of Nuclear Warheads.
Secondly, global politics incompatibility between India & the U.S Sphere :
having those troubles with Pakistan (formerly part of India), India doesn’t appreciate much the Western games with the Muslim World… and the formerly non-aligned countries, especially the “territorial games”.
That explains, for example, why India does not recognize an independent Albanian Muslim Kosovo, detached from Serbia through a NATO aggression in 1999 and occupation ever since. Kashmir is an apple of discord between India and the U.S backed Pakistan, with some similar problematics (terrorism, ethnic cleansing).
Globally, I think India, as a non-Aligned movement pioneer, and now as a nuclear State and a regional superpower in the making which does not rely on bellicism but on societal progress (democratization, reformist, economy, partnership with other nations) to expand and elevate itself, India has no interest to join the U.S / Western Empire and antagonize both its Russian traditional ally and its Chinese neighbor.
As History demonstrated, the West is often better at creating problems for everyone and fixing them only in its own interest, than at helping anyone else than itself. 
Now, India is independent, hence free, developing itself, better on its own making its own choices about partnerships, accordingly to its interests and everyone’s behavior.

Julien Philippe
为什么印度不是北约成员国?
不如问:
为什么印度要加入北约?
从印度安全的角度来看,加入北约是荒谬的,而从北约的角度来看,这是超现实主义的,是“越界”的:
首先,印度自独立以来一直有领导国际政策的传统,这一政策首先服务于印度的利益,这与北约和美国的利益并不一致。作为证据,让我们记住贾瓦哈拉尔·尼赫鲁领导下的印度曾经是(现在仍然是)不结盟运动的主要国家之一。该运动始于50年代末和60年代,与铁托领导下的南斯拉夫、纳赛尔领导下的埃及以及其他许多不愿与美国或苏联结盟的国家一起开展。
其次,与此同时,北约代表北大西洋公约组织,因此,印度与该条约的地理范围相距甚远,该条约从北美一直延伸到土耳其。
此外,文化上更接近的国家,如澳大利亚、新西兰(都是美国““五眼”情报联盟的成员)和日本、韩国都不是北约的成员。二战(日本)和朝鲜战争(韩国)以来,美国确保了战略防御。
不管怎么说,印度是一个太大的问题,北约不可能吞并它,因为它的人口比北约29个成员国加起来还要多。
第三,苏联解体后,除了集体的安全,北约的非官方目标首先是确保美国(和德国)对欧洲的控制,然后是美国在中东的利益。
印度不是这个计划的一部分,与北约的官方目标和实际目标相距甚远,对印度来说,北约的计划和目标也是和印度的相距甚远。相反,美国考虑与印度建立双边关系。
然后,印度与俄罗斯和它的前身苏联保持了长久的友好关系,并定期投资印度的发展和军备,直到今天(印度与俄罗斯达成了一项不错的S400防空协议,为此,印度不理会美国的威胁,即如果该协议获得通过,美国将实施制裁)。
第四,印度是一个核大国,排在美国、俄罗斯和中国之后的前五名,和平时期的总体实力与法国和英国相当,人口超过10亿,独自占据了印度次大陆的大部分。
一旦发生战争,拥有核武器的印度也可以将其常规军事力量提升到前两者之上,因此根本不需要北约的保护,甚至不需要北约的支持来阻止任何国家(即使是中国)攻击印度。
此外,北约是美国的势力范围,从印度目前与巴基斯坦的地缘政治僵局来看,加入美国势力范围将是荒谬的:
首先,美国作为北约的领导力量,在相当长的一段时间里对其麻烦不断的巴基斯坦邻国表现出了一些关爱和帮助:
美国在巴基斯坦广泛存在(但这部分可能不是“唯一”的问题,因为毕竟一个美国控制的巴基斯坦总比一个没有监护人的疯狂激进的巴基斯坦好,因为局势已经够紧张了)。
但是,为什么印度会突然加入一个由一个在邻国打出敌对牌的国家(美国)领导的团队呢?
而且对北约来说,它的主要目标是集体安全和共同防御,为什么要让一个可能在未来几十年再次卷入一场重大冲突的国家加入北约呢?
其次,印度和美国之间的全球政治不相容:
由于与巴基斯坦(以前是印度的一部分)有这些麻烦,印度不太欣赏西方与穆斯林世界和前不结盟国家的游戏,特别是“领土游戏”。
例如,这就解释了为什么印度不承认一个独立的阿尔巴尼亚穆斯林的科索沃。科索沃在1999年北约的侵略和占领下从塞尔维亚分离出来。克什米尔是印度和美国支持的巴基斯坦之间不和的根源,有一些类似的问题(恐怖主义、种族清洗)。
从全球来看,我认为印度,作为不结盟运动的先驱,现在作为一个核国家和正在崛起的地区超级大国,不依赖于好战主义,而是依靠社会进步(民主化、改革、经济、与其他国家的伙伴关系)来扩大和提升自己,印度没有兴趣加入美国/西方帝国和对抗俄罗斯传统盟友和邻国中国。
正如历史所证明的那样,西方往往更擅长为每个人制造问题,并只从自己的利益出发来解决问题,帮助自己而不是帮助别人。
现在,印度是独立的,因此是自由的,发展着自己,更好地根据自己的利益和每个人的行为,自己选择伙伴关系。

Jacques Văn Khải, Fond of Foreign Affairs, relations buff
For India, they have never been a part of NATO. And in the future, they will never be. Because why?
India is in Asia, while NATO stands for the North Atlantic which means Europe and the U.S.+Canada.
Right now, India is seeking a position as a major non-NATO ally. For a long time, India has never decided to join any military parties, giving the fact India went neutral even India was allying with Russia itself. This is why India joins the Non-Alignment instead. It does have a serious role for this.
Not just only having no geographic relations, India was busy on its clash with Pakistan and minimal conflict with China.
Besides, NATO has its own law. They can protect its members, but towards its non-NATO allies, they can only help and even transfer weapons and technologies. So this makes India can only receive helps from them, because they won’t fight for India.
What ever it says, India will never be a part of NATO. But if they are seeking to be a major non-NATO ally, then yes, they can be.
I hope NATO and India can reach a good agreement - their alliance will definitely be blessed.

Jacques Văn Khải,爱好外交事务,有良好的人际关系。
对印度来说,他们从来都不是北约的成员。在未来,他们也永远不会是北约的成员。为什么? 
因为印度在亚洲,而北约代表北大西洋,意味着欧洲和美国+加拿大。
目前,印度正在寻求成为一个主要的非北约盟国。很长一段时间以来,印度从来没有决定加入任何军事党派,即使印度与俄罗斯结盟,印度也保持中立。这就是为什么印度加入不结盟组织的原因。它在这方面确实发挥了重要作用。
印度不仅没有地理关系,还忙于处理与巴基斯坦的冲突和与中国的小冲突。
此外,北约有自己的法律。他们可以保护成员国,但对于非北约盟国,他们只能提供帮助,甚至转让武器和技术。所以这使得印度只能得到他们的帮助,因为他们不会为印度而战。
不管说什么,印度永远不会成为北约的一部分。但是如果他们想成为一个主要的非北约盟国,那么,是的,他们可以。
我希望北约和印度能达成一个好的协议——他们的联盟一定会受到祝福。

Bala Senthil Kumar
First of all - Why is it even important to be a "great power"?  I certainly do not subscribe to the views that endorse any sort of power as being important.
This whole business of strategy and planning and competitive urges amongst nations comes from basic insecurities.
I'd rather see an India that is economically robust, in which its people are happy and able to lead healthy, secure lives, living in peace with its neighbours and the whole world indeed.
Some people see blocks and competition.  Hopefully India can see confluence and co-operation.  
All this bull about how much oil we consume and how much of it we hold is simply adding fuel to the fire of fear.  Indians have lived well for thousands of years before fossil oil was even considered a resource.  If the whole nation today was cut off from all electricity sources, Indians will find a way to live, without chaos.  
This isn't an endorsement of being backward.  This is just a question of who measures progress and indeed "great"ness and by using what standards.
No, I'm not for India or any bloody nation signing on to someone else's ideas.  How about letting India figure out what is best for its own people?  Just because the USA could use India being a West leaning power in the region shouldn't mean India toe the line to make this happen, since it looks favorable right now.
How about thinking of the next 500 years, removing all dependence on fossil fuels, reinvigorating India's agricultural assets, educating its people, making them healthy, wealthy and having no enemies?  How about an India that is able to give knowledge and great forward thinking ideas to the rest of the world, and showing how to live without stress and fear?  
Why should India even begin to subscribe to a foreign idea of "greatness" that is essentially built on the idea of supremacy of some sort that is neither morally or spiritually in tune with India's ethos as a people?

Bala Senthil Kumar
首先,为什么成为一个“大国”如此重要? 我当然不赞同那种认为任何权力都是重要的观点。
国家之间的战略、规划和竞争的全部事务都来自于基本的不安全感。
我宁愿看到一个经济强健,人民幸福,有能力过上健康、安全的生活,与邻国乃至整个世界和平相处的印度。
有些人看到障碍和竞争。希望印度能看到融合与合作。
所有这些关于我们消耗了多少石油以及我们持有了多少石油的胡言乱语只不过是在给恐惧火上浇油。在化石油被认为是一种资源之前,印度人已经生活了数千年。如果今天整个国家切断所有的电力来源,印度人将找到一种没有混乱的生活方式。
这不是对落后的认可。这只是一个谁来衡量进步和真正的“伟大”以及使用什么标准的问题。
不,我不支持印度或任何国家接受别人的想法。不如让印度找出对自己人民最好的办法。仅仅因为美国可以利用印度在该地区成为一个亲西方的大国,不应该意味着印度要遵循路线来实现这一点,即使它现在看起来是有利的。
如果我们生活在一个需要安全联盟的世界,那么我们就在培育一个本质上发展了许多因不安全而结成的联盟的世界。这正是我们应该超越的思维方式。
想想未来500年,消除所有对化石燃料的依赖,重振印度的农业资产,教育人民,让他们健康、富裕,没有敌人,如何?印度向世界其他地方提供知识和伟大的前瞻性思想,并展示如何在没有压力和恐惧的情况下生活,如何? 
为什么印度或其他国家就不能有勇气在不威胁或不受威胁的情况下,悄悄地忽略保持聪明和战略眼光的必要性,而不是一味地关心他人、富有同情心,并坚持下去呢?
为什么印度要开始接受外国所谓的“伟大”理念,这种理念本质上是建立在某种既不符合印度民族精神的道德或精神上的霸权之上?
环球旅行
请文明理性发言,请不要发布违规评论,包括但不限于(诋毁、极端、敏感、歧视、色情、引战、人身攻击)等,如发现此类评论,请不要回复,直接举报。网站意见建议请点击 意见反馈
我要纠错&举报
文章地址
纠错类型
备注说明
 
我要举报
文章地址
举报理由
 
打赏评论
1、如果您喜欢此评论,可以对其打赏
2、不鼓励对违规评论(包括但不限于违法、辱骂、歧视等)进行打赏,系统将可能回收对其的打赏
充值