That's why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali -- we honor them not as makers of war, but of wagers -- but as wagers of peace. And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. There will be times when nations -- acting individually or in concert -- will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified. Sanctions must exact a real price. Of course, we know that for most of history, this concept of "just war" was rarely observed. 共同：オバマ米大統領ノーベル平和賞受賞演説の全文（日本語訳)　 外サイトではどんな反応が上がっているのか、いつかご紹介します。 And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for years to come. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint -- no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or the Red Cross worker, or even a person of one's own faith. America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear: All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work towards disarmament. アとの間に第四次戦略兵器削減条約(新start)を結んでいる。 先住民政策 In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not protected, peace is a hollow promise. The Nobel Committee recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant -- the founder of the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions. I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries -- including Norway -- in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks. Listed below are links to weblogs that reference オバマのノーベル平和賞スピーチ: イアン・アレクサンダーほか: いつかは行きたい 一生に一度だけの旅 BEST500 [コンパクト版], 大人の科学マガジン Vol.30 (テオ・ヤンセンのミニビースト) (Gakken Mook), http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2009/12/10/war-and-peace-oslo, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-acceptance-nobel-peace-prize, http://www.47news.jp/47topics/e/137313.php. 2017å¹´1月10日、第44代アメリカ大統領、バラク・オバマ大統領が退任スピーチを行ないました。ノーベル平和賞を受賞し、数々の功績を残してきたオバマ氏が、最後に語った言葉が非常に素晴らし … And so I come here with an acute sense of the costs of armed conflict -- filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other. Some will kill, and some will be killed. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, more famine, more mass displacement -- all of which will fuel more conflict for decades. In many ways, these efforts succeeded. As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are; to understand that we're all basically seeking the same things; that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. Agreements among nations. For we are fallible. | JIN-仁- DVD-BOX 3月発売 », War and Peace in Oslo | The White House This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by famine and human suffering. Support for human rights. それらを見れば、オバマ氏が「ノーベル平和賞だ」などと、吉本新喜劇でも採用しないコントであることがよく分かる。 政治とは結果. I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to actually change behavior -- for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. And over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers and clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. What might this evolution look like? http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-acceptance-nobel-peace-prize « オバマのアフガニスタン新戦略演説 | That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. And we honor -- we honor those ideals by upholding them not when it's easy, but when it is hard. Strong institutions. And while it's hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished. の米大統領のノーベル平和賞受賞は、日露戦争を講和に導いた… We can admit the intractability of depravation, and still strive for dignity. 元ノーベル委員会書記ゲイル・ルンデスタド氏は、米国のオバマ大統領は平和賞授与の際に託された期待を叶えてはくれなかった、と考えている。賞は核のない世界の実現に向けた取り組みを奨励する意味のものであった。ルンデスタド氏が回顧録『平和書記』で述べた。 That's why we must strengthen U.N. and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war. による ノーベル平和賞授与演説 これはピースボートによる非公式訳であり、英語の原文（以下のリンク）の著作権は© the nobel foundation, stockholm, 2017にある。 I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please; choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. And it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear that these movements -- these movements of hope and history -- they have us on their side. The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries, and other friends and allies, demonstrate this truth through the capacity and courage they've shown in Afghanistan. And yet, a decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. Even as we make difficult decisions about going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet it as such. And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists -- a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values around the world. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations -- total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. No matter how callously defined, neither America's interests -- nor the world's -- are served by the denial of human aspirations. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and environmental activists who call for swift and forceful action -- it's military leaders in my own country and others who understand our common security hangs in the balance. And that is why I have reaffirmed America's commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. バラク・オバマは米国歴代大統領最低評価？ノーベル賞受賞理由は？ バラク・オバマの評価が低い！米国歴代大統領最低評価なのか？ バラク・オバマは、第44代米国大統領。間もなく任期終了となりますが、米国歴代大統領最低の評価ではとの声が上がっているようです。 No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement, pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice. Let us live by their example. The absence of hope can rot a society from within. And that's why helping farmers feed their own people -- or nations educate their children and care for the sick -- is not mere charity. We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. アフガン増派は大統領選時代から言っていたことだから、アフガン増派だからオバマに失望っていうのもどうかと。9.11でアフガン戦争は国際社会に認められていたし、イラク戦争が理由なき戦争だっただけだし。まあ、これから戦争することがわかっているのに平和賞を与えたノーベル委員会の問題でしょう。演説自体は戦争をしている覇権国のトップによる現実的な演説だなと思った。かなり難解だし。, しかしこの演説でいう「大義のある戦争」にアフガン戦争があたるかというと、ちょっと疑問だ。9.11があったからって、アフガンの一般市民を巻き込んでいいわけじゃない。ビン・ラディンを捕まえるだけなら、空爆して一般市民を殺す権利はないわけだし。一般市民を抑圧するタリバンは潰したほうがいいわけだけど、そのために米国が戦っているわけではない。むしろ石油ルート確保という深謀遠慮もあるのかもしれないし。そもそもブッシュのアメリカはわざとビン・ラディンを捕まえなかった、もしくは捕まえる気がなかったという話もあるわけだし。, というわけで、アフガン戦争だって間違った戦争だったと思う。だけど今やめるわけにはいかないだけだ。とにかくアフガンがいち早く落ち着いて、かつてのような肥沃な土地に戻ることを望む。, 01:37 AM in 経済・政治・国際, in オバマ演説, in オバマウォッチ | Permalink Let me make one final point about the use of force. We will bear witness to the quiet dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi; to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their ballots in the face of beatings; to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran. 去年の11月だったかそのぐらいにオバマ米大統領がノーベル賞を受賞した。イラクへの米軍増派などでノーベル平和賞の受賞が果たして妥当であるかということについて疑問視する声があったり、ノーベル賞委員会の思惑があるのではないかという話もあったりした。 There's no simple formula here. Peace requires responsibility. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but I believe it's incompatible with the very purpose of faith -- for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. It is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations -- that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. のことは今回オバマが得たのはかろうじて過半数を上回る51％の得票率だっ たことからもわかる（注1）。しかし日本では大統領再選勝利演説がcd ブックと して複数の出版社から出版されるなど、いまだにオバマのスピーチへの評価や 人気は高い。 All these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. We lose our sense of possibility. For if we lose that faith -- if we dismiss it as silly or naïve; if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace -- then we lose what's best about humanity. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. ノーベル賞を受賞した山中伸弥教授をはじめとし、有名人17名の感動するスピーチを収録した1冊です。 CD3枚と大容量ですが、ノンネイティブのスピーチも多数収録されており、世界の英語をリスニングで … "Let us focus," he said, "on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions." Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale. Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights -- it must encompass economic security and opportunity. Some time ago in Calcutta we had great difficulty in getting sugar, 以前、私達はカルカッタで砂糖を手に入れるのにものすごく苦労しました。 In light of the Cultural Revolution's horrors, Nixon's meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable -- and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty and connected to open societies. And at times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world's sole military superpower. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when certain conditions were met: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the force used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence. ャル・ネットワーク』という映画に収められました。 映画に出てきた小ネタを挟みながら、卒業生へ年齢の近い彼だからこそ伝えられる思いを語っています。 The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the author has approved them. Peace entails sacrifice. As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. But in many countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of the broader public. Main The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. But I also know that sanctions without outreach -- condemnation without discussion -- can carry forward only a crippling status quo. Pope John Paul's engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another world war. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest -- because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if others' children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity. Copyright©1999-2020 Rakuten Securities, Inc. All Rights Reserved. It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine and shelter they need to survive. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. >>> オバマ大統領の他の名言を見てみる >>> 偉人の名言を見てみる. And yet somehow, given the dizzying pace of globalization, the cultural leveling of modernity, it perhaps comes as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish in their particular identities -- their race, their tribe, and perhaps most powerfully their religion. Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace. Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. I am committed to upholding this treaty. But let me now turn to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace. http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2009/12/10/war-and-peace-oslo, 原文：ホワイトハウスホームページ What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work, and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. Investments in development. I understand why war is not popular, but I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. Ronald Reagan's efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. That's why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace. オバマ大統領は8年前の選挙戦のころから数々の名言を残しています。ノーベル平和賞を受賞し、2016å¹´8月には現役大統領ではじめて広島を訪問し、ここでもスピーチを残しています。 But the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions -- not just treaties and declarations -- that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Let us reach for the world that ought to be -- that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. More and more, we all confront difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government, or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women -- some known, some obscure to all but those they help -- to be far more deserving of this honor than I. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations -- an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this prize -- America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide, restrict the most dangerous weapons. I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King Jr. said in this same ceremony years ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts; the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies, and failed states -- all these things have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. Remarks by the President at the Acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize | The White House The same principle applies to those who violate international laws by brutalizing their own people. 「バラク・オバマを見てください。彼は実際には何もせず、ノーベル平和賞を受賞した。 当時彼は大統領に就任してまだ1年で、いくつかの素晴らしいスピーチをし、見た目も悪くない。しかし、実際には彼は平和のために何もしていなかった」 But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not game the system. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. 本演説と「核なき世界」に向けた国際社会への働きかけ（原文："a world without nuclear weapons"）が評価され、オバマは2009å¹´ 10月9日にノーベル平和賞を受賞した。 This brings me to a second point -- the nature of the peace that we seek. Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. But in a world in which threats are more diffuse, and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. A gradual evolution of human institutions. And this becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self-defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. I reject these choices. 未分類 オバマ ノーベル平和賞 演説. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo, repression in Burma -- there must be consequences. Somewhere today, in the here and now, in the world as it is, a soldier sees he's outgunned, but stands firm to keep the peace. In today's wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed, children scarred. Now these questions are not new. 皆さんオバマ大統領のノーベル平和賞受賞スピーチの放送ご覧になりましたか？私は、受賞スピーチを聞いていてチョット首をかしげる内容がありました大統領就任の際のスピ… Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities committed. It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. The ideals of liberty and self-determination, equality and the rule of law have haltingly advanced. That's why NATO continues to be indispensable. Billions have been lifted from poverty. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct. And yet too often, these words are ignored. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones." ノーベル賞、なぜ私でない？＝トランプ氏が不満表明 【ロンドン＝土佐茂生】ノルウェーのノーベル賞委員会は9日、09年のノーベル平和賞を、バラク・オバマ米大統領（48）に授与すると発表した。 Pent-up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. オバマ氏らしいきっぱりした曖昧さ こんなに物議をかもしたノーベル平和賞は珍しいというくらいの平和賞を受賞し、オバマ氏は、受賞演説で「Just War（正当な戦争、正義の戦争）」という言葉を繰り返 … Yes, there will be engagement; yes, there will be diplomacy -- but there must be consequences when those things fail. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened cynics. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago, "I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. America's commitment to global security will never waver. So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. I -- like any head of state -- reserve the right to act unilaterally if necessary to defend my nation. America alone cannot secure the peace. This is true in Afghanistan. That is a source of our strength. I refuse to accept the idea that the 'isness' of man's present condition makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal 'oughtness' that forever confronts him." For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, the determination, the staying power, to complete this work without something more -- and that's the continued expansion of our moral imagination; an insistence that there's something irreducible that we all share. ェル・オバマに惚れ直しそうw(2016.08.07) オバマのプラハ演説 核廃絶宣言(2016.05.28) We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. The Cold War ended with jubilant crowds dismantling a wall. What might these practical steps be? That is why I prohibited torture. At times, it even feels like we're moving backwards. スピーチの天才と称されるオバマ大統領、多くの民衆を感動に導くその秘密とは？韻を踏み、リズムを大切にしながら、解りやすい例えや過去の偉人の言葉をレトリックを交えて散りばめていく彼の手法は英語教材としても非常に高い価値を生み出しています。 マザーテレサ ノーベル平和賞 スピーチ一部抜粋. Compared to some of the giants of history who've received this prize -- Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela -- my accomplishments are slight. （1）オバマ演説集 岩波新書 オバマ／〔述〕 岩波書店 2010．1 （日販マーク内容紹介）バラク・オバマの名をアメリカ中に知らしめた2004年の民主党全国大会の演説から、09年の大統領就任演説、そしてノーベル平和賞受賞講演までを収録したオバマ演説集の決定版。 Only a just peace based on the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting. The soldier's courage and sacrifice is full of glory, expressing devotion to country, to cause, to comrades in arms. Tweet, Posted by: BlogPetのsleepy | December 24, 2009 02:21 PM, Email Address: Commerce has stitched much of the world together. One of these wars is winding down. It does not exist where children can't aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family. (Laughter.) The non-violence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached -- their fundamental faith in human progress -- that must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey. So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. And I'm working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia's nuclear stockpiles. We lose our moral compass. We also know that the opposite is true. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past, and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud. THE PRESIDENT: Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world: Still, we are at war, and I'm responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. I raise this point, I begin with this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter what the cause. (Not displayed with comment.). To begin with, I believe that all nations -- strong and weak alike -- must adhere to standards that govern the use of force. For some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are somehow Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation's development.