英國(guó)提議西方向?yàn)蹩颂m派遣1萬(wàn)名維和部隊(duì)

UK proposes Western peacekeeping mission of 10,000 troops in Ukraine

2025-03-19 jiangye111 4140 37 11 收藏糾錯(cuò)&舉報(bào)

譯文簡(jiǎn)介

“歐洲有5億人口。我們應(yīng)該有能力建立一支3萬(wàn)人的軍隊(duì)……”

正文翻譯

UK proposes Western peacekeeping mission of 10,000 troops in Ukraine

英國(guó)提議西方向?yàn)蹩颂m派遣1萬(wàn)名維和部隊(duì)

(Keir Starmer, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, speaks during a joint press conference with President Volodymyr Zelensky on Jan. 16, 2025 in Kyiv.)

（2025年1月16日，在基輔，英國(guó)首相基爾·斯塔默與總統(tǒng)弗拉基米爾·澤連斯基在聯(lián)合新聞發(fā)布會(huì)上發(fā)表講話。）
新聞：

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer presented plans to send 10,000 peacekeeping troops to Ukraine at a high-level virtual summit in London on March 15.

英國(guó)首相斯塔默15日在英國(guó)倫敦舉行的高級(jí)別首腦會(huì)談上，提出了向?yàn)蹩颂m派遣1萬(wàn)名維和部隊(duì)的方案。

The summit, which included 29 international leaders, was organized by the U.K. with the purpose of creating a "coalition of the willing" that could secure Ukraine in the event of a peace deal with Russia.

這次峰會(huì)有29位國(guó)際領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人參加，由英國(guó)組織，目的是建立一個(gè)“自愿聯(lián)盟”，在與俄羅斯達(dá)成和平協(xié)議的情況下，確保烏克蘭的安全。

Starmer's proposed peacekeeping contingent would include around 10,000 troops, mostly provided by the U.K. and France, U.K. military sources told the Sunday Times. Thirty-five countries have agreed to supply the peacekeeping mission with weapons, logistics, and intelligence support.

英國(guó)軍方消息人士告訴《星期日泰晤士報(bào)》，斯塔默提議的維和部隊(duì)將包括約1萬(wàn)人，主要由英國(guó)和法國(guó)提供。已有35個(gè)國(guó)家同意向維和行動(dòng)提供武器、后勤和情報(bào)支持。

The peacekeeping mission will be "a significant force with a significant number of countries providing troops and a much larger group contributing in other ways," a senior government source said.

一位高級(jí)政府消息人士表示，維和行動(dòng)將是“一支重要的部隊(duì)，由大量國(guó)家提供步兵，并以其他方式作出更大的貢獻(xiàn)”。

In addition to European nations, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand joined the call, as did NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.

除歐洲國(guó)家外，澳大利亞、加拿大和新西蘭以及北約秘書(shū)長(zhǎng)馬克·呂特也加入了這一呼吁。

The proposed force of 10,000 is significantly smaller than the 30,000 troops Starmer reportedly pitched to U.S. President Donald Trump during their White House meeting on Feb. 20.

據(jù)報(bào)道，斯塔默在2月20日與美國(guó)總統(tǒng)唐納德·特朗普在白宮會(huì)晤時(shí)提出了3萬(wàn)人的兵力，而擬議中的1萬(wàn)人的兵力遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)少于這一數(shù)字。

Previously, President Volodymyr Zelensky said that European partners would need to station 100,000 to 150,000 troops on Ukraine's front lines to effectively deter Russia.

此前，總統(tǒng)弗拉基米爾·澤連斯基表示，歐洲伙伴需要在烏克蘭前線部署10萬(wàn)至15萬(wàn)部隊(duì)，以有效遏制俄羅斯。

U.K. defense sources told the Guardian on Feb. 18 that a much smaller European-led peacekeeping force could instead rely on intelligence, surveillance, and long-range monitoring to enforce a ceasefire.

英國(guó)國(guó)防部消息人士2月18日對(duì)《衛(wèi)報(bào)》表示，由歐洲領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的規(guī)模小得多的維和部隊(duì)可以依靠情報(bào)、監(jiān)視和遠(yuǎn)程監(jiān)控來(lái)執(zhí)行?；?。

Following the virtual summit, Starmer announced that "troops on the ground and planes in the sky" would provide security guarantees for Ukraine following a future peace deal.

在這次虛擬峰會(huì)之后，斯塔默宣布，“地面部隊(duì)和空中飛機(jī)”將在未來(lái)的和平協(xié)議后為烏克蘭提供安全保障。

The allied coalition will hold a second round of military talks on March 20, Starmer said.

斯塔默說(shuō)，聯(lián)盟將于3月20日舉行第二輪軍事會(huì)談。

While France and the U.K. have been the most vocal about sending troops to Ukraine, some countries, including Italy and Finland, have expressed reservations. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni attended the summit and vocalized support for Ukraine, but said that Italy does not plan to participate in the proposed peacekeeping force.

雖然法國(guó)和英國(guó)在向?yàn)蹩颂m出兵的問(wèn)題上直言不諱，但包括意大利和芬蘭在內(nèi)的一些國(guó)家表達(dá)了保留意見(jiàn)。意大利總理梅洛尼出席了峰會(huì)，并表示支持烏克蘭，但表示意大利不打算參加擬議中的維和部隊(duì)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

The summit followed an eventful week of diplomacy, as Kyiv agreed to a 30-day ceasefire proposed by the U.S. on March 11. While the the Kremlin said it was ready to agree to the U.S.-backed ceasefire, it demanded that Kyiv limit military mobilization and training in addition to the West halting military aid to Ukraine.

這次峰會(huì)之前，烏克蘭在3月11日同意了美國(guó)提出的為期30天的停火協(xié)議。雖然克里姆林宮表示準(zhǔn)備同意美國(guó)支持的停火協(xié)議，但它要求基輔限制軍事動(dòng)員和訓(xùn)練，并要求西方停止對(duì)烏克蘭的軍事援助。

U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are expected to hold a call this week to discuss the terms of the ceasefire, Trump's Special Envoy Steve Witkoff said on March 16.

特朗普特使史蒂夫·維特科夫3月16日表示，美國(guó)總統(tǒng)唐納德·特朗普和俄羅斯總統(tǒng)弗拉基米爾·普京預(yù)計(jì)將于本周舉行電話會(huì)議，討論停火條款。

評(píng)論翻譯

GCU_ZeroCredibility
People saying that's not remotely enough: 10,000 troops are not supposed to be able stop an invasion. They're supposed to be enough that when they're killed in the initial stage of the invasion, it functions as a tripwire to guarantee full scale war. Since the aggressor knows this, they don't invade unless they're willing to engage in full scale war with the countries that sent the 10,000 troops.
The US only has like 25,000 troops in South Korea. They're not supposed to win a war with 25,000 troops they're supposed to deter aggression because NK knows if they kill a bunch of those troops the US will go all hard ass motherfucker on them.
This isn't a new tactic.

人們說(shuō)這遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠：10000名士兵不被指望能夠阻止一場(chǎng)入侵。他們被指望當(dāng)他們?cè)谌肭值某跏茧A段被殺時(shí)，足夠作為一根保證全面戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的絆線（人肉預(yù)警）。因?yàn)榍致哉咧肋@一點(diǎn)，所以他們不會(huì)入侵，除非他們?cè)敢馀c派遣這10000軍隊(duì)的那些國(guó)家開(kāi)打全面戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。
美國(guó)在韓國(guó)只有25000名士兵。他們不指望用25000人的軍隊(duì)打贏一場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，他們被指望阻止侵略，因?yàn)槌r知道如果他們殺了一堆士兵，美國(guó)就會(huì)對(duì)他們采取強(qiáng)硬措施。
這并不是一種新策略。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

GuyLookingForPorn
While this shouldn't impact the forces purpose, its sad to note the UK originally wanted at least 30,000 for their coalition. This unfortunately implies nations have been much less willing to offer real support than Britain hoped.
All the 'just talk' seems to have really frustrated Starmer. He apparently told leaders at one of the summits that he didn't want anyone tweeting they stood with Ukraine afterwards, unless they were actually prepared to offer them tangible support.

雖然這不應(yīng)該影響部隊(duì)的目的，但令人遺憾的是，英國(guó)最初希望他們的聯(lián)盟至少有3萬(wàn)人。不幸的是，這意味著各國(guó)并不像英國(guó)希望的那樣愿意提供真正的支持。
所有這些“只是說(shuō)說(shuō)”似乎真的讓斯塔默感到沮喪。他顯然在一次峰會(huì)上告訴各國(guó)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人，他不希望任何人在會(huì)后發(fā)推特表示他們支持烏克蘭，除非他們真的準(zhǔn)備向?yàn)蹩颂m提供切實(shí)的支持。

RadioHonest85
Europe is 500M people. We should be able to create a army of 30k…

歐洲有5億人口。我們應(yīng)該有能力建立一支3萬(wàn)人的軍隊(duì)……

Coven_Evelynn_LoL
The one major advantage Russia has over Europe is Russians are willing to die for Russia well they have no choice Putin forces them to die, you can't actually do this in a democratic European continent of 500M people who want nothing to do with fighting.
People talk a lot about the GDP of Europe being way bigger than Russia and yet Russia outspends the whole of Europe in military spending, even getting the richest countries in Europe to spend 2% of their GDP on defense almost resulted in Neo Nazi parties being elected.
Let us stop pretending like the average European isn't just as selfish as the average American or Canadian or Mexican etc
EDIT: I meant to say Russia outspends all of the military aid the EU sends to Ukraine.
Russia has more missiles and bombs to hit Ukraine including more soldiers an unlimited supply of soldiers, wake me up when Europe is willing to match at least the missiles and bombs without silly restrictions.

俄羅斯相對(duì)于歐洲的一個(gè)主要優(yōu)勢(shì)是俄羅斯人愿意為俄羅斯而死，他們別無(wú)選擇，普京強(qiáng)迫他們?nèi)ニ?，但在一個(gè)民主的歐洲大陸上，你不能這樣做，因?yàn)闅W洲大陸上有5億人，他們不想打仗。
人們經(jīng)常談?wù)摎W洲的GDP比俄羅斯大得多，但俄羅斯的軍費(fèi)開(kāi)支超過(guò)了整個(gè)歐洲，甚至讓歐洲最富有的國(guó)家將其GDP的2%用于國(guó)防，這幾乎導(dǎo)致了新納粹政黨的勝選。
讓我們停止假裝普通的歐洲人不像普通的美國(guó)人、加拿大人或墨西哥人那樣自私
PS：我的意思是說(shuō)俄羅斯的軍費(fèi)超過(guò)了歐盟向?yàn)蹩颂m提供的所有軍事援助。
俄羅斯有更多的導(dǎo)彈和炸彈來(lái)打擊烏克蘭，包括更多的士兵和無(wú)限的士兵供應(yīng)，當(dāng)歐洲愿意至少在沒(méi)有愚蠢限制的情況下匹配導(dǎo)彈和炸彈時(shí)，再叫醒我。

Swimming_Mind_2027
Sad indeed. But as a relatively new immigrant to the uk but one that has lived in other European countries am not surprised. And I wonder what citizens make of this inability of European coubtries to muster 30,000 forces to deter Putin.
And I also always have this question, if the uk was attacked militarily, how many of its citizens would volunteer to take up arms to defend it? Would it be at same levels (proportionally) as ww2 or less? Especially if it was completely voluntary.

確實(shí)悲哀。但作為一個(gè)相對(duì)較新的英國(guó)移民，一個(gè)在其他歐洲國(guó)家生活過(guò)的人，我并不感到驚訝。我想知道民眾如何理解歐洲國(guó)家無(wú)法召集3萬(wàn)名士兵來(lái)威懾普京。
我也一直有這個(gè)問(wèn)題，如果英國(guó)受到軍事攻擊，有多少公民會(huì)自愿拿起武器保衛(wèi)它？是和二戰(zhàn)一樣（按比例）還是更低？尤其是在完全自愿的情況下。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

LothirLarps
It depends on the scale of the attack and its impact.
I imagine you'd get a bump to recruitment if the UK was attacked, but not a high impact, if it was a more serious threat, you'd likely get a higher/more sustained recruitment drive.
Part of why it's been so low is the whole being sent to fight for billionaires, it's a different story if it's about the survival of the country.

這取決于攻擊的規(guī)模和影響。
我想，如果英國(guó)遭到襲擊，你的招募會(huì)有所增加，但影響不會(huì)很大，如果威脅更嚴(yán)重，你可能會(huì)得到更高/更持久的招募動(dòng)力。
它之所以如此之低，部分原因是整個(gè)國(guó)家都被派去為億萬(wàn)富翁們而戰(zhàn)，如果是關(guān)于國(guó)家的生存，那就是另一回事了。

Cyb3rMonocorn
Iraq and Afghanistan left a very bitter taste in the mouths of many. The damage to peoples lives, direct or indirectly was and is still massive. It pissed me off so much after spending several years of my youth there working to make the place better only for all the work and peoples lives to be essentially wasted.
It pains me, but I can't blame the change in attitude towards joining up. I'm still on the hook as a reservist, so I've very much got a vested interest in this being done right and not just fritted away as a token gesture.

伊拉克和阿富汗戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)給許多人留下了非?？酀挠∠?。直接或間接對(duì)人民生命造成的損害過(guò)去是，現(xiàn)在仍然是巨大的。我在那里度過(guò)了幾年的青春時(shí)光，努力讓這個(gè)地方變得更好，結(jié)果所有的工作和人們的生命基本上都被浪費(fèi)了（塔利班卷土重來(lái)了），這讓我非常生氣。
這讓我很痛苦，但我不能指責(zé)人們對(duì)參軍態(tài)度的改變。我仍然是預(yù)備役軍人，所以我非常希望這件事做得好，而不是作為一種象征性的姿態(tài)而被拋棄。

Famous_Owl_840
The elites have destroyed UKs will to live.
Why would a native British boy want to fight and die for a country that hates him? He gets sent to the front lines while millions of able bodied foreigners are back home on the dole raping native British girls?
It’s preposterous to think a young man would look around these unrecognizable countries and think ‘I’ll fight for this’.

精英們摧毀了英國(guó)人的生存意志。
為什么一個(gè)土生土長(zhǎng)的英國(guó)男孩要為一個(gè)恨他的國(guó)家而戰(zhàn)而死？他被派到前線，而數(shù)百萬(wàn)身強(qiáng)力壯的外國(guó)人卻靠救濟(jì)回家強(qiáng)奸英國(guó)本土女孩？
認(rèn)為一個(gè)年輕人環(huán)顧這些面目全非的國(guó)家，然后覺(jué)得“我要為這個(gè)而戰(zhàn)”是荒謬的。

FaultThat
Russia is a paper tiger. Ukraine was able to take the Kursk region with 10,000 troops.
The UK bolstering the existing Ukrainian forces with 10,000 additional soldiers will have a more pronounced effect than you think.
Russian troops have shit leadership and constantly get sent on suicide missions. Admittedly, offensive pushes to retake territory favours Russia, but they’re still quite inept.
If Putin mobilizes more forces through conscxtion, we’ve seen their work in the Kursk region. Zero training and poorly armed.

俄羅斯是一只紙老虎。烏克蘭用1萬(wàn)名士兵就占領(lǐng)了庫(kù)爾斯克地區(qū)。
英國(guó)向現(xiàn)有的烏克蘭軍隊(duì)增派1萬(wàn)名士兵，其效果將比你想象的更為顯著。
俄羅斯軍隊(duì)的指揮很爛，經(jīng)常被派去執(zhí)行自殺任務(wù)。誠(chéng)然，重新奪回領(lǐng)土的攻勢(shì)有利于俄羅斯，但他們?nèi)匀幌喈?dāng)無(wú)能。
如果普京通過(guò)征兵動(dòng)員更多的軍隊(duì)，我們已經(jīng)看到他們?cè)趲?kù)爾斯克地區(qū)的表現(xiàn)。沒(méi)有受過(guò)訓(xùn)練，裝備也很差。

WeRegretToInform
People are missing the point.
This isn’t 10,000 troops to defend Ukraine. These are 10,000 flags affirming Ukraine’s territory. If Russia fucks with the flags, then they fuck with the coalition of nations who supplied those flags.
Russia will not be able to take further land without coming into direct conflict with British or French troops (amongst others). Such actions have consequences.

人們沒(méi)有抓住要點(diǎn)。
這不是10000軍隊(duì)去保衛(wèi)烏克蘭。這是用10000面旗幟肯定了烏克蘭的領(lǐng)土。如果俄羅斯敢cao這些國(guó)旗，那么他們就是在cao提供這些旗幟的國(guó)家聯(lián)盟。
如果不與英國(guó)或法國(guó)軍隊(duì)（以及其他國(guó)家）發(fā)生直接沖突，俄羅斯將無(wú)法占領(lǐng)更多的土地。這種行為是有后果的。

enverest
What's the difference? What kind of consequences?

有什么區(qū)別？什么樣的后果？

WeRegretToInform
“10K to defend Ukraine” = If you kill one, you only have 9,999 left to kill before you take the territory.
“10K peacekeepers” = If you kill one, you’ve killed British or French troops. Which means their colleagues back home are coming over to rock your world.
“Consequences” = Who knows. But consider that Russia has struggled massively to take a fraction of Ukraine. Compare Ukraine to Britain or France, countries with navies, air forces, and all the top shelf toys we haven’t been sharing with Ukraine because it would embarrass Russia. Russia doesn’t want to fight Britain or France, or their allies.

“10000士兵保衛(wèi)烏克蘭”=如果你殺了1個(gè)，那么在你奪取領(lǐng)土之前，你只剩下9999個(gè)需要?dú)⑺馈?br /> “10000名維和人員”=如果你殺了1個(gè)，你就殺了英國(guó)或法國(guó)士兵。這意味著他們?cè)趪?guó)內(nèi)的同事會(huì)過(guò)來(lái)震撼你的世界。
“后果”=誰(shuí)知道呢。但考慮到俄羅斯一直在掙扎著奪取烏克蘭的一小部分。將烏克蘭與英國(guó)或法國(guó)相比——這些國(guó)家擁有海軍、空軍和所有我們沒(méi)有與烏克蘭分享的頂級(jí)玩具（因?yàn)檫@會(huì)讓俄羅斯難堪）。俄羅斯不想與英國(guó)、法國(guó)或它們的盟友作戰(zhàn)。

Kom34
Yes but with unknown USA support, Russia might attack these troops just to show the alliance who is boss and dare them to fight back/escalate further which they will probably back down even if a few of them have a small amount of nukes they wont want to die for this. So this whole thing is kind of useless.
If they struggle to find 10,000, how are they gonna surge the reinforcements needed to have the threat of force backing not attacking these troops in the first place.
They simply dont have the numbers of men, equipment or military industrial output to fully fight Russia so there is no teeth to the threat of these troops.

是的，但是在未確認(rèn)的美國(guó)支持下，俄羅斯可能會(huì)攻擊這些軍隊(duì)，只是為了向聯(lián)盟展示誰(shuí)是老大，以及他們敢不敢反擊/進(jìn)一步升級(jí)，他們可能會(huì)退縮，即使他們中的一些人有少量的核武器，他們也不想為此而死。所以這整個(gè)公式是沒(méi)用的。
如果他們連湊10000人都難了，他們要如何快速增加所需的增援兵力以達(dá)成保證從一開(kāi)始不攻擊這些軍隊(duì)的武力威脅后盾呢。
他們根本沒(méi)有足夠的人員、裝備或軍事工業(yè)產(chǎn)出來(lái)全面對(duì)抗俄羅斯，所以這些軍隊(duì)的威脅是沒(méi)有牙齒的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

lonigus
Lets face it... It was sooner or later going to happen anyway. Its a shame, that it didnt happen much sooner and namely during the successfull counteroffensive when UK was on an uptrend and Russia weakened. Now its very, very late, because Russia has massively improved and learned a lot during the last 3 years.

讓我們面對(duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)吧……反正這事遲早會(huì)發(fā)生的。遺憾的是，它沒(méi)有發(fā)生得更快，也就是說(shuō)，在英國(guó)處于上升趨勢(shì)而俄羅斯被削弱的成功反攻期間。現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)非常非常晚了，因?yàn)槎砹_斯在過(guò)去3年里已經(jīng)有了很大的進(jìn)步，也學(xué)到了很多東西。

Capital_Regret670
It's great to see nations rallying together for peace in Ukraine, but we also need to think critically about the practicalities. A peacekeeping force of 10,000 troops could provide valuable security, but this is a small drop in the ocean compared to the scale of what Ukraine needs. The real challenge will be balancing international commitment with the on-the-ground realities of securing peace in a region that's been ravaged by war. Let's hope this sparks the momentum needed for larger, more meaningful support. The road to lasting peace will take more than a military presence it’ll take unity, diplomacy, and genuine resolve from all sides.

很高興看到各國(guó)為了烏克蘭的和平團(tuán)結(jié)在一起，但我們也需要批判性地思考現(xiàn)實(shí)問(wèn)題。一支由1萬(wàn)名士兵組成的維和部隊(duì)可以提供寶貴的安全保障，但與烏克蘭需要的規(guī)模相比，這只是九牛一毛。真正的挑戰(zhàn)將是平衡國(guó)際承諾與在一個(gè)飽受戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)蹂躪的地區(qū)確保和平的實(shí)地現(xiàn)實(shí)。讓我們希望這能激發(fā)更大、更有意義的支持所需的勢(shì)頭。通往持久和平的道路需要的不僅僅是軍事存在，還需要各方的團(tuán)結(jié)、外交和真正的決心。

Yeohan99
10000 is a joke. Thats 8 man per kolometer. You need command, logistics, support and rotation troops. Thats comes down to 1 or 2 platoons for 1200 km of front.

10000人就是個(gè)笑話。每公里部署8個(gè)人。你需要指揮、后勤、支援和輪換部隊(duì)。于是在1200公里的前線上減少到1到2個(gè)排的兵力。

TickingClock74
They really ought to consider 10k per UK plus each EU country.
Please someone really DO something.

他們真的應(yīng)該考慮英國(guó)和每個(gè)歐盟國(guó)家都各出1萬(wàn)人。
拜托有誰(shuí)真正做點(diǎn)什么吧。

Lower_Currency3685
we need about 500.000 but its a start.

我們需要大約50萬(wàn)，但這10000人只是個(gè)開(kāi)始。

WOZ-in-OZ
REMEMBER - Article 5 of The NATO agreement with the USA and all to defend said country as one after September 11th. 2001.
You, USA was the first Country to call it on Septembers terrorist attack 9/11. Well, we all did what was expected and fought along side you, and lost our people also with you. … where are you now.

記住——北約與美國(guó)的協(xié)議第5條款，以及2001年9月11日后所有人都團(tuán)結(jié)一致保護(hù)這個(gè)國(guó)家（“今晚我們都是美國(guó)人”）。
你，美國(guó)，是第一個(gè)把9月恐怖襲擊稱為9/11的國(guó)家。好吧，我們都盡了所能和你并肩作戰(zhàn)，也失去了我們的人。你現(xiàn)在在哪里？

meglobob
This is why Russia, China & the USA think Europe is a total joke.
Only UK & France willing to do any real lifting, the rest of europe are useless.
Europe is going to be left behind by USA & China, with Russia having delusions its a still a superpower but at least its united vs the rest of europe which is not.

這就是為什么俄羅斯、中國(guó)和美國(guó)認(rèn)為歐洲完全是個(gè)笑話。
只有英國(guó)和法國(guó)愿意做任何真正的提升，歐洲其他國(guó)家都沒(méi)用。
歐洲將被美國(guó)和中國(guó)甩在后面，俄羅斯妄想自己仍然是超級(jí)大國(guó)，但至少它團(tuán)結(jié)一致，而歐洲其他國(guó)家不是。

英國(guó) 西方 烏克蘭 維和部隊(duì)

很贊 ( 11 )