您的位置: 爱思网 > 24EN专题 > 著名演讲100篇 > 马歇尔计划 The Marshall Plan

马歇尔计划 The Marshall Plan

来源:  日期:2012-07-25 16:16  阅读 4602 次  作者: George C. Marshall   划词  进入论坛  投稿

George C. Marshall

The Marshall Plan

delivered 5 June 1947 at Harvard University

演讲者简介:乔治·卡特莱特·马歇尔(George Catlett Marshall,1880年12月31日-1959年10月16日),美国军事家、政治家、外交家,陆军五星上将。他于1901年毕业于弗吉尼亚军校,参加过第一次世界大战。1924年夏到1927年春末,在美军驻天津第15步兵团任主任参谋,学习了汉语。1939年任美国陆军参谋长,在第二次世界大战中,他帮助富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福出谋划策,坚持先攻纳粹德国再攻日本帝国,为美国在二战的胜利作了不可磨灭的贡献。1945年退役。

演讲背景:于1947年6月5日,国家秘书长马歇尔(George C. 马歇尔) 於哈佛大学(Harvard University)发表演说,并提出之後以「马歇尔计画」为人所知之纲要。仍受战争深创的欧洲刚渡过有史以来最严重的冬天。欧洲国家没有物资可供外贸,而大多数民主社会主义政府国家不愿接受 旧式古典经济学家所提倡的严苛提案。为人道理由与停止可能的共产主义西进,於此必须有所处置。

美国提供2亿美元,以供舒解使用,但条件是欧洲国家应团结起来,并提出其如何使用此协助的合理计划。这是他们第一次必须要以单一经济体行动的时候;他们必须彼此合作。马歇尔亦提供对苏联及其东欧盟友的协助,但史达林(Starlin)指控此计画为诡计,并拒绝合作,然苏俄拒绝合作也许更促使国会通过此办法。

值得注意的是,马歇尔计画同时於美国经济有利。金钱会被用来买美国的物品,而且他们在跨越大西洋(the Atlantic)时,必须要用美国商船来运输。但它成功了。於1953年,美国已吸进了1.3亿美元,而欧洲则重新站稳了脚步。更甚者,此计画包括西德(West Germany),其重整合而加入欧洲共同区。(协助纯粹为经济;其不包括军事协助,直到於韩战之後。)

除了帮助欧洲重新站稳,马歇尔计画引向舒曼计画(Schuman Plan),其後则导向欧洲原子能共同体(Euratom),接着是欧洲煤钢共同体条约(Coal and Iron Community and the Common Market),并指向可能将进化为经济与政治统合的欧洲。在许多方面,马歇尔计画满足需要我们外交政策宽厚且理想化的人和要求现实政治的人两造;其帮助填饱饥民并使无家可归者有所避护,同时也停共产主义的扩张,并重新稳定欧洲经济。

georgemarshallpublicdomain.JPG

Mr. President, Dr. Conant, members of the Board of Overseers, Ladies and Gentlemen:

I am profoundly grateful, touched by the great distinction and honor and great compliment accorded me by the authorities of Harvard this morning. I am overwhelmed, as a matter of fact, and I am rather fearful of my inability to maintain such a high rating as you've been generous enough to accord to me. In these historic and lovely surroundings, this perfect day, and this very wonderful assembly, it is a tremendously impressive thing to an individual in my position.

But to speak more seriously, I need not tell you that the world situation is very serious. That must be apparent to all intelligent people. I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. Furthermore, the people of this country are distant from the troubled areas of the earth, and it is hard for them to comprehend the plight and consequent reactions of the long-suffering peoples of Europe and the effect of those reactions on their governments in connection with our efforts to promote peace in the world.

In considering the requirements for the rehabilitation of Europe, the physical loss of life, the visible destruction of cities, factories, mines, and railroads was correctly estimated, but it has become obvious during recent months that this visible destruction was probably less serious than the dislocation of the entire fabric of European economy. For the past ten years conditions have been highly abnormal. The feverish preparation for war and the more feverish maintenance of the war effort engulfed all aspects of national economies. Machinery has fallen into disrepair or is entirely obsolete. Under the arbitrary and destructive Nazi rule, virtually every possible enterprise was geared into the German war machine. Long-standing commercial ties, private institutions, banks, insurance companies, and shipping companies disappeared through loss of capital, absorption through nationalization, or by simple destruction. In many countries, confidence in the local currency has been severely shaken. The breakdown of the business structure of Europe during the war was complete. Recovery has been seriously retarded by the fact that two years after the close of hostilities a peace settlement with Germany and Austria has not been agreed upon. But even given a more prompt solution of these difficult problems, the rehabilitation of the economic structure of Europe quite evidently will require a much longer time and greater effort than had been foreseen.

There is a phase of this matter which is both interesting and serious. The farmer has always produced the foodstuffs to exchange with the city dweller for the other necessities of life. This division of labor is the basis of modern civilization. At the present time it is threatened with breakdown. The town and city industries are not producing adequate goods to exchange with the food-producing farmer. Raw materials and fuel are in short supply. Machinery, as I have said, is lacking or worn out. The farmer or the peasant cannot find the goods for sale which he desires to purchase. So the sale of his farm produce for money which he cannot use seems to him an unprofitable transaction. He, therefore, has withdrawn many fields from crop cultivation and he's using them for grazing. He feeds more grain to stock and finds for himself and his family an ample supply of food, however short he may be on clothing and the other ordinary gadgets of civilization.

Meanwhile, people in the cities are short of food and fuel, and in some places approaching the starvation levels. So, the governments are forced to use their foreign money and credits to procure these necessities abroad. This process exhausts funds which are urgently needed for reconstruction. Thus, a very serious situation is rapidly developing which bodes no good for the world. The modern system of the division of labor upon which the exchange of products is based is in danger of breaking down. The truth of the matter is that Europe's requirements for the next three or four years of foreign food and other essential products -- principally from America -- are so much greater than her present ability to pay that she must have substantial additional help or face economic, social, and political deterioration of a very grave character.

The remedy seems to lie in breaking the vicious circle and restoring the confidence of the people of Europe in the economic future of their own countries and of Europe as a whole. The manufacturer and the farmer throughout wide areas must be able and willing to exchange their product for currencies, the continuing value of which is not open to question.

Aside from the demoralizing effect on the world at large and the possibilities of disturbances arising as a result of the desperation of the people concerned, the consequences to the economy of the United States should be apparent to all. It is logical that the United States should do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return of normal economic health in the world, without which there can be no political stability and no assured peace. Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos. Its purpose should be the revival of a working economy in the world so as to permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which free institutions can exist.

Such assistance, I am convinced, must not be on a piecemeal basis, as various crises develop. Any assistance that this Government may render in the future should provide a cure rather than a mere palliative. Any government that is willing to assist in the task of recovery will find full cooperation, I am sure, on the part of the United States Government. Any government which maneuvers to block the recovery of other countries cannot expect help from us. Furthermore, governments, political parties, or groups which seek to perpetuate human misery in order to profit there from politically or otherwise will encounter the opposition of the United States.

It is already evident that before the United States Government can proceed much further in its efforts to alleviate the situation and help start the European world on its way to recovery, there must be some agreement among the countries of Europe as to the requirements of the situation and the part those countries themselves will take in order to give a proper effect to whatever actions might be undertaken by this Government. It would be neither fitting nor efficacious for our Government to undertake to draw up unilaterally a program designed to place Europe on its feet economically. This is the business of the Europeans. The initiative, I think, must come from Europe. The role of this country should consist of friendly aid in the drafting of a European program and of later support of such a program so far as it may be practical for us to do so. The program should be a joint one, agreed to by a number, if not all, European nations.

An essential part of any successful action on the part of the United States is an understanding on the part of the people of America of the character of the problem and the remedies to be applied. Political passion and prejudice should have no part. With foresight, and a willingness on the part of our people to face up to the vast responsibility which history has clearly placed upon our country, the difficulties I have outlined can and will be overcome.

I am sorry that on each occasion I have said something publicly in regard to our international situation, I have been forced by the necessities of the case to enter into rather technical discussions. But, to my mind, it is of vast importance that our people reach some general understanding of what the complications really are, rather than react from a passion or a prejudice or an emotion of the moment.

As I said more formally a moment ago, we are remote from the scene of these troubles. It is virtually impossible at this distance merely by reading, or listening, or even seeing photographs and motion pictures, to grasp at all the real significance of the situation. And yet the whole world of the future hangs on a proper judgment. It hangs, I think, to a large extent on the realization of the American people, of just what are the various dominant factors. What are the reactions of the people? What are the justifications of those reactions? What are the sufferings? What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done?

Thank you very much.

转贴于:24EN.COM

考试推荐

CET

TEM

BEC

IELTS

精华推荐

听力

视频

OMG

美文