應繼續探求MH17被擊落事件的真相
The conflict between the Ukrainian government and Russian-backed rebels has brought much bloodshed over the past 18 months. No single event has been as startling as the shooting down one year ago of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17. Some 298 people were killed, two-thirds of them Dutch nationals. Today there has still been little progress bringing the perpetrators of this event to justice.
過去18個月，烏克蘭政府與俄羅斯支持的叛軍之間的衝突導致大量人員傷亡。但任何事件都比不上一年前馬航(Malaysia Airlines) MH17航班被擊落那麼令人震驚。在此次事件中，有大約298人喪生，其中三分之二爲荷蘭人。如今，相關方面在將肇事者繩之以法方面幾乎仍未取得任何進展。
The reasons for the crash are fiercely contested between western governments and the Russian authorities. The west believes that the plane was shot down with a Russian supplied anti-aircraft BUK missile system, controlled either by the rebels or by Russian soldiers. There is considerable evidence pointing to this, based on radio intercepts, photographic and video material. But Moscow rejects the claim, arguing that the plane was hit by a missile fired from a Ukrainian fighter jet.
西方政府與俄羅斯當局對於此次墜機的原因存在激烈爭議。西方認爲，飛機是被俄羅斯提供的山毛櫸(BUK)防空導彈體系擊落的，該體系要麼由烏克蘭叛軍控制，要麼由俄羅斯士兵控制。有不少證據指向這一結論，這些證據基於截獲的無線電情報、照片和視頻資料。但俄羅斯否認這種說法，主張飛機是被一架烏克蘭戰鬥機發射的導彈擊落的。
The best hope for establishing exactly what did happen lies with two investigations by the Dutch authorities that are yet to conclude. One by the Dutch Safety Board is set to be published in October but is focused solely on establishing the technical cause of the crash and will not ascribe blame. The national prosecutor in the Netherlands is leading a separate international criminal investigation to establish culpability, but there is no indication when it will finally report.
還原事件真相的最大希望落在荷蘭當局展開的兩項調查上，這兩項調查尚未得出結論。荷蘭安全委員會(Dutch Safety Board)主持的調查按計劃將於10月公佈結果，但將只關注於確定此次墜機的技術原因，不會確定真兇。荷蘭國家檢察院正主持一項獨立的國際刑事調查，以確定罪責，但該機構將何時最終提交報告尚不得而知。
No prosecution can begin until there has been an authoritative account of the facts by these inquiries. But Mark Rutte, the Dutch prime minister, has rightly recognised that if justice is to be done, the evidence will ultimately have to be submitted to some kind of judicial authority. He has therefore begun lobbying allies to back the creation of an international tribunal that could one day mount a prosecution.
在這些調查對事實真相進行權威描述之前，不可能提起任何訴訟。荷蘭首相馬克呂特(Mark Rutte)正確認識到，如果要伸張正義，證據將最終提交給某個司法當局。因此，他開始遊說盟國支持設立一個國際法庭，未來可以提起訴訟。
The choice of an international tribunal is a sound one. A similar kind of tribunal has successfully prosecuted war crimes in the former Yugoslavia. But the creation of such a court would need to be authorised by the UN Security Council resolution; and President Vladimir Putin last week told Mr Rutte that setting one up would be “premature and counter productive” — indicating that Moscow would almost certainly use its veto to block it.
設立國際法庭是個不錯的選擇。類似的國際法庭曾成功對前南斯拉夫的戰爭罪行提起訴訟。但設立這類法庭需要得到聯合國安理會(UN Security Council)決議的批准；俄羅斯總統弗拉基米爾渠京(Vladimir Putin)上週告訴呂特，設立國際法庭“時機還不成熟，會帶來反效果”，這表明，俄羅斯幾乎肯定會動用其否決權封殺這一提議。
The Netherlands and its allies on the Security Council should press ahead with a vote on the matter all the same. If Moscow were to exercise its veto, it would be seen to be the main obstacle to justice after the mass killing of 298 innocent civilians. That would allow the Netherlands to press for specific economic sanctions beyond those that have already been imposed by the US and EU after Russia’s annexation of Crimea and activities in eastern Ukraine.
儘管如此，荷蘭及其在聯合國安理會的盟國應推動就此事進行投票。如果俄羅斯動用否決權，該國將被視爲在298名無辜平民喪生後阻礙正義伸張的主要障礙。這將允許荷蘭要求對俄羅斯實施“特別”經濟制裁，不同於俄羅斯吞併克里米亞並在烏克蘭東部展開支持叛軍的活動後，美國和歐盟(EU)已對俄羅斯實施的那些經濟制裁。
Even if the idea is scuppered at the Security Council, the west should also try to pursue the matter by other means. An international tribunal can be set up by a vote at the UN General Assembly as happened with the Khmer Rouge tribunal in Cambodia established in 1997; or the Dutch government and others could take the case to the International Court of Justice, a UN court in The Hague. The ICJ cannot mount a prosecution. But it can order a state to pay damages, as it did when the US agreed to pay $131.8m after shooting down an Iranian airliner over the Persian Gulf in 1988.
即便這種想法在聯合國安理會化爲泡影，西方還應設法通過其他方式尋求這一想法的實現。西方國家可以通過聯合國大會(UN General Assembly)投票設立國際法庭，就像1997年提議在柬埔寨對紅色高棉(Khmer Rouge)設立國際法庭那樣；或者荷蘭政府和其他國家可以將此案交由聯合國在海牙設立的國際法院(International Court of Justice)審理。國際法院只有在當事國一致同意將爭端提交至該院後才能做出裁決。但它可以命令一國賠償損失，就像美國1988年在波斯灣上空擊落一架伊朗客機後同意支付1.318億美元賠償金那樣。
The pursuit of justice for the victims of MH17 will be long and hard. What is vital is that the international community does not give up on it. In the years ahead, some government will be tempted to negotiate with the Putin regime for economic and political reasons. But there can be no compromise when it comes to such a dreadful act of mass killing.
爲MH17航班受害者討回公道的過程將是漫長且艱難的。關鍵是國際社會不能放棄。未來幾年，一些政府會出於經濟和政治原因忍不住與普京政權談判。但面對這麼可怕的大規模殺戮行爲，不能做出任何妥協。
