新闻


录音稿:拉姆·伊曼纽尔做客《与玛格丽特·布伦南面对面》,2026年7月12日

2026-07-12T13:32:17-0400 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻

以下是前白宫幕僚长、前芝加哥市长拉姆·伊曼纽尔的采访录音稿,该采访于2026年7月12日在《与玛格丽特·布伦南面对面》节目中播出。


玛格丽特·布伦南: 我们接下来请到前芝加哥市长、前美国驻日本大使拉姆·伊曼纽尔。欢迎来到《面对面》,大使阁下。

拉姆·伊曼纽尔,前美国大使: 谢谢,玛格丽特。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 我有太多问题想和你探讨,但我知道你曾在华盛顿与林赛·格雷厄姆参议员共事过一段时间,你们的政治立场并不完全一致,我想听听你对他去世的看法。

伊曼纽尔: 说得很到位。没错,我们失去了一位爱国者。我们政见不合,但从未因此变得不友善。我们曾在三件事上展开合作。第一,他代表约翰·麦凯恩,我则代表当时的参议员奥巴马处理辩论规则事宜。第二,在过渡期间举行的一次会议上,参议员麦凯恩、林赛、候任总统和我本人达成共识,推动一项全国服务法案,我们最终在2009年春季促成了该法案的通过,将美国服务队和和平队的规模扩大了一倍。第三,也是最后一件,也是最困难的一件事,但我们最终达成了协议,那就是关闭关塔那摩监狱。当时是莱文参议员、林赛和我代表本届政府进行谈判。我们就最终细节达成了一致,但司法部长反对一项内容:即对那位酋长的审判,他主张采用民事法庭。林赛则认为必须采用军事法庭才能争取到15票支持。但最终结果并非如此,当时存在一种我认为准确的政治考量,而非或许符合法律条文但无法实现的法律分析。我们在我的幕僚长办公室里推进这项工作。我不知道卡尔·莱文、我和那位参议员之间开过多少次会,那些会议本可以关闭关塔那摩监狱、转移所有在押人员,为美国画上这个章节的句号。当时我们没有把所有事情都考虑周全吗?当然没有。但我们确实找到了妥协方案,这一点毋庸置疑。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 没错。大使阁下,我们需要插播广告,稍后再继续讨论你几天前在以色列发表的重要演讲。但我们很快就会回到这个话题。希望大家不要走开,我们马上回来。

[广告插播]

玛格丽特·布伦南: 欢迎回到《面对面》。我们继续与大使拉姆·伊曼纽尔的对话。大使阁下,你刚从海外访问回来。我知道你的家族与以色列有着深厚的渊源。你曾在克林顿政府、奥巴马政府期间参与处理重要的中东问题。在你刚刚发表的演讲中,你严厉批评了巴勒斯坦当局的领导失误,指责阿拉伯国家没有为巴勒斯坦人民采取更多可信的行动,随后还将矛头对准内塔尼亚胡总理,称他将以色列带入了死胡同。你希望通过这场演讲达成什么目标?

伊曼纽尔: 这不仅仅是批评,这些观点都很明确,我也都已经阐明。我还指出了美国过去也曾犯下错误。但我提出了一项计划,帮助以色列摆脱被孤立的境地。以色列从一个拥有技术实力的国家,沦落成了一个在领土问题上被孤立的国家,而对于一个小国来说,这种处境是无法长久维持的。再过22年,以色列建国就将满100周年。这样下去,以色列根本无法生存。首先,我们需要的不是两国方案,而是23国方案:采纳阿拉伯联盟提出的承认以色列国的倡议,所有21个阿拉伯国家,如果它们能就以色列的安全(这一点至关重要)和巴勒斯坦的主权达成协议。这将是以色列的最佳时机,也是伊朗的最坏时机。其次,依托印度-中东-欧洲经济走廊,这将是最重要的贸易路线,让以色列的技术实力成为核心,融入正在推进的经济一体化进程。这就是我提出的计划。其他人可以提出他们的方案,但在我看来,这一方案解决了这个同盟未来面临的最核心问题:你不能只依赖军事力量,而让经济外交、政治游说和文化吸引力这三个支柱萎缩,最终你的整个国家安全体系就只剩下军事力量。以色列目前的情况就是一个例子,而打破这种局面对这个同盟是有利的。美国与北约的同盟关系很稳固,这从公众舆论中就能看出来。美国民众对我们的亚洲盟友也抱有很强的支持态度。唯独对这个盟友,支持率仅在20%出头。这种情况对于以色列这个对美国安全至关重要的盟友来说,是不可持续的。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 你曾说,本届内塔尼亚胡领导的以色列政府将每一个安全挑战都视为钉子,而将以色列军队视为锤子。至少在我听来,这话和下面这段话非常相似。

[录音片段开始]
副总统JD·万斯: 你们是一个拥有900万人口的国家。你们不可能靠杀戮来解决所有的国家安全问题。
[录音片段结束]

玛格丽特·布伦南: 我想你和副总统J·D·万斯之间的共识应该不多,但你是否认为——

伊曼纽尔: ——没错——

玛格丽特·布伦南: ——这种左右翼的分歧,代表了美国政策的重大转变,而且这种转变还没有回头路?

伊曼纽尔: 玛格丽特,有两点需要说明。2009年,我作为奥巴马总统的幕僚长,曾直接向这位总理提出质疑。不是说“我不需要这场战争”,而是直接指出:你在约旦河西岸的定居点政策将会导致永久冲突和孤立。如果我希望有一个预测是错误的,那就是这个了。所以,即使言辞尖锐,也要告诉对方真相,这对我来说并不新鲜。我也曾在场见证奥巴马总统批准并开始资助“铁穹”防御系统,这套系统已经保护了数千名以色列平民。我相信资助“铁穹”符合美国的战略利益,也符合以色列的利益。我认为,确保不破坏约旦河西岸的稳定,不破坏两国方案或23国方案的可能性,同样符合以色列的安全利益。我想回到这两点,它们是相辅相成的。以叙利亚为例。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 好的。

伊曼纽尔: 阿萨德已经不再掌权。如今的叙利亚领导人是伊朗向真主党运送所有武器的中转站。这位叙利亚国家元首曾表示,伊朗是个问题,以色列和他应该达成安全协议。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 没错。

伊曼纽尔: 但没人去推动这件事。我说过,我来支付电话费,拿起电话就能促成这项安全协议:以色列北部边境、约旦在东部的安全、埃及在南部的安全,再加上叙利亚,你就能真正达成一项打破僵局的安全协议。外交和政治战略已经不再是以色列国家安全体系的一部分,这反过来也损害了美国的利益。我的首要目标是:什么才符合美国的利益?如果不做出改变,当前的现状是不可持续的。我这么做是为了美国的利益,也是为了这个在国内外都陷入政治孤立的盟友与美国的同盟关系。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 没错,说到这一点,我今年9月去过叙利亚,看到了大马士革最近被内塔尼亚胡政府轰炸的区域——

伊曼纽尔: 而你可以切断真主党,切断真主党从伊朗获取武器的通道。这符合你的国家安全利益——

玛格丽特·布伦南: ——不过特朗普或许正试图这么做——

伊曼纽尔: ——这不需要动用军事手段。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 特朗普可能确实在尝试这么做。

伊曼纽尔: 我再说一次,我可以提供我的电话卡,美国电话电报公司的,随时都能用。他们可以打电话给大马士革。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 但我们还是回到美国国内的话题吧。我刚刚结束了与现任美国驻以色列大使的对话,顺便一提,他非常支持以色列在约旦河西岸的定居点,你也知道,他在本国发起的总统竞选活动中因此受到了抨击。他谈到了众议员罗·卡纳以及他在约旦河西岸的遭遇,但先生,有些人也用同样的话来评价你。你如何回应这种批评?你是否同意卡纳等进步民主党人将本届以色列政府称为“种族隔离”和“种族灭绝”的说法?

伊曼纽尔: 首先,我是受特拉维夫大学邀请发表演讲的,我不只是提出了批评,还提出了一项和平计划。其次,我回顾一下我的经历:我不仅为克林顿总统工作,参与了奥斯陆协议、怀伊种植园会谈、戴维营会谈,还为奥巴马总统效力。第三,至于是否参选总统,我还没有决定。但我做的第一件事是去了密西西比州,那里的阅读成绩从全美第49位提升到了第9位。我将教育作为核心议题。作为一个国家,我们有50%的孩子阅读能力达不到年级水平,但华盛顿的所有人对此都置若罔闻,对这个国家的未来漠不关心。所以,如果要找一个地方投入精力,那不是中东,而是密西西比州,那里才是美国的未来所在。玛格丽特,我对白宫有一点了解:你必须在 Situation Room( Situation Room 即白宫 Situation Room,通常译为“白宫战情室”,此处保留原译法)、董事会、休息室和教室都表现出色。但两党都存在问题:一方被困在厕所里,另一方被困在卧室里。赶紧走出来,聚焦未来。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 大使阁下,我们今天的采访就到这里。

伊曼纽尔: 谢谢。

玛格丽特·布伦南: 期待你再来做客,我们继续深聊。马上回来。

Transcript: Rahm Emanuel on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” July 12, 2026

2026-07-12T13:32:17-0400 / CBS News

The following is the transcript of an interview with former White House chief of staff and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on July 12, 2026.


MARGARET BRENNAN: We go now to the former mayor of Chicago and the former U.S. ambassador to Japan, Rahm Emanuel. Welcome to Face the Nation, Ambassador.

RAHM EMANUEL, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR: Thanks, Margaret.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I have so much to get to with you, but I know you worked with Senator Lindsey Graham for a time here in Washington, you weren’t exactly on the same page politically, but I wonder your thoughts on his passing.

EMANUEL: Good observation. No, look, you lost a patriot. We disagreed, but we weren’t disagreeable about it. There were three things we worked on. One, he represented John McCain. I represented then Senator Obama on the debate rules. Two, when we had a meeting during the transition, Senator McCain, Lindsey, the president-elect, myself, we agreed to work on a national service bill, which we actually got done in spring ’09 that doubled the size for Americorps and for the Peace Corps. And then third, our final, which was really the most difficult, but we got to an agreement, which was to close Guantanamo. It was Senator Levin, Lindsey, myself representing the administration. We got to a final issue. The attorney general was against it, which was the trial of the sheikh, which he wanted civilian. Lindsey said it had to be military court to get the 15 votes. That’s not what happened, and so therefore, and it was one political analysis which I thought was accurate, versus a legal analysis which was maybe by the law but wasn’t going to happen. And so we worked at my desk as the chief of staff. I don’t know the dozen meetings between Carl Levin, myself, and the senator that would actually have closed Guantanamo, moved all the prisoners out and brought that chapter to America to end. Now, did we see everything 100%? No. Did we find compromise? Absolutely.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah. Well, Ambassador, we need to take a break and finish our conversation about the significant speech you just gave in Israel a few days ago. But we’re going to do that in a minute. I hope everyone will stay with us. We will be right back.

[COMMERCIAL BREAK]

MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to Face the Nation. We continue our conversation now with Ambassador Rahm Emanuel. Ambassador, you are just back from a trip overseas. Your family, I know, has deep ties to Israel. You worked during the Clinton administration, the Obama administration on important Mideast issues. In this speech you just delivered, you were very critical of Palestinian authorities’ leadership failures. You faulted Arab states for not doing more in a credible way for the Palestinian people, and then you took aim at Prime Minister Netanyahu, saying he has led his country into a dead end. What do you hope you accomplished?

EMANUEL: Well, it was not just a criticism, all those are clear, and I was- stated that. And I also said the United States made mistakes in the past. But I laid out a plan that gets out of Israel being a pariah. It’s went from a technological prowess to a territorial pariah, and for a small nation, that’s not survivable. In 22 years, it will be 100 years old. You cannot survive like this. So, one, not a two-state solution, a 23-state solution, taking the Arab League’s offer to recognize the state of Israel, all 21 nations, if they come to an agreement on security for the state of Israel, which is essential, and Palestinian sovereignty. That’s Israel’s best day and Iran’s worst day. Second, building off the India Mideast European Economic Corridor, which would be the most important trade route, and put Israel’s technological prowess at the center, break into the economic integration that’s happening. So that was a plan. Others can offer theirs, but to me, it addresses the single most important thing for the future of this alliance—that you cannot reduce your national security apparatus with military power, economic statecraft, political persuasion, and cultural attraction reduce three of them and let them atrophy, and your entire national security apparatus has only military power. And that’s an example of how Israel has a breakout that is good for alliance. The United States is strong with NATO. You can see that in public opinion. The United States public opinion is also strong with our Asian allies. This is the only ally that is in the low 20s in support. That is not a sustainable path for an alliance that’s essential for Israel, America security.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You said the current Israeli government, the Netanyahu government, views every security challenge as a nail and Israel’s military as a hammer. That sounded very similar to me, at least, to this listen.

[SOUND ON TAPE BEGINS]

VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: You’re a country of of 9 million people. You can’t just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have.

[SOUND ON TAPE ENDS]

MARGARET BRENNAN: I imagine there aren’t a lot of points of agreement between you and the Vice President J.D. Vance, but do you see this–

EMANUEL: –Correct–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –On the right and left, as a major shift in policy here for the United States that does not turn around.

EMANUEL: So two things, Margaret. The- in 2009, when I challenged as chief of staff for President Obama, I challenged the Prime Minister directly. Not, “I didn’t need this war,” directly. That what you’re doing on housing in the West Bank will lead to perpetual conflict and isolation. If there was a prediction I wanted to be wrong on, that was it. So telling somebody the truth, even when it’s painful, that’s not new to me. I was also in the room with President Obama when we funded, and started funding the Iron Dome, that has protected thousands of Israeli civilians. I believe funding the Iron Dome is right for America’s strategy, right for Israel. I think making sure that you’re not having a undermining the West Bank or the possibility of a two-state solution, a 23-state solution, is also in Israel’s security interest. And I want to get back to those go hand in hand. And so my view is, take Syria for example.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.

EMANUEL: There’s no more Assad. You have a head of Syria that is the transit way to Hezbollah from Iran of all their weapons. The Syrian head of state has said that he- Iran is a problem and that Israel and he should have a security agreement.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.

EMANUEL: Nobody’s called. I said I’ll pay for the phone call charges, pick up the phone, and come to a security agreement where your northern part, Jordan is secure on the east, Egypt is secure on the south, Syria you would actually have a security agreement that breaks out. Diplomacy, political strategy is dormant as a part of Israel’s national security, and that therefore harms the United States. My number one goal: What advances America’s interests? This, if they don’t change, the status quo today is unsustainable. I did it in the interests of America, the alliance with an ally that is isolated politically at home and abroad.

MARGARET BRENNAN: No, and to your point, I was in Syria in September, and I saw the parts of Damascus that were bombed by the Netanyahu government very recently—

EMANUEL: And you would cut off Hezbollah. You would cut off Hezbollah from Iranian weapons. That’s in your national security interest–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –Well, Trump might be trying to do that–

EMANUEL: –that doesn’t require the military.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Trump may be trying to do that.

EMANUEL: I know, once again, I offer my telephone card, AT&T. You can use it any time. They can make the call to Damascus.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But bringing you back here to home. When I just finished that conversation with the current Israeli ambassador to the United States, who, by the way, very much supports Israeli settlements in the West Bank, as you know, he did take a hit there at those trying to launch presidential campaigns from his country. He was speaking about Representative Ro Khanna and what happened to him in the West Bank, but some are saying that about you too, sir. I mean, how do you respond to that, and do you agree with words like apartheid and genocide, that progressive Democrats like Khanna use to talk about the current Israeli government?

EMANUEL: Second, I was invited by Tel Aviv University, so I took it up, and I didn’t just offer criticism; I offered a plan for peace. Second, I go back to working on this, not with President Clinton, on both the Oslo Accords, the Wye plantation, Camp David, and with President Obama. And third, if it comes to where you start or how you do, I haven’t decided whether I’m running for president. But the first thing I did was go to Mississippi, that has moved from 49th to 9th on reading scores. I have made education this core. We as a country, 50% of our kids cannot read at grade level, and no, everybody in Washington is radio silence on the future of this country. So if there’s going to be a place, it wasn’t the Middle East; it was actually down in Mississippi, that is where the future of America is. Now, one thing I know, Margaret, about the White House: you have to be good in the Situation Room, the boardroom, the break room, and the classroom. And the problem for both parties is one stuck in the bathroom and the other one stuck in the bedroom. Get out and focus on the future.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Ambassador, we’ll leave it there.

EMANUEL: Thanks

MARGARET BRENNAN: Look forward to having you back to talk more. We’ll be right back.

评论

发表回复

您的邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用 * 标注