There's a big question at the center of life in our democracies today: How do we fight terror without destroying democracies, without trampling human rights?
有一個很嚴峻的問題 存在於生活的中心, 我們今天的民主當中: 我們如何打擊恐怖主義, 在不破壞民主、 不踐踏人權的情況下?
I've spent much of my career working with journalists, with bloggers, with activists, with human rights researchers all around the world, and I've come to the conclusion that if our democratic societies do not double down on protecting and defending human rights, freedom of the press and a free and open internet, radical extremist ideologies are much more likely to persist.
我工作的大部分時間是與一些記者、 博客作者、 積極份子, 還有來自世界各地的 人權研究者一起共事, 我也由此得出一個結論, 就是如果我們的民主社會 不加倍地保護和捍衛人權、 新聞自由 還有自由和開放的網際網路, 極端激進的意識形態 很有可能會一直存留著。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
OK, all done. Thank you very much. No, just joking.
好了,我說完了。感謝你們。 不,只是玩笑。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
I actually want to drill down on this a little bit.
我其實想要再 深入探討一下這個話題。
So, one of the countries that has been on the frontlines of this issue is Tunisia, which was the only country to come out of the Arab Spring with a successful democratic revolution. Five years later, they're struggling with serious terror attacks and rampant ISIS recruitment. And many Tunisians are calling on their government to do whatever it takes to keep them safe.
有一個國家一直位於 這個話題的前線: 突尼斯, 透過一場成功的民主革命, 唯一一個走出阿拉伯之春的國家, 五年後, 他們卻掙扎於嚴重的恐怖襲擊, 還有猖獗的 ISIS 徵募。 很多突尼斯民眾呼籲他們的政府 採取一切手段 來保護他們的人身安全。
Tunisian cartoonist Nadia Khiari has summed up the situation with this character who says, "I don't give a damn about human rights. I don't give a damn about the revolution. I don't give a damn about democracy and liberty. I just want to be safe."
突尼斯漫畫家 Nadia Khiari 通過一個漫畫角色概括了國內的情形: 「我一點都不在乎人權。 我一點都不在乎革命。 我一點都不在乎民主和自由。 我只想要安全。」
"Satisfied?" asked his jailer. "You're safe now."
「滿意了嗎?」 獄卒問他, 「你現在安全了。」
If the Tunisian people can figure out how to deal with their terrorism problem without ending up in this place, they will be a model not only for their region, but for all of us.
假如突尼斯人民能夠想到 怎麼去處理恐怖主義問題, 而又不必終其一生在監獄中度過, 他們將不僅僅成為他們當地的榜樣, 更將成為我們所有人的榜樣。
The reality is that civil society, journalists and activists are coming under attack from extremist groups on the one hand, and, in many countries, also from their own governments. We're seeing bloggers and journalists being jailed, charged and intimidated by their own governments, many of which are allies with the West in the war on terror.
事實是公民社會、記者和積極份子們 在一方面正經受著 來自極端團體的攻擊, 並且,在很多國家, 還經受著來自他們自己政府的攻擊。 我們看到很多博客作者 和記者被關押、 控告和威脅著── 被他們自己的政府。 當中的許多國家是西方國家 在反恐戰爭中的盟友。
Just three examples. A friend and former colleague of mine, Hisham Almiraat, has been charged with threatening state security, along with six other activists in Morocco. The Saudi blogger Raif Badawi has been jailed and flogged for insulting Islam and criticizing the Saudi regime on his blog. More recently, the Turkish representative for Reporters Without Borders, Erol Önderoglu, has been detained and charged with spreading terrorist propaganda, because he and some other activists have been supporting Kurdish media.
就舉三個例子。 我的一位朋友兼前同事, Hisham Almiraat, 他被控告威脅國家安全, 與其他六位在摩洛哥的 積極份子們一道。 沙特博客作者 Raif Badawi 被關押和鞭打, 因他在博客裡侮辱伊斯蘭 和批判沙特政權。 最近的是,無國界記者土耳其代表, Erol Önderoglu, 被拘留和控告宣揚恐怖主義, 因為他和一些其他積極份子 一直是庫德族媒體的支持者。
Anti-terror measures quickly turn into state repression without strong protection for minority communities and for peaceful debate; this needs to be supported by a robust, independent local media.
反恐措施很快轉變 成為了國家的一種鎮壓, 沒有對少數群體提供有力的保護, 也沒有和平的辯論; 這需要由一個強大而獨立的 當地媒體來支撐。
But while that's not really happening, Washington is teaming up with Silicon Valley and with Hollywood to pour millions -- hundreds of millions of dollars -- into what's called "counter-messaging," a fancy word for propaganda. To counter the terrorist propaganda spreading all over the internet, in Europe, Internet Referral Units are being set up, so that people can report on extremist content that they find and get it censored. The problem is, that all of this propaganda, monitoring and censorship completely fails to make up for the fact that the people who are the most credible voices, who can present credible ideas and alternative solutions to real economic, social and political problems in their community that are causing people to turn to extremism in the first place, are being silenced by their own governments.
然而實際上卻恰好相反, 華盛頓正與矽谷還有好萊塢合作, 投入數百萬──數億美元── 到所謂的「反信息活動」中, 其實就是宣傳的一種花俏的說法。 為了對抗在網路上 廣泛宣傳的恐怖主義, 歐洲設置了網路轉介單位, 人們可以通過它們 告發他們所看到的極端內容, 使這些內容得以審查。 問題是, 這些宣傳、監控和審查 完全無法彌補一個事實, 就是有那麼一群人, 他們擁有最具公信力的聲音, 他們能呈現可靠的想法和 可替代的解決方案 去解決他們所在地方的 真實的經濟、社會和政治問題, 這些問題促使人們投身於極端主義, 然而這群人卻被他們的政府所禁言。
This is all adding up to a decrease in freedom across the world. Freedom House, the human rights organization, reports that 2015 marks the 10th straight year in a row of decline in freedom worldwide. And this is not just because of the actions of authoritarian governments. It's also because democratic governments are increasingly cracking down on dissenters, whistle-blowers and investigative journalists. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has warned that "preventing extremism and promoting human rights go hand-in-hand." It's not to say that governments shouldn't keep us safe -- of course they should -- but we need public oversight, transparency and accountability to the rule of law. Meanwhile, extremists are literally killing off civil society in some countries. Since 2013 in Bangladesh, over a dozen secular bloggers and community activists have been literally slaughtered by extremists while the government has done very little. From the city of Raqqa in Syria, people like Ruqia Hassan and Naji Jerf have been assassinated for their reporting out of ISIS-controlled territory.
這在全世界範圍內 進一步削減了人們的自由。 自由之家, 一個人權組織, 在報告中稱道,2015 年 標誌著全世界自由度 持續下降的第 10 個年頭。 造成這結果的不僅僅是 獨裁政府的所作所為。 還因為民主政府 越來越多鎮壓異見者、 揭發者、 和調查記者。 聯合國秘書長潘基文曾警告道: 「防止極端主義和 促進人權是息息相關的。」 這並不是說政府 不應該保護我們的安全── 它們當然應該這麼做── 但是我需要公眾監督、透明度 和問責制來實行法治。 同時, 在某些國家極端主義者 正逐漸消滅公民社會。 自 2013 年,在孟加拉國 已經有超過十二位 非宗教博客作者和社會活動家 被極端主義者所屠殺, 然而政府卻對此無甚作為。 在敘利亞的拉卡市, 像 Rudi Hassan 和 Naji Jerf 這樣的人們被刺殺了, 理由是他們在 ISIS 掌控的 領域範圍外進行報導。
The citizen media group called Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently relies on strong encryption to send out their reports and shield themselves from interception and surveillance. Yet authorities in countries like the United States, the United Kingdom and many other democracies are seeking to use the law to either weaken or outright ban strong encryption, because the bad guys are using it, too. We have got to fight for the right of citizens to use strong encryption. Otherwise, dissent and investigative journalism are going to become even more difficult in even more places. And the bad guys -- the criminals and terrorists -- are still going to find ways to communicate. Kudos to the companies that are standing up for their users' right to use encryption.
公民媒體團體「拉卡正遭無聲屠殺」 依靠強加密把他們的報導發送出去, 並使他們自己免遭攔截和監視。 然而一些官方機構如美國、 英國和很多其他的民主國家, 他們正尋求著運用法律 去削弱或者完全禁止強加密技術, 原因是壞傢伙們也在利用著它。 我們需要去爭取公民使用 數據強加密技術的權利。 否則,異見和調查報導 在更多的地方會變得更為困難。 而壞傢伙們── 罪犯和恐怖主義者── 仍然會尋找其它傳播方式。 致敬那些站起來維護 用戶使用加密技術權利的公司。
But when it comes to censorship, the picture is much more troubling. Yes, there's a real problem of extremist content spreading all over the internet. And Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are among the many companies who report having taken down hundreds of thousands of pieces of content and deactivating accounts that are connected to the extremist's speech. The problem is their enforcement mechanisms are a complete black box, and there is collateral damage.
然而提到審查的話, 它的情況更加的令人擔憂。 是的,現在有一個真實的問題, 就是極端主義內容 正在網路當中廣泛傳播著。 而臉書、Youtube、推特 還有眾多的公司 聲稱他們已清除了無數內容片段, 並註銷了 與極端主義演說相關的用戶帳號。 問題是這些公司的執行機制 是一個複雜的黑匣子, 並且會引起「附帶損害」。
Take, for example, Iyad el-Baghdadi, an activist who makes fun of ISIS on Twitter. He had his account deactivated, because he shares a surname with a prominent ISIS leader. Last December, a number of women named Isis, which also happens to be the name of an Egyptian goddess, had their accounts deactivated. And this woman, who lives in the United States and is a computer programmer, reported on Twitter about her deactivation on Facebook, managed to get enough media attention to have her account reinstated. But that's the thing -- she had to get media attention. And journalists aren't immune. David Thomson, an expert on terrorism and reporter for Radio France International, had reports deleted from his Facebook account and had his account deactivated for several days, because they contained pictures of ISIS flags, even though he was just reporting on ISIS, not promoting it.
把 Iyad el-Baghdadi 作為一個例子, 他是一位經常在推特上 開 ISIS 玩笑的積極份子。 他的帳號被註銷了, 因為他和一位著名的 ISIS 領導者擁有一樣的姓氏。 去年十二月, 有許多名字叫 "Isis" 的女生, 她們的名字恰好來源自 一位埃及女神的名字, 這些女生的帳號卻被註銷了。 而當中有一位女生, 一位住在美國的程式設計師, 在推特上敘述了她 臉書帳號被註銷的事情, 設法通過獲得媒體的 注意力來恢復她的帳號。 然而這就是問題的所在之處── 她需要獲得媒體的注意力。 但是記者並不是免疫的。 大衛.湯姆森, 一位恐怖主義方面的專家 兼法國國際廣播電台記者, 他在臉書帳號上的報導被刪除了, 他的帳號也被註銷了幾天, 原因是報導中包含了 ISIS 旗幟, 儘管他僅僅在作 ISIS 相關的報導, 而不是在推廣它。
And then we have stories from people like this Egyptian man, Ahmed Abdellahy, who reported recently in an event in Washington DC that some of his arguments with extremists -- he now spends his time on social media arguing with ISIS followers, trying to get them to turn away -- some of his arguments with these extremists get deleted, which he believes has the effect of shielding them from alternative points of view.
接下來我們有來自類似於 這位埃及男人的故事, Ahmed Abdellahy 最近在華盛頓的一個活動中報告, 他與極端主義者的一些爭論── 他現在花時間在社群媒體上 與 ISIS 追隨者爭論, 嘗試去讓他們遠離 ISIS ── 他和這些極端主義者的 一些爭論內容被刪除了, 然而他相信這些爭論內容 能夠有效地庇護他們, 使他們免遭其它觀點影響。
It's unclear whether Facebook even knows the extent of the collateral damage, or the other companies as well. But we do know that journalism, activism and public debate are being silenced in the effort to stamp out extremist speech.
我們不知道臉書是否了解到 附帶損害的程度, 我們也不知道 其它公司是否有所了解。 然而我們知道的是 新聞、行動主義還有公開辯論, 都在這些公司致力於 撲滅極端言論的過程中被壓制了。
So with these companies having so much power over the public discourse, they need to be held accountable. They need to carry out impact assessment to identify and fix the problems that we're clearly seeing. They need to be more transparent about their enforcement mechanisms, and they need to have clear appeal and grievance mechanisms, so people can get their content reinstated.
對於那些能夠 控制公共話語的企業們, 它們需要負起相對的責任。 他們需要實行影響評估, 從而去辨認和解決 我們能夠清楚看到的問題。 它們需要使它們的 執行機制更加透明化, 它們還需要具備明確的 上訴和申訴機制, 讓人們能夠使他們的內容得到恢復。
Now, I've been talking for the last 10 minutes about how governments and companies are making it more difficult for people like these. This is a picture of members of the citizen media network, Global Voices, that I helped to cofound over 10 years ago with my friend, Ethan Zuckerman. Interestingly, about 5 years ago, right after the Arab Spring, the data scientist Gilad Lotan created a network map of the people in Global Voices who were heavy users of Twitter during the Arab Spring. And he found that many of these people served as key information nodes between activists and journalists throughout the Tunisian and Egyptian revolution. We've got to make sure that these people not only survive, but are able to continue to thrive. Many of them are still active, other than the ones who have gone to jail or have been driven into hiding or exile.
至此,我已花了 10 分鐘 講述了政府和企業是如何 帶來更多的困難 給這些人們。 這是公民媒體網路 「全球之聲」成員的相片, 我在 10 多年前與我的朋友 Ethan Zuckerman 共同創立的。 有趣的是,大約 5 年前, 就在阿拉伯之春發生之後, 數據科學家 Gilad Lotan 製作了一個全球之聲 某些成員的網絡圖, 這些成員是阿拉伯之春期間 推特的高度使用者。 他發現這些人 在積極份子和記者之間 充當了關鍵信息節點這個角色, 存在於突尼斯革命 和埃及革命整個過程中。 我們必須確保 這些人不僅僅能夠活著, 還要確保他們能夠茁壯成長起來。 他們當中有很多人仍然活躍著, 除了那些已經入獄的, 或者那些被迫躲藏或流放的。
All around the world, people who are sick and tired of fear and oppression are linking up in their communities and across borders. We've got to do everything we can to push our governments and companies to do a better job of protecting their rights. We've also got to be more mindful about how our own personal, political, consumer and business choices affect people like these around the world. Also, if you follow the news, it's pretty clear that that alone isn't going to be enough. We've got to take personal responsibility by joining -- or at very least, actively supporting -- the growing ecosystem of individuals and groups who are fighting for social justice, environmental sustainability, government accountability, human rights, freedom of the press and a free and open internet, all around the world.
在世界各地, 那些對恐懼和壓抑 感到厭惡和厭倦的人們, 正在他們的社區裡面 或跨國境聯合起來。 我們必須盡我們所能 去促使我們的政府和企業 能更保護這些人的權利。 我們還必須更多地留意 我們個人、政治、 消費者和企業的選擇 是如何影響著世界上的這些人。 還有,如果你們關注新聞, 你們會清楚知道 單單如此是並不足夠的。 我們還必須承擔起 我們的責任去參與── 或者至少,踴躍支持── 這個由個體和群體所組成、 持續增長的生態系統, 他們正爭取著社會正義, 環境可持續性, 政府問責, 人權,出版自由 還有一個自由開放的網路, 在全世界內。
I believe that, ultimately, we can overcome the digitally empowered networks of extremism, demagoguery and hate. But ... we've got to do this by really beefing up the global networks of citizens around the world, powered by people who are working hard every day, and taking personal risk for a future world that is more peaceful, just, open and free.
我相信,最終,我們能夠克服 藉由數位而成長的極端主義、 煽動行為以及仇恨網絡。 但是── 要想達到這個目標, 我們必須增強全球公民的網絡。 他們每天都在拼搏努力, 冒著個人風險 為了建造一個更加和平、公正、 開放和自由的未來世界。
Thanks very much for listening.
非常感謝你們的聆聽。
(Applause)
(掌聲)