-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
Voice 1
Hello and welcome to Spotlight1. I'm Marina Santee.
Voice 2
And I'm Steve Myersco. This programme uses a special English method of broadcasting. It is easier for people to understand, no matter where in the world they live.
Voice 1
A small boy stands outside his school building. It is playtime. But this boy always seems to be alone. Suddenly, two older, bigger boys walk over to him. They start to shout at him and push him. The small boy tries to fight back. But he is too weak. The older boys hit him over and over again.
You watch these boys from a distance. You are not particularly big or powerful. But you feel strongly that the big boys' behaviour is completely wrong. You believe that someone should intervene2 to stop the fight. The small boy has not asked for help. But it is clear that he needs it! You start to wonder if you should go and help him. But what if the bigger boys start hitting you? You may be able to help him this time - but what about the next time? What if they attack the boy again when you are not there to intervene? Will helping3 him just this once do any good? All these thoughts fly around your mind! You are just about to act when the school bell rings. A teacher appears. And the two big boys run away. The teacher sees the small boy crying. And quickly she takes him away to the school medical officer. You feel happy that the attack is over. But you are angry with yourself too - why did you not do anything to help? Why did you not get involved?
Voice 2
Conflict is everywhere - from the school playground to countries with nuclear weapons. In 2008, there were 30 armed conflicts in the world. Should people intervene to try and stop these conflicts? This is a question that many groups have to answer - the UN, concerned countries, aid groups.
Voice 1
One of the issues that may prevent such groups from acting4 is sovereignty. A sovereign5 nation is independent from any other authority6. Its government has the freedom to decide how to rule its country. So, any government wishing to intervene and help in another country's conflict meets a problem. Should its leaders ask that country to permit them to intervene? This would avoid threatening that country's sovereignty. But what if that country is treating its own people very badly? It will probably not permit any other country to intervene. So should other countries act without such permission? Surely the right thing to do is to help suffering people - even if it means going against a nation's sovereignty?
Voice 2
The United Nations organization decided7 on some rules for military intervention8 in 1945. The Second World War had just ended. And the U N wanted to make sure that future generations avoided a similar terrible conflict. Article 51 of the United Nations document states:
Voice 3
"Nothing in this present document will interfere9 with the right of an individual country or group of countries to defend themselves against a military attack."
Voice 2
So, a country can go to war if it needs to defend itself against attack. But the UN document does not permit any other military action, except if the UN votes that the action is needed to make and keep peace.
Voice 1
The UN bases its statements about war on the ‘Just War' theory. This theory had its beginning in ancient Greece and Rome. Later, a Christian10 church leader developed the idea. His name was Augustine. Augustine lived in North Africa and Italy in the 4th and 5th centuries. These were troubled times. And events in his country caused him to develop the Just War theory. As a Christian, he believed that war was always wrong. But, he knew that wars would probably always happen. So, rulers should go to war with sadness. And their aim should always be to bring peace. He wrote:
Voice 4
"We do not seek peace in order to be at war. But we go to war that we may have peace. Be peaceful, then, when you fight. Win against enemies that you fight with, and bring them to a state of peace."
Voice 1
Augustine believed that injustice11 was a greater crime than war. So rulers going to war to establish justice were right to do so.
Voice 2
Eight centuries later, another Christian thinker developed the Just War theory even more. His name was Thomas Aquinas. He wrote a book called Summa Theologica. In it, he presented a model of just war - how to decide if it was right or not for a leader to go to war. He wrote:
Voice 5
"It must be said that, in order that a war may be just, three things are necessary. Firstly, a country must go to war on the authority of its leader. Secondly12, there must be a good enough cause for the leader to go to war. The other country must deserve13 to be attacked. Thirdly, the people fighting should do so for the right personal reasons. That means to either prevent evil14 or to do good."
Voice 2
Today, there are two parts to the ‘Just War' theory. People call each part by an ancient Latin15 name. The first is jus ad bellum. This deals with the conditions and events before the war. Do they really need military force, or not? The second part is jus in bello - how to fight during a war in a moral16 way. For a war to be just, each of these parts must be true. There has to be a good reason for the war. And people have to fight it in a fair and legal way.
Voice 1
So, the question, ‘Should we intervene?' seems an easy one to answer. Surely it is just a matter of testing the situation using the ‘Just War' theory? Experts on conflict and peace-keeping would say that it is much more complex than that. For example, what if the conflict is not between two states, but between two groups inside a sovereign state? Would concerned countries still have the right to intervene? What if a sovereign state is acting in a way that causes its citizens to suffer? Is the need to protect basic human rights a just reason for other countries to get involved? As the Christian leader Augustine said: "The purpose of all wars...is peace."
Voice 2
We will discuss these questions in a later Spotlight programme. And we would like to hear your opinions on this subject! E-mail us at radio @ english . net.
收听单词发音 |
1
spotlight
|
|
| n.公众注意的中心，聚光灯，探照灯，视听，注意，醒目 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
intervene
|
|
| vi.干涉，干预，干扰，阻挠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
helping
|
|
| n.食物的一份&adj.帮助人的，辅助的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
acting
|
|
| n.演戏，行为，假装；adj.代理的，临时的，演出用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
sovereign
|
|
| n.元首，金镑；adj.具有主权的，至高无上的，极好的，完全的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
authority
|
|
| n.当局，官方；权力，权威，威信；当权者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
intervention
|
|
| n.介入，干涉，干预 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
interfere
|
|
| v.(in)干涉，干预；(with)妨碍，打扰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
injustice
|
|
| n.非正义，不公正，不公平，侵犯（别人的）权利 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
secondly
|
|
| adv.第二，其次 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
deserve
|
|
| vt.应受，值得；vi. 应受报答，值得受赏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
evil
|
|
| n.邪恶，不幸，罪恶；adj.邪恶的，不幸的，有害的，诽谤的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
Latin
|
|
| adj.拉丁的，拉丁语的，拉丁人的；n.拉丁语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
moral
|
|
| adj.道德(上)的，有道德的；n.品行，寓意，道德 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
购买
在百度中搜索