評論
打印
To talk about it, the men met TIME at the Watergate complex, where a 1972 break-in spawned the scandal that redefined the terms of governance.
為了討論這一問題，兩人同本刊記者在水門綜合大廈見了面。1972年，情報部門曾闖入該大廈，以致丑聞爆發，民眾對政府的管理方式另眼相看。
NEITHER MAN IS TAILOR-MADE for the job of restoring faith in truth and government.
然而，兩人都不是為恢復民眾對真相和政府的信心量身打造的角色。
For starters, some spies lie.
首先，某些間諜會撒謊。
And it was the discovery that America’s intelligence services had been exploiting secrets
美國情報部門一直在利用秘密謀取國家利益之外的利益，
for something other than the national good that fueled the crisis after Vietnam and Watergate.
正是這一發現導致了越南戰爭和水門事件后政府及情報部門公信力的崩塌。
Congressional investigators in the 1970s found that the CIA, NSA and FBI had been meddling in politics
上世紀70年代，國會調查人員發現，CIA、NSA和FBI為保護自身利益持續干預政治，
and breaking the law to protect the interests of their agencies and preferred political bosses, not the American people.
實施違法行為，而且，比起美國人民，他們更偏向于其政治領導。
In response, Congress created special committees to oversee the work of the intelligence community.
為此，國會成立了監督情報機構工作的專門委員會。
With the new constraints in place, Hayden says,
有了新的約束力，海登說，
“we took it as an article of faith that if we followed the (new rules), we are doing things that are legitimate within American political culture.”
“我們堅信，如果我們遵循了(新規則)，我們所做的事情就是符合美國政治文化的合法行為。”
The post-Watergate measures held up for decades.
水門事件后，恢復公信力的措施擱置了幾十年。
There were crises, including the intelligence community’s failure to spot the 9/11 terrorists’ plot,
危機時有發生，例如，情報機構未能及時發現911恐怖分子的陰謀，
the faulty intelligence that contributed to the decision to go to war in Iraq
錯誤的情報導致政府作出了發動伊拉克戰爭的決定，
and the 2013 revelations by Edward Snowden of the government’s electronic-surveillance programs.
2013年，政府的電子監聽計劃被愛德華·斯諾登曝光。
But even as faith in the federal government declined, trust in the intelligence agencies remained relatively high.
然而，盡管聯邦政府的公信力有所下降，民眾對情報機構的信任度依然較高。
In 2015, faith in the CIA was still about 60%, according to Pew, and in the NSA about 52%.
皮尤研究中心的數據顯示，2015年，民眾對CIA的信任度仍在60%左右，對NSA的信任度約為52%。
A year later, public confidence in the CIA had plummeted to 33%, according to an NBC/ Wall Street Journal poll.
一年后，全國廣播公司(NBC)和《華爾街日報》合作展開的一項民調顯示，公眾對CIA的信任度已經暴跌至33%。
Congress and the spies point fingers at each other over who is to blame.
國會和間諜們互相指責，均認為是對方的過錯。
Hayden says the outcry that followed Snowden’s revelations showed that public support for American spies was already eroding.
海登表示，斯諾登泄密事件后，民眾發出了強烈抗議，表明公眾對美國間諜的支持已經開始滑坡。
“What I discovered,” Hayden says, “is that the post-Watergate structure for gaining legitimacy from the American people was no longer adequate.”
“我發現，”海登說，“水門事件后，從美國民眾中間獲取正統地位的資格已經不再充分。”
The programs Snowden revealed had been approved by the congressional committees, Clapper and Hayden agree.
克拉珀和海登一致認為，斯諾登曝光的監聽計劃得到了國會委員會的批準。
What had changed, says Hayden, was “a growing unwillingness of the American people to outsource this oversight and validation to their elected representatives.”
海登還說，不一樣的是，“美國民眾越來越不愿意將這種監督和驗證的工作委托給他們遴選出的代表了。”
Americans, he says, no longer trusted Congress to keep the spies in check.
他說，美國民眾已經不相信國會還能約束那些間諜。
Congressional critics see things differently.
國會批評人士則持不同看法。
They argue that the extraordinary measures the CIA, NSA and others took after 9/11 to fight terrorism
他們聲稱，CIA、NSA等機構在9/11事件后采取的打擊恐怖主義的非常措施
included evading congressional oversight, and so broke the post-Watergate compact.
就含有逃避國會監督一項，這就打破了水門事件后的約定。
And they say both Clapper and Hayden bear some of the blame for the resulting loss of faith.
他們還說，克拉珀和海登都應為公信力崩塌這一后果承擔部分責任。
In September 2006, Hayden first testified to the congressional oversight committees about the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation” program.
2006年9月，海登首次就中情局的“強化審訊”計劃向國會監督委員會作證。
A multiyear report by the Senate Intelligence Committee later concluded
后來，參議院情報委員會一項持續了多年的報告顯示，
that the CIA had engaged in widespread torture, which is illegal, and that Hayden had misled the committees.
中央情報局廣泛應用酷刑，這一做法違反了法律，海登則誤導了委員會。
譯文由可可原創，僅供學習交流使用，未經許可請勿轉載。
