與FT共進(jìn)午餐：46年前的“斯諾登”

I am half-expecting an invalid to turn up. Daniel Ellsberg’s publisher had emailed a week before to say he had been suffering from laryngitis, needed rest, and that his energy tended to flag early. They asked if I could bring the lunch forward to before noon. I could hardly blame Ellsberg, now 86, for wanting to cut our engagement short.

我原以為自己會(huì)看到一位久病衰弱者。丹尼爾•艾爾斯伯格(Daniel Ellsberg)的出版商前一陣子發(fā)來(lái)郵件稱，他患上了喉炎，需要休息，而且他的精力容易衰退。他們問我，能否將這頓午餐提前到中午之前。我無(wú)法責(zé)怪一位86歲的老人想要縮短我們的約會(huì)。

Shortly after I take a seat at our table, a sprightly, besuited man wanders in. The only hint of infirmity is a large pink hearing aid protruding from his left ear. I rush to help Ellsberg with his coat. It takes a while to disentangle him. “I got this in Moscow when I visited Edward Snowden,” he says, as if apologising for the garment. The moment we are seated, he asks a waiter for chamomile tea with honey. “I need it for my throat,” he says. Several times over lunch he explains he cannot talk for long. “My voice is going very fast,” he says. It begins weakly but grows steadily more animated. Two hours later he is still talking.

我在我們的桌邊坐下不久后，一位精神矍鑠、身著套裝的男士走了進(jìn)來(lái)。唯一的衰落跡象是他左耳露出的粉紅色助聽器。我急忙起身去幫艾爾斯伯格脫外套，這花了好一會(huì)兒。“我在莫斯科拜訪愛德華•斯諾登(Edward Snowden)時(shí)買了這件衣服。”他開口道，仿佛在為這件外套道歉。我們落座后，他向服務(wù)員要了一杯蜂蜜甘菊茶。他說(shuō)：“我的喉嚨需要這個(gè)。”整個(gè)午餐期間，他幾次解釋自己不能說(shuō)太久話。他說(shuō)：“我的聲音很快就沒了。”他的聲音在開始時(shí)有氣無(wú)力，但漸漸變得興奮起來(lái)。兩小時(shí)后，他還在講話。

The venue is The Oval Room, an upmarket modern American restaurant the other side of Lafayette Square to the White House. The reason is Ellsberg’s new book, The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner, which came out this week after decades of gestation. Ellsberg is best known for having leaked the Pentagon Papers in 1971, revealing that America’s generals had known for years that the best outcome in Vietnam was a military stalemate. Yet they, and successive White House commanders-in-chief, had pressed on for fear of sacrificing US credibility.

我們共進(jìn)午餐的地方是The Oval Room，這是一家高檔現(xiàn)代美式餐廳，位于白宮面向的拉斐特廣場(chǎng)的另一側(cè)。這次會(huì)面的由頭是，艾爾斯伯格的新書《末日機(jī)器：一個(gè)核戰(zhàn)策劃者的自白》(The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner)在經(jīng)過幾十年的醞釀后終于出版。艾爾斯伯格因在1971年泄露“五角大樓文件”(Pentagon Papers)而聞名，該文件揭露了美軍將領(lǐng)們?cè)缭跀?shù)年前就知道，越戰(zhàn)最好的結(jié)果是一場(chǎng)軍事僵局。然而他們——以及身為三軍總司令的歷屆白宮主人——無(wú)謂地延續(xù)那場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，就因?yàn)閾?dān)心美國(guó)的可信度受損。

The 7,000-page leak, which Ellsberg smuggled from his office at the Rand Corporation and spent nights xeroxing, helped destroy whatever remaining case there was for the Vietnam war. Two weeks afterwards Ellsberg turned himself in to the authorities. It was later revealed that Richard Nixon, the then president, who had done his best to stop publication of the Pentagon Papers, had promised the presiding judge that he would appoint him as the next head of the FBI. It was the judge’s life-long ambition, but the gambit failed. The espionage trial, which could have resulted in a 115-year jail term, was declared a mistrial. Ellsberg walked free.

艾爾斯伯格從他在蘭德公司(Rand Corporation)的辦公室偷偷帶出這些文件，再用好幾個(gè)夜晚復(fù)印出來(lái)。在這7000頁(yè)泄密文件的幫助下，延長(zhǎng)越南戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的剩余理由被徹底否定。兩星期后，艾爾斯伯格向有關(guān)部門自首。后來(lái)世人得知，曾竭盡全力阻止“五角大樓文件”公諸于眾的時(shí)任總統(tǒng)理查德•尼克松(Richard Nixon)，曾向主審法官許諾，將任命其為下一任聯(lián)邦調(diào)查局(FBI)局長(zhǎng)，這是后者畢生的雄心，但尼克松的算盤落了空。這樁間諜案的庭審——本來(lái)可能導(dǎo)致艾爾斯伯格被判處115年監(jiān)禁——被宣告無(wú)效，艾爾斯伯格當(dāng)庭釋放。

Less well known is that Ellsberg was one of cold war America’s most senior nuclear planners. First at the Pentagon, then at the Rand Corporation, he helped devise the nuclear doctrines that still hold today. Ellsberg went from being a brilliant cold war hawk to becoming an advocate of nuclear elimination.

不那么為人所知的是，艾爾斯伯格還是冷戰(zhàn)時(shí)期美國(guó)最資深的核規(guī)劃者之一，他先是在五角大樓工作，隨后進(jìn)了蘭德公司，他參與制定的核戰(zhàn)略思想沿用至今。后來(lái)，艾爾斯伯格從一名杰出的冷戰(zhàn)鷹派人物變成了廢除核武器的倡導(dǎo)者。

He has been trying to sell this book on and off since 1975. Nobody wanted to read about nuclear weapons. “My previous agent, who was very good, said he would not represent me on a nuclear book,” says Ellsberg. “Even five years ago this same book was rejected by 17 different publishers on commercial grounds.” Then something changed. Perhaps it was Russia’s annexation of Crimea, or North Korea’s nuclear advance, or Donald Trump’s candidacy. Why was it snapped up now when no one else had wanted it, I ask? The world got scarier, he replies. “The only silver lining to today’s world is that people now want to read my book,” he says.

自1975年以來(lái)，艾爾斯伯格一直努力想把這本書賣出去。但沒人想看關(guān)于核武器的書。艾爾斯伯格說(shuō)：“我的前一位經(jīng)紀(jì)人——非常能干——說(shuō)他不會(huì)代理我的核武器著作。就在5年前，這本書還被17家出版商以商業(yè)理由拒絕了。”然后情況有了變化。也許是俄羅斯吞并克里米亞，也許是朝鮮的核武進(jìn)展，又或者是唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)的當(dāng)選。我問道，為什么這本書過去無(wú)人問津，而現(xiàn)在變得如此搶手呢?他回答說(shuō)，因?yàn)槭澜缱兊酶植懒?。他說(shuō)：“當(dāng)今世界僅存的一線希望是，人們現(xiàn)在想要讀我的書。”

We order our starters. Ellsberg chooses beet salad and I opt for lobster bisque. Ellsberg is keen to avoid anything with salt in it. The waiter promises to oblige. Ellsberg’s salt aversion reminds me of the botched attempt to mess with his state of mind before he addressed an antiwar rally in 1971. Nixon’s aides hatched the idea of putting LSD in Ellsberg’s soup, hoping to depict him as a deranged hippie. The operatives charged with executing the plan failed to get the instructions in time. Ellsberg is something of an expert on bungled hatchet jobs. His psychiatrist’s office was burgled on Nixon’s instructions, with the goal of finding doctor’s notes that would raise doubts about Ellsberg’s sanity. His case file turned out to be innocuous. “They tried all sorts of tricks on me,” he recalls.

我們點(diǎn)了開胃菜。艾爾斯伯格點(diǎn)了甜菜沙拉，我選了龍蝦濃湯。艾爾斯伯格極力強(qiáng)調(diào)他的菜里不要放鹽。服務(wù)員承諾會(huì)滿足他的要求。艾爾斯伯格對(duì)鹽的厭惡讓我想起1971年時(shí)的一起拙劣嘗試，目的是在他在一個(gè)反戰(zhàn)集會(huì)發(fā)表演講前擾亂他的精神狀態(tài)。當(dāng)時(shí)尼克松的助手們想出一個(gè)餿主意：把LSD(一種致幻劑)放入艾爾斯伯格的湯里，希望他在眾目睽睽之下變成一個(gè)瘋狂的嬉皮士，結(jié)果負(fù)責(zé)執(zhí)行計(jì)劃的行動(dòng)人員未能及時(shí)得到指令。說(shuō)到這類拙劣的下三濫手段，艾爾斯伯格可謂是一個(gè)專家。尼克松曾授意撬開他的心理醫(yī)生的辦公室行竊，意圖找到醫(yī)生的筆記，以便抹黑艾爾斯伯格的精神狀況。結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)他的病歷毫無(wú)問題。他回憶道：“他們對(duì)我使出了各種詭計(jì)。”

I was keen to go further back in Ellsberg’s life than that. When he was 15, his father crashed the car that was carrying his family. Ellsberg’s mother and younger sister were killed. Ellsberg nearly joined them. He was in a coma for almost four days. How has that affected him? “The car crash alerted me to the possibility that the world can change in a flash for the worst,” he says. “That is the story I have been telling myself for more than 70 years.”

我很想探尋艾爾斯伯格更早的生活經(jīng)歷。他15歲時(shí)，父親開車載著全家人出行，結(jié)果發(fā)生車禍，他的母親和妹妹遇難。艾爾斯伯格差點(diǎn)也隨她們而去，他昏迷了近四天。這段經(jīng)歷對(duì)他有什么影響嗎?他說(shuō)：“那次車禍讓我意識(shí)到，你的世界可能在轉(zhuǎn)瞬之間崩塌。70多年來(lái)我不斷這么告訴自己。”

But in the past few months he has been revising what he thinks of the tragedy. “Was it really an accident?” he asks. His new answer is complex. It also goes some way to explaining why Ellsberg is more worried about human fallibility than most people.

但在過去幾個(gè)月里，他在修正自己對(duì)那場(chǎng)悲劇的看法。他問道：“那真的是一場(chǎng)意外嗎?”他有了一個(gè)復(fù)雜的新答案，這個(gè)答案在某種程度上也解釋了為什么艾爾斯伯格比多數(shù)人更為擔(dān)心人為錯(cuò)誤。

The tragedy occurred on the July 4 holiday in 1946. Ellsberg’s mother wanted to drive to Denver from Detroit, where they lived. She forgot to book a motel for the first night, so they slept on the dunes of Lake Michigan. Ellsberg and his father shivered under blankets on the beach for most of the night. His mother and sister slept in the car. “I remember my father hardly got any sleep,” Ellsberg recalled. “I also remember waking up in the middle of the night and seeing falling stars, this shower of meteors — I’d never seen so many.”

悲劇發(fā)生在1946年7月4日獨(dú)立日。艾爾斯伯格的母親希望從他們家所在的底特律開車去丹佛。她忘了預(yù)定第一天晚上的汽車旅館，所以一家人只能睡在密歇根湖畔的沙丘上。那天晚上，艾爾斯伯格和他父親大部分時(shí)間都蓋著毯子躺在沙灘上凍得發(fā)抖。他的母親和妹妹睡在車?yán)?。艾爾斯伯格回憶說(shuō)：“我記得我父親幾乎沒睡過。我還記得半夜醒來(lái)看到流星，那是一場(chǎng)流星雨——我從沒看到過那么多流星。”

The next day, Ellsberg’s father kept saying he was too tired to drive, and suggested they pull over. But his mother said they should press on. At some point in the middle of Iowa’s cornfields, Ellsberg’s father must have nodded off at the wheel. They veered calamitously off the road. “‘Accident’ is the wrong word,” says Ellsberg. “It was an accident in the sense that nobody intended it to happen. But both my parents knew the risks and they took the gamble anyway.”

第二天，艾爾斯伯格的父親一直說(shuō)他太累，開不了車，并建議靠邊停車。但他的母親說(shuō)他們應(yīng)該繼續(xù)趕路。車行駛到愛荷華州大片玉米地中的某處時(shí)，艾爾斯伯格的父親一定是在方向盤后打了個(gè)盹。車不幸沖出了公路。艾爾斯伯格說(shuō)：“說(shuō)‘事故’是不對(duì)的。說(shuō)這是一起事故，只是因?yàn)闆]人希望它發(fā)生。而我的父母都知道有風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，但他們還是選擇賭一把。”

Ellsberg relates this calmly but sadly. He also draws the natural parallel. “Nuclear war is also an accident waiting to happen,” he says. “The world has been preparing for nuclear catastrophe — for the end of civilisation — for 70 years now. I know: I have seen the plans.”

艾爾斯伯格在講述這件事時(shí)冷靜而傷感。他還自然地打了個(gè)比方。“核戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)也是一場(chǎng)等著發(fā)生的事故，”他表示，“這個(gè)世界過去70年來(lái)一直在準(zhǔn)備迎接核災(zāi)難，迎接文明的終結(jié)。我知道：我看過這些計(jì)劃。”

The incident taught Ellsberg that leaders whom you trust and even love — like his father — can gamble for little upside with everything they hold dear. “He should never have been driving,” Ellsberg says. “My mother should have listened to him.” It was a straight road. There were no other cars. “It was not as if we were hit by a meteor,” he adds.

這個(gè)事故讓艾爾斯伯格明白，你所信任、甚至愛戴的領(lǐng)袖——比如他的父親——也可能會(huì)孤注一擲，在明知道對(duì)自己珍愛的一切沒什么好處的情況下魯莽行事。“他根本不應(yīng)該開車，”艾爾斯伯格表示，“我的母親應(yīng)該聽他的話。”那是一條筆直的道路。沒有其他汽車。“這又不是我們被流星擊中，”他補(bǔ)充稱。

Our waiter interrupts to say that Ellsberg’s choice of entrée, the pan-roasted Amish chicken, is too salty — it has been brined for three days. “Oh, that’s off the menu then,” says Ellsberg. He substitutes it with a crispy skin salmon and lentils. I have ordered a magret duck breast with bok choi. “That’s a pity,” Ellsberg adds. “Amish had a good ring to me there. I’m more appreciative of all the peace religions than I was before, including the Christian Scientists.” Although Jewish by ethnicity, Ellsberg was raised a Christian Scientist. After the car crash, his father refused Ellsberg any medical treatment, in keeping with the sect’s practice. Relatives managed to remove the injured boy to another hospital. “If they hadn’t reset my knee, one of my legs would be an inch-and-a-half shorter,” he says. “Anyway, it put me off Christian Science.”

服務(wù)員打斷了我們，說(shuō)艾爾斯伯格選擇的主菜——平底鍋烤阿米什雞——太咸了，因?yàn)殡u已經(jīng)腌了三天。“噢，那就不選了，”艾爾斯伯格表示。他又選了脆皮三文魚和小扁豆。我點(diǎn)了鴨胸肉配白菜。“真遺憾，”艾爾斯伯格補(bǔ)充稱，“我喜歡阿米什這個(gè)名稱(阿米什(Amish)是基督教的一個(gè)分支，其信徒過著簡(jiǎn)樸生活，拒絕現(xiàn)代設(shè)施——譯者注)。如今我比以前更欣賞所有的和平宗教，包括基督科學(xué)教(Christian Science)。”盡管艾爾斯伯格是猶太人，但他家里把他培養(yǎng)成一名基督科學(xué)教徒。車禍發(fā)生后，他的父親依照該教派的慣例，拒絕讓艾爾斯伯格接受醫(yī)治。親戚們最終把受傷的艾爾斯伯格轉(zhuǎn)到其他醫(yī)院。“如果他們沒有給我的膝蓋做置換術(shù)，我會(huì)有一條腿短1.5英寸，”他表示，“無(wú)論如何，這讓我遠(yuǎn)離了基督科學(xué)教。”

Could Ellsberg imagine he would have been a whistleblower without his tragedy? He ponders for a while. He has become a friend both to Snowden, who is in exile in Moscow after having dumped mountains of data from the National Security Agency, and Chelsea Manning, the former US soldier who was jailed for having released troves of US diplomatic cables. Ellsberg has also made a point of befriending corporate whistleblowers. In each case, he quizzes them about their motives. “We all agree on three things,” he says. “First, what we know about what is happening is wrong. Second, people should know about it. Third, I will tell them.”

如果沒有那場(chǎng)悲劇，艾爾斯伯格能想象到自己成為泄密者嗎?他想了一會(huì)兒。他現(xiàn)在是斯諾登和切爾西•曼寧(Chelsea Manning)的朋友。前者在泄露美國(guó)國(guó)家安全局(NSA)大量數(shù)據(jù)后逃亡莫斯科，后者是曾因泄露大量美國(guó)外交電文而被監(jiān)禁的前美國(guó)軍人。艾爾斯伯格還刻意與企業(yè)泄密者交朋友。對(duì)于每個(gè)泄密者，他都會(huì)詢問他們的動(dòng)機(jī)。“我們都認(rèn)同三件事，”他表示，“第一，我們所了解的當(dāng)下正在發(fā)生的事情是錯(cuò)誤的。第二，人們應(yīng)該知道這一點(diǎn)。第三，我會(huì)告訴他們。”

The only part neither Ellsberg nor his fellow whistleblowers can explain is the third. Why them? Why don’t more people come forward? Ellsberg says Snowden has the best answer. “People have careers, jobs, security — they don’t want to risk that,” he says. He then tells me that he once read that whistleblowers divorce on average within 18 months of speaking out. Their spouses did not sign up for the change of location, the pressure or the condemnation from their peers. “Perhaps that is the most important thing,” says Ellsberg. “It’s something about humanity — the fear of ostracism. People will go along with almost anything, including risking the end of the world, to avoid being ostracised.”

艾爾斯伯格和他的泄密者朋友唯一都無(wú)法解釋的部分是第三點(diǎn)。為什么是他們?為什么其他人沒有站出來(lái)?艾爾斯伯格說(shuō)，斯諾登拿出了最好的答案。“人們擁有事業(yè)、工作、安全——他們不想冒險(xiǎn)，”他表示。接著他告訴我，他曾經(jīng)看過一項(xiàng)數(shù)據(jù)，稱泄密者平均而言會(huì)在泄密后18個(gè)月內(nèi)離婚。配偶和他們結(jié)婚，并不是為了更換住址和面臨同齡人的指責(zé)。“或許這是最重要的事，”艾爾斯伯格表示，“這與人性有關(guān)——人對(duì)于被排斥的恐懼。為了避免被排斥，人們幾乎會(huì)忍受所有事，包括冒著世界終結(jié)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。”

I ask if Ellsberg hopes his new book will inspire nuclear personnel to become whistleblowers. “Well, you know, nuclear warheads can’t read,” he says. “But the people working in the silos have a lot of time on their hands: they tend to apply to work in these bunkers so they can complete correspondence degrees and such like. They have time to read. I hope my book triggers a lot of resignations.” I tell Ellsberg that I was at a conference in Halifax last month when General John Hyten, head of the US strategic command that controls America’s nuclear arsenal, said he would refuse an “illegal order” from the president to use nuclear weapons.

我問艾爾斯伯格，他是否希望他的新書鼓舞核武部隊(duì)人員成為泄密者。“嗯，你知道，核彈頭不會(huì)看書，”他表示，“但是在核武器發(fā)射井里工作的人手頭有很多時(shí)間：他們申請(qǐng)?jiān)诘叵卵隗w里工作，往往是為了完成函授學(xué)位之類的課程。他們有時(shí)間讀書。我希望我的書能觸動(dòng)很多人辭職。”我告訴艾爾斯伯格，我上個(gè)月在加拿大哈利法克斯市參加會(huì)議，當(dāng)時(shí)控制美國(guó)核武庫(kù)的美國(guó)戰(zhàn)略司令部(US Strategic Command，簡(jiǎn)稱USSTRATCOM)司令約翰•海滕將軍(General John Hyten)表示，他會(huì)拒絕總統(tǒng)發(fā)出的使用核武器的“非法命令”。

It has been more than an hour and we have yet to talk about President Trump. Given that we are a stone’s throw from the White House, this must rank as something of a milestone. Ellsberg is dismissive of Hyten’s reassurance. “No president ever believes he is doing anything illegal,” he says. “Trump is different in that he talks about that openly. He says whatever he does is legal, just like Nixon said. Of course Trump is much more unbalanced than most presidents, but Hyten was talking nonsense. Which American officer has ever been sent to jail for obeying orders? Name me one. Besides, if the general refused the president’s order, Trump could fire him and replace him with someone who would.” At this point Ellsberg’s publicist approaches to remind him that his voice will go if he carries on talking. “I’ll be a few more minutes,” Ellsberg replies amiably. “I am enjoying this.”

談了一個(gè)多小時(shí)，我們還沒有說(shuō)到特朗普總統(tǒng)。鑒于我們距離白宮僅有一箭之遙，這肯定算得上一個(gè)里程碑。艾爾斯伯格對(duì)海滕的保證不以為然。“沒有一個(gè)總統(tǒng)會(huì)相信自己在做違法的事情，”他表示。“特朗普的不同之處在于他公開談?wù)撨@個(gè)問題。他說(shuō)，他所做的一切都是合法的，就像當(dāng)年尼克松所說(shuō)的那樣。當(dāng)然，特朗普比多數(shù)總統(tǒng)更不平衡，但是海滕的的話是胡扯。有哪位美國(guó)軍官因?yàn)榉拿疃慌腥氇z?有誰(shuí)說(shuō)得出一個(gè)嗎?再說(shuō)，如果將軍拒絕總統(tǒng)的命令，特朗普可以撤銷他的職務(wù)，換上一個(gè)聽話的人。”說(shuō)到這里，艾爾斯伯格的公關(guān)人員走過來(lái)提醒他說(shuō)，如果他再說(shuō)下去，他的嗓子會(huì)受不了。“我還有幾分鐘就好了，”艾爾斯伯格溫和地回答。“我享受此時(shí)此刻。”

So is Trump no better or worse than his predecessors, I ask. Ellsberg confesses to having voted “reluctantly” for Hillary Clinton last year. But Trump is only publicly declaring what many presidents do privately, he says. “Do you think Trump is the first president to grope a woman? Do you think he’s the first racist in the White House?” No, I answer. But surely he’s the least stable. Ellsberg agrees. But first he reminds me of Nixon’s anti-Semitism, something that was captured on the Oval Office tapes in the context of a discussion about Ellsberg. “Most Jews are disloyal,” said Nixon. “You can’t trust the bastards. They turn on you.”

我問道，那么特朗普比他的前任更好還是更差勁。艾爾斯伯格坦白稱，去年他“不情愿地”投票支持了希拉里•克林頓(Hillary Clinton)。但他稱，特朗普只是公開宣告了很多總統(tǒng)私下做的事情。“你認(rèn)為特朗普是第一位猥褻女性的總統(tǒng)嗎?你認(rèn)為他是白宮第一名種族主義者嗎?”不是，我回答道。但是他肯定是最不穩(wěn)定的一個(gè)。艾爾斯伯格表示贊同。但是首先，他提醒我注意尼克松的反猶太主義，這是橢圓形辦公室的錄音帶記錄在案的，當(dāng)時(shí)尼克松在討論艾爾斯伯格。“大多數(shù)猶太人都不忠誠(chéng)，”尼克松表示，“你無(wú)法信任這些混蛋。他們會(huì)背叛你。”

Ellsberg then turns to North Korea. He believes Trump has largely created the crisis by saying North Korea will not become a nuclear weapons state on his watch. “‘I won’t let it happen,’ according to Trump,” says Ellsberg. “But it already did happen before he took office.”

然后艾爾斯伯格轉(zhuǎn)向了朝鮮問題。他認(rèn)為這場(chǎng)危機(jī)在很大程度上源自特朗普的表態(tài)，即在他主政期間，朝鮮不會(huì)成為一個(gè)核武國(guó)家。“‘我不會(huì)讓那發(fā)生的’，特朗普說(shuō)，”艾爾斯伯格表示，“但在他上臺(tái)之前，那已經(jīng)是既成事實(shí)。”

The result is that the US is now, for the first time since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, threatening to attack a country equipped with nuclear weapons. “We are talking openly about assassination teams, about full-scale invasion exercises, about the decapitation of North Korea’s leadership. This is insanity. HR McMaster [Trump’s national security adviser] says we’re moving closer to nuclear war every day. It’s crazy.”

結(jié)果是，自1962年古巴導(dǎo)彈危機(jī)以來(lái)，美國(guó)首次威脅要攻擊一個(gè)有核武的國(guó)家。“我們?cè)诠_討論暗殺小組、全面入侵演習(xí)、對(duì)朝鮮領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層進(jìn)行斬首。太瘋狂了。(特朗普的國(guó)家安全顧問)赫伯特•雷蒙德•麥克馬斯特(HR McMaster)說(shuō)，我們每天都離核戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)更近一點(diǎn)。這簡(jiǎn)直是瘋了。”

The result of Trump’s words is to accelerate Kim Jong Un’s missile programme. Trump has convinced Kim that North Korea’s ability to obliterate South Korea and parts of Japan would not deter the US. Only the capability of hitting the US mainland would suffice. As a result, North Korea has stepped up its intercontinental ballistic missile development. It is only a matter of time — “perhaps weeks” — before Kim tests a hydrogen bomb in the atmosphere, which he needs to do for his ICBMs to be credible. At which point, all bets are off, says Ellsberg. “Trump is at least pretending to be unstable and crazy,” he says. “At the moment he’s fooling me.”

特朗普的言論導(dǎo)致金正恩(Kim Jong Un)加速推進(jìn)導(dǎo)彈計(jì)劃。特朗普讓金正恩意識(shí)到，就算朝鮮有能力毀滅韓國(guó)，毀滅日本部分地區(qū)，也無(wú)法威懾美國(guó)。只有當(dāng)朝鮮擁有打擊美國(guó)本土的能力，才能達(dá)到嚇阻美國(guó)的目的。結(jié)果是，朝鮮加大力度開發(fā)洲際彈道導(dǎo)彈。對(duì)金正恩而言，在大氣層試驗(yàn)氫彈只是時(shí)間問題，“可能只有數(shù)周”;要使其洲際彈道導(dǎo)彈有威懾力，金正恩就需要做這一試驗(yàn)。艾爾斯伯格說(shuō)，到那個(gè)時(shí)候，任何事情都可能發(fā)生。“至少現(xiàn)在特朗普在假裝反復(fù)無(wú)常和瘋狂。”他說(shuō)，“眼下我看不透他的心思。”

By this point I am drinking an espresso, although profoundly regretting not having ordered a large cognac. Ellsberg is back on the chamomile and honey. Does anything give him cause for optimism? He mentions Mikhail Gorbachev and Nelson Mandela and others who improved the world, but keeps returning to his abiding theme: humans control nuclear weapons and they are fallible. Leaders in the US and Russia have delegated the authority to use them to underlings. The US alone possesses an arsenal large enough to destroy the world hundreds of times over. Barack Obama could not cut America’s nuclear capacity in spite of wanting to. Instead the Pentagon persuaded him to spend another $1tn modernising America’s arsenal. “The chances that we can get off the Titanic are vanishing,” says Ellsberg. “But in spite of all this I am an optimist,” he adds. My ears prick up. It sounds like Ellsberg is going to end on an upbeat note. “The human race would not go extinct from a nuclear winter,” he says. “One or two per cent of us would survive, living on molluscs in places like Australia and New Zealand. Civilisation would certainly disappear. But we would survive as a species.”

此時(shí)我已經(jīng)在喝濃縮咖啡，盡管在內(nèi)心深處后悔沒有點(diǎn)一大杯白蘭地。艾爾斯伯格又開始喝蜂蜜甘菊茶。這世界上有任何事情讓他有理由樂觀嗎?他提到了米哈伊爾•戈?duì)柊蛦谭?Mikhail Gorbachev)、納爾遜•曼德拉(Nelson Mandela)和其他讓世界變得更美好的人，但最后還是回到他永恒的主題：人類掌控著核武器，而人類是會(huì)犯錯(cuò)的。美國(guó)和俄羅斯的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人把動(dòng)用核武器的權(quán)力下放給下屬。僅美國(guó)擁有的核武庫(kù)就足以毀滅這個(gè)世界數(shù)百次。盡管巴拉克•奧巴馬(Barack Obama)有削減美國(guó)核能力的意愿，但他做不到。相反，五角大樓說(shuō)服了奧巴馬再支出1萬(wàn)億美元更新美國(guó)的核武庫(kù)。“我們能從泰坦尼克號(hào)(Titanic)安然下船的幾率正在消失。”他說(shuō)，“我們中有1%或者2%的人會(huì)活下來(lái)，在澳大利亞和新西蘭這樣的地方靠吃軟體動(dòng)物生存。文明肯定會(huì)消失。但人類作為一個(gè)物種會(huì)生存下去。”

Buoyed by this slim chance of reprieve, I hint that it is probably time to leave. It has been two hours since we started talking, though it has sailed by. To my amusement, we spend 10 minutes chatting by the coat rack. It takes another five to get him out the door. “Give me your card,” says a full-throated Ellsberg as we finally take our leave. “I want to continue talking.”

抓住這個(gè)稍縱即逝的喘息機(jī)會(huì)，我暗示很可能是時(shí)候離開了。我們已經(jīng)談了兩個(gè)小時(shí)，盡管談得很投機(jī)。讓我感到好笑的是，我們?cè)谝旅奔芘赃呌至牧?0分鐘。又過了5分鐘才陪著他走出餐廳。“給我一張你的名片，”在我們終于分別之際，聲音仍舊洪亮的艾爾斯伯格說(shuō)，“我還想繼續(xù)聊。”

Edward Luce is the FT’s chief US columnist and commentator

愛德華•盧斯是英國(guó)《金融時(shí)報(bào)》首席美國(guó)專欄作家和評(píng)論員