When I was a young officer, they told me to follow my instincts, to go with my gut, and what I've learned is that often our instincts are wrong.
當我還是個年輕軍官時, 他們告訴我 要跟著直覺走、 照本能行事, 而我學到的是 我們的直覺通常都是錯的。
In the summer of 2010, there was a massive leak of classified documents that came out of the Pentagon. It shocked the world, it shook up the American government, and it made people ask a lot of questions, because the sheer amount of information that was let out, and the potential impacts, were significant. And one of the first questions we asked ourselves was why would a young soldier have access to that much information? Why would we let sensitive things be with a relatively young person?
2010 年夏天, 有許多機密文件 從國防部流出。 這震驚了世界 也撼動了美國政府, 並引起民眾的許多質疑, 因為這些外洩的大量資訊 和潛在的影響 極為驚人。 很多人首先會問 為什麼一位年輕的士兵有權限 獲得這麼多的資訊? 為什麼我們讓敏感資訊 被一位年輕人知道?
In the summer of 2003, I was assigned to command a special operations task force, and that task force was spread across the Mideast to fight al Qaeda. Our main effort was inside Iraq, and our specified mission was to defeat al Qaeda in Iraq. For almost five years I stayed there, and we focused on fighting a war that was unconventional and it was difficult and it was bloody and it often claimed its highest price among innocent people. We did everything we could to stop al Qaeda and the foreign fighters that came in as suicide bombers and as accelerants to the violence. We honed our combat skills, we developed new equipment, we parachuted, we helicoptered, we took small boats, we drove, and we walked to objectives night after night to stop the killing that this network was putting forward. We bled, we died, and we killed to stop that organization from the violence that they were putting largely against the Iraqi people.
2003 年的夏天,我被派任指揮 一個特別行動部隊, 這是分佈在中東的部隊, 為打擊蓋達組織。 我們主要精力放在伊拉克, 而我們的具體任務 是要擊敗伊拉克的蓋達組織, 我在那待了將近五年時間。 我們專心打一場戰爭, 這是非常規且困難的戰爭, 非常血腥 且付出最慘痛代價的 往往都是那些無辜的人。 我們盡全力 阻止蓋達組織, 阻止外國自殺炸彈客, 因為他們加劇了這場暴力。 我們精進作戰技巧、 發展新裝備、 我們跳傘、搭直升機、 乘小船、開車、步行, 日以繼夜的活動都為了 阻止這組織所帶來的殺戮。 我們流血、 有人死亡、 我們殺戮, 都為阻止這組織 加諸在伊拉克人民的暴力行為。
Now, we did what we knew, how we had grown up, and one of the things that we knew, that was in our DNA, was secrecy. It was security. It was protecting information. It was the idea that information was the lifeblood and it was what would protect and keep people safe. And we had a sense that, as we operated within our organizations, it was important to keep information in the silos within the organizations, particularly only give information to people had a demonstrated need to know. But the question often came, who needed to know? Who needed, who had to have the information so that they could do the important parts of the job that you needed? And in a tightly coupled world, that's very hard to predict. It's very hard to know who needs to have information and who doesn't. I used to deal with intelligence agencies, and I'd complain that they weren't sharing enough intelligence, and with a straight face, they'd look at me and they'd say, "What aren't you getting?" (Laughter) I said, "If I knew that, we wouldn't have a problem."
我們執行所知的、 一直以來所學的, 這其中一件事就是 在我們組織的 DNA 中存在著保密性。 這是保護資訊關乎安全、 資訊是命脈的想法, 認為這可以保護人民。 我們也感受到 自己組織運作時, 很重要的是,將資訊 儲存在這組織的地窖中, 特別是只將資訊 提供給需要知道的人。 但這經常引起一個問題:誰需要知道? 誰需要知道這資訊 以達成所需的重要任務? 在這個緊密相連的世界中, 這是很難預測的。 很難知道誰需要這些資訊 而誰不需要。 我以前跟情報機關合作過, 也會抱怨他們不分享足夠的情報。 他們通常都一臉正經的告訴我: 「有什麼你不知道的嗎?」(笑聲) 我說,「要是我知道答案, 我們就不會有這問題了。」
But what we found is we had to change. We had to change our culture about information. We had to knock down walls. We had to share. We had to change from who needs to know to the fact that who doesn't know, and we need to tell, and tell them as quickly as we can. It was a significant culture shift for an organization that had secrecy in its DNA.
不過我發現我們需要改變。 我們必須改變我們對資訊的文化。 必須打破壁壘、必須分享。 必須從「誰必須知道」的想法 轉變為「誰不知道, 我們需要盡快告訴他們」。 這是很重大的組織文化轉變, 尤其對一個 DNA 中 存在著保密性的組織來說更是如此。
We started by doing things, by building, not working in offices, knocking down walls, working in things we called situation awareness rooms, and in the summer of 2007, something happened which demonstrated this. We captured the personnel records for the people who were bringing foreign fighters into Iraq. And when we got the personnel records, typically, we would have hidden these, shared them with a few intelligence agencies, and then try to operate with them. But as I was talking to my intelligence officer, I said, "What do we do?" And he said, "Well, you found them." Our command. "You can just declassify them." And I said, "Well, can we declassify them? What if the enemy finds out?" And he says, "They're their personnel records." (Laughter)
我們開始建立 --不是在辦公室中-- 而是打破壁壘, 在我們所謂的狀況警覺室中工作。 在 2007 年夏天, 有件事成為知識分享的佳例。 我們找到一些人員資料, 是那些將外國武裝份子 帶進伊拉克的人員資料。 通常我們拿到這些人員資料時 會把它們藏起來, 只分享給極少數情報組織, 再與其合作。 但當我與情報官討論時, 我問:「我們要怎麼做?」 他說:「你找到這些資料的。」 我們有權處理。 「你可以撤銷機密等級。」 我說:「我們能撤銷機密等級嗎? 如果被敵軍發現呢?」 他說:「這本就是他們的人員名單啊。」 (笑聲)
So we did, and a lot of people got upset about that, but as we passed that information around, suddenly you find that information is only of value if you give it to people who have the ability to do something with it. The fact that I know something has zero value if I'm not the person who can actually make something better because of it. So as a consequence, what we did was we changed the idea of information, instead of knowledge is power, to one where sharing is power. It was the fundamental shift, not new tactics, not new weapons, not new anything else. It was the idea that we were now part of a team in which information became the essential link between us, not a block between us.
所以我們就這麼做了, 引起許多人不滿, 但當我們將資訊分享出去時, 你會突然發現, 資訊唯有在交給 能做出行動的人時才有價值 我空握有知識是沒有價值的 除非我是那個 可以將之加以運用的人。 因此我們將 資訊的想法改變了。 與其將知識視為力量, 不如想成分享是力量。 這是很徹底的想法轉變, 不是新的作戰策略、新武器, 這想法一點也不新穎。 只是將我們視為一個團隊 而知識是我們之間的必要連結 而不是彼此間的阻礙。
And I want everybody to take a deep breath and let it out, because in your life, there's going to be information that leaks out you're not going to like. Somebody's going to get my college grades out, a that's going to be a disaster. (Laughter) But it's going to be okay, and I will tell you that I am more scared of the bureaucrat that holds information in a desk drawer or in a safe than I am of someone who leaks, because ultimately, we'll be better off if we share.
現在請大家深吸一口氣, 吐出來。 因為你的一生中,一定會有些資訊 被洩漏出來,而你不喜歡的。 有人會把我大學成績抖出來, 一定會很慘。(笑聲) 但這一點也沒關係,告訴你們 比起這個,我更怕官僚制度 將資訊鎖在抽屜中 或是保險箱裡,而不是怕有人洩密。 因為追根究柢, 相互分享會達到更好的結果。
Thank you.
謝謝。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
Helen Walters: So I don't know if you were here this morning, if you were able to catch Rick Ledgett, the deputy director of the NSA who was responding to Edward Snowden's talk earlier this week. I just wonder, do you think the American government should give Edward Snowden amnesty?
海倫.華特:我們不知道 你今早在不在現場。 不過如果你遇到瑞克.雷傑特 ——美國國家安全局副局長—— 他回應了幾天前 愛德華.史諾頓的演講。 我想問,你認為美國政府 應該給愛德華豁免權嗎?
Stanley McChrystal: I think that Rick said something very important. We, most people, don't know all the facts. I think there are two parts of this. Edward Snowden shined a light on an important need that people had to understand. He also took a lot of documents that he didn't have the knowledge to know the importance of, so I think we need to learn the facts about this case before we make snap judgments about Edward Snowden. HW: Thank you so much. Thank you. (Applause)
史丹利.麥克力斯托: 我想瑞克提到一點很重要。 大多數的人都不知道全情。 我想這件事有一體兩面。 愛德華.史諾頓揭露了 世人須了解的重要之事。 但他也拿了許多 他並不知道其重要性的文件。 所以我想我們需要了解更多實情 才能對愛德華.史諾頓一案做出評判。 海倫.華特:非常謝謝你。 (掌聲)