요 며칠동안 먹고사는 문제떄문에 한동안 뒤쳐지고 말았습니다. 적시성이 너무 떨어져서 2월달의 남은 부분들은 건너뛸까라는 생각도 드네요.
언제나 그렇듯이 번역에 태클걸어주시면 오히려 대환영입니다!
(사실 태클걸리길 바랄 지경입니다. 그래야 생산적일테니까요.)
-
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-february-15-2023/
1. 북한 문제는 우크라이나, 중국, 대만 문제보다 후순위에 있는가?
Janne.
QUESTION: Thank you, thank you. I have two questions. Thank you, Ned. The United States congressional foreign committee pointed out that China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea as threatening countries to United States, and said that they should be reserved a priority. The former President Bush called North Korea as the axis of evil. However, President Biden did not mention North Korea’s threatening behavior in his State of the Union address this year. Does the Biden administration regard the North Korean issue as less important than Ukraine, China, and Taiwan issues?
---> 미 의회 위원회에서는 중국, 러시아, 이란, 북한을 미합중국을 위협하는 국가들이라고 지적했다. 부시 대통령은 북한을 '악의 축'으로 지목하기도 했는데, 바이든 대통령 올해 2023년 연두교서에서 북한의 위협적 행태에 대해서 언급하질 않았다. 혹시 바이든 행정부는 북한을 우크라이나, 중국, 대만 문제보다 덜 중요하게 보느냐는 질문.
MR PRICE: Janne, all of these issues are important. We don’t have the luxury of being able to prioritize. But in some ways, all of these same issues are made of the same cloth. All of these challenges that we face, very different challenges that we face from the PRC, from Iran, from Russia, from the DPRK, in some ways this all boils down to the rules-based order and the role the United States and our partners and allies and the rest of the world has played over the course of some 70 or 80 years now to build a rules-based order, a rules-based order that is codified not in anything the United States wrote or anything that our partners alone wrote, but that’s codified in the UN Charter, that’s codified in international law, that is codified in elements that all of the countries you just cited have signed on to.
So whether it’s Russia’s unprovoked, brutal aggression against Ukraine, whether it is the PRC’s attempts to change or undermine the status quo in the Taiwan Strait, whether it is Iran’s provision of support to malign actors that in turn destabilize the Middle East, or whether it’s the DPRK’s nuclear weapon and ballistic missile programs – all of these in different ways pose a challenge to the rules-based order. Everywhere and anywhere it comes under assault, the United States and countries around the world are standing up for that rules-based order. It’s what we’re doing in Ukraine. It’s what we’re doing in the context of the DPRK too.
---> 한마디로 말해서 중국이건 러시아이건 이란이건 북한이건 모두 규범을 기반으로한 세계질서를 저해하는 문제들이므로 바이든 행정부는 그 모든 문제들에 대하여 신경쓰고 있다는 겁니다. 하지만 이 문제들은 같은 형태를 띄고 있진 않다고도 말했습니다.
---> 저는 북한 문제에 대하여 이미 말씀드린바가 있습니다. 미국의 진정한 적수는 북한이 아니라 중국이며, 북한이 행한 일련의 행위들은 대중국 전선을 형성하는 좋은 구실이 되고 있다고 말입니다. 물론 북한의 도발행위들에 대한 대비태세는 갖추어져야 하고 미국은 그 점을 윤석열 행정부에게 증명하려고 부던히 애쓰고 있습니다.
F-35를 보내서 같이 훈련하고, 핵항모와 핵잠수함을 부산에 정박시키고, B-52를 시찰하게 해준다던지. 등등. 미국은 자신의 안보공약을 증명하기 위해 눈에 띄는 것들이라면 무엇이든 윤석열 행정부에게 제공해주고 있습니다. 그럼에도 불구하고 확장억제에 핵우산이 포함되어 있다는 것조차 모르는 바보들이 산적해있기도 하지만.
2. 후쿠시마 원전 저장수 방출에 대한 미국의 입장
QUESTION: Yeah, one more. Regarding the discharge of radioactively contaminated water from the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant in Japan, South Korea and the international community are very concerned about Japan’s decision to release contaminated water into the sea and arising issues. What is the United States position on this?
---> 제곧내입니다. 후쿠시마 원전 저장수 방출에 대하여 남한을 포함한 많은 국가들이 우려하고 있는데 미합중국은 어떤 입장이냐는 질문.
MR PRICE: We strongly support the nuclear safety and security standards championed by the International Atomic Energy Agency, or the IAEA, and we welcome Japan’s continued openness and close coordination with the international community as Japan prepares to disperse the treated water in a manner that appears to be in line with the internationally accepted nuclear safety standards. We are aware that the Government of Japan examined several options related to the management of the treated water currently being stored on site at the Fukushima – Fukushima installation. In this unique and challenging setting, Japan has weighed the options and effects; it has been transparent about its decision-making in doing so; and it appears to have adopted an approach in accordance with globally accepted nuclear safety and security standards. We look forward to the Government of Japan’s continued coordination with the IAEA as it monitors the effectiveness of this approach.
---> 한마디로 줄여보면요? 미국은 일본의 방출결정을 부정적으로 보고 있지 않습니다. 프라이스 대변인은 일본이 IAEA와 긴밀하면서도 개방된 협조속에서 핵 안전 기준을 준수하고 있다고 말했습니다. 특히 일본의 의사결정이 투명했다(It has been transparent about its decision-making)고 까지 강조하고 있습니다.
---> 실망하실 분들이 많겠지만 이것이 현실이라면 현실입니다. 그나마 항의해볼 수 있는 주체가 있으나 우리는 이미 일본으로 날아간 윤석열 행정부가 어떤 입장을 취할지도 알고 있지요.
3. 틱톡이 미합중국에 대한 정보를 수집한다구요?
QUESTION: And as for China, a different question a different way. Can you say that China is spying on the United States in a different way, is collecting military or cultural or maybe nuclear or other types of espionage against the United States and hurting the national security of the U.S.? But also, if you can say what is different between these balloons and also TikTok, which we have been hearing about TikTok also related to the Chinese military directly.
---> 정찰풍선이 핫한데 중국이 다른 방법으로도 미합중국에 대한 정찰활동을 한다고 말할 수 있느냐는 질문. 예를 들면 틱톡.
MR PRICE: Sure.
---> 넵! 아주 당연하다는 듯이 그렇다고 단답해줬네요.
QUESTION: Collecting information from the U.S., sir.
MR PRICE: Sure. And you can understand I am not going to offer too much here. But what I will say is that we are acutely aware of the challenges that the PRC poses to the United States, and those challenges come in many different forms – the threat of espionage or the misuse of private or confidential information on the part of private American citizens, American companies, the U.S. Government. Of course that is something we are acutely aware of when it comes to the PRC, and we’re determined to do all we can to counter it.
---> 한마디로 중국이 미국에 가하는 도전중에는 정보의 수집과 수집한 정보의 오용(misuse)도 있다는 대답.
It is part and parcel of the broader set of challenges that the PRC poses to our interests, to our values, and it’s also why we believe in the importance of maintaining open lines of communication. We are highly attuned to these challenges. We are also highly attuned to the need to do everything we can to see to it that the competition and the potentially conflictual elements between our two countries don’t actually veer into conflict, to see to it that there are guardrails on this relationship. It is what we hope to establish. It is what we seek to do as a responsible country. It is also what the rest of the world expects our two countries to do.
---> 이러한 정보의 수집과 오용은 중국이 미국에 가하는 도전의 일부분이며, 미국은 이러한 도전에 늘 매우 조응해왔다(We are highly attuned)고 대답하고 있습니다. 그러면서도 미국은 경쟁적이고 부분적으론 분쟁적이기도한 요소들에 대하여 실제 두 국가간의 분쟁으로 이어지지 않도록 모색할 수 있다고도 첨언하고 있네요.
QUESTION: Despite all this, where is the relations between the U.S. and China today?
MR PRICE: The relationship today is where it has been for some time. It is the most complex and consequential relationship we have on the face of the Earth. The same could be true for any number of countries around the world in their own bilateral relationship with China. We are clear-eyed to these areas of competition, and it is competition that we think dominates this bilateral relationship. We’re clear-eyed about the profound challenges and even potentially conflictual elements that divide us as two countries. We’re determined to establish guardrails and to see to it that competition doesn’t veer into conflict, but we’re also aware that there are areas where it would be profoundly in our interest to cooperate and to coordinate with the PRC and perhaps even to deepen that cooperation with the PRC.
It’s also, by the way, what countries around the world expect us to do. They recognize, as we recognize, that as two leading powers in the world, there are challenges that the world simply could not address unless the United States and China were able to find some way to cooperate together. Climate is a prime example of that. It is why we not only want to keep the lines of communication open, but we want to manage this relationship in a way that is responsible for our interests and a way that is prudent for countries around the rest of the world as well.
---> 그리고 그 뒤에는 예의 미중간 양자관계의 <협력-경쟁-분쟁>의 프레임도 첨언하고 있습니다.
* 그 뒤로 눈에 띄는 점은 프라이스 대변인이 노르트스트림 2 폭파사건의 배후에 미국이 있다는 주장에 대하여 '러시아의 조작(disinformation)'이라고 말한 것 정도네요.
what we have heard from Moscow, what we’ve heard from the Kremlin, is nothing but a lie. It is pure disinformation that the United States was behind what transpired with Nord Stream 2 – the Nord Stream blasts. This is the message that we have conveyed consistently in the face of these lies that have been parroted by Russian officials, and we’ll convey them again if we need to in any forum.