remilitarize

简明释义

英[riːˈmɪlɪtəraɪz]美[riˈmɪlɪtəˌraɪz]

vt. 再武装；再军备

第 三 人 称 单 数 r e m i l i t a r i z e s

现 在 分 词 r e m i l i t a r i z i n g

过 去 式 r e m i l i t a r i z e d

过 去 分 词 r e m i l i t a r i z e d

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.I trust Japan is anxiously measuring and figuring out what it can remilitarize so she can protect their people from fearing of being bombed by another nuclear WMD.

我相信日本也在焦虑的衡量的估算如何重新军事化以保护其人民免遭另一次核武器攻击的恐惧。

2.I trust Japan is anxiously measuring and figuring out what it can remilitarize so she can protect their people from fearing of being bombed by another nuclear WMD.

我相信日本也在焦虑的衡量的估算如何重新军事化以保护其人民免遭另一次核武器攻击的恐惧。

3.The government decided to remilitarize the region after years of peace.

政府决定在多年和平后对该地区进行再军事化。

4.In response to rising tensions, the country plans to remilitarize its border areas.

为了应对日益紧张的局势，该国计划对其边境地区进行再军事化。

5.Some analysts believe that to remilitarize is a dangerous move that could escalate conflicts.

一些分析人士认为，再军事化是一种危险的举动，可能会加剧冲突。

6.The decision to remilitarize was met with protests from the local population.

对该地区进行再军事化的决定遭到了当地居民的抗议。

7.After the treaty expired, the nation began to remilitarize its armed forces.

在条约到期后，该国开始对其武装力量进行再军事化。

作文

The term remilitarize refers to the act of re-establishing military forces or capabilities in a particular area, often after a period of demilitarization or reduced military presence. This concept has been particularly relevant in discussions surrounding international relations and national security. The historical context of remilitarize can be traced back to various instances where nations have sought to reassert their military power in response to perceived threats or geopolitical changes. For example, following World War I, the Treaty of Versailles imposed strict limitations on Germany's military capabilities. However, in the 1930s, Germany began to remilitarize the Rhineland, a move that defied the treaty and signaled its intentions to reclaim lost power and territory. In modern times, the concept of remilitarize has taken on new dimensions as countries navigate complex security environments. For instance, tensions in Eastern Europe have led some nations to consider remilitarize their borders in response to aggressive posturing from neighboring countries. This involves not only increasing troop deployments but also enhancing military infrastructure and readiness. The decision to remilitarize can be a contentious one, often provoking debates about the balance between security and diplomacy. Critics of remilitarize argue that such actions can escalate conflicts and lead to an arms race, undermining efforts for peace and stability. They advocate for diplomatic solutions and disarmament as alternatives to military buildup. On the other hand, proponents argue that remilitarize is essential for deterrence and maintaining sovereignty, especially in regions where threats are perceived to be increasing. The debate surrounding remilitarize reflects broader questions about how nations prioritize their security needs in an interconnected world. Moreover, the implications of remilitarize extend beyond national borders. International organizations, such as NATO, play a significant role in shaping military policies and responses to remilitarize actions. Collaborative defense strategies and joint military exercises are often employed to counterbalance any unilateral decisions made by individual nations. This collective approach aims to ensure that remilitarize does not lead to destabilization but rather fosters a sense of security among allied nations. In conclusion, the concept of remilitarize is multifaceted and deeply embedded in the discourse of international relations. It serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between maintaining security and pursuing peaceful resolutions to conflicts. As global dynamics continue to evolve, understanding the nuances of remilitarize will be crucial for policymakers and scholars alike. The challenge lies in finding ways to address legitimate security concerns without falling into the trap of militarization that can lead to further tensions and conflict.

“重新军事化”一词指的是在特定地区重新建立军事力量或能力的行为，通常是在经历了一段非军事化或减少军事存在的时期之后。这个概念在国际关系和国家安全的讨论中尤为相关。“重新军事化”的历史背景可以追溯到各国在面对感知威胁或地缘政治变化时寻求重新确立军事力量的各种情况。例如，在第一次世界大战之后，《凡尔赛条约》对德国的军事能力施加了严格限制。然而，在20世纪30年代，德国开始“重新军事化”莱茵兰，这一举动违反了条约，并表明其重新夺回失去的力量和领土的意图。 在现代，“重新军事化”的概念呈现出新的维度，因为各国在复杂的安全环境中航行。例如，东欧的紧张局势促使一些国家考虑在邻国的侵略姿态下“重新军事化”其边界。这不仅涉及增加部队部署，还包括增强军事基础设施和战备状态。“重新军事化”的决定可能是一个有争议的问题，常常引发关于安全与外交之间平衡的辩论。 批评者认为，“重新军事化”这样的行为可能会升级冲突并导致军备竞赛，从而破坏和平与稳定的努力。他们主张以外交解决方案和裁军作为军事扩张的替代方案。另一方面，支持者则认为，“重新军事化”对于威慑和维护主权至关重要，尤其是在威胁被认为正在增加的地区。围绕“重新军事化”的辩论反映了国家在互联世界中如何优先考虑其安全需求的更广泛问题。 此外，“重新军事化”的影响超越了国界。北约等国际组织在塑造军事政策和应对“重新军事化”行动方面发挥着重要作用。通常采用协作防御战略和联合军事演习，以平衡各国所做的单边决定。这种集体方法旨在确保“重新军事化”不会导致不稳定，而是促进盟国之间的安全感。 总之，“重新军事化”的概念是多方面的，深深植根于国际关系的讨论中。它提醒我们在保持安全与追求和平解决冲突之间的微妙平衡。随着全球动态的不断演变，理解“重新军事化”的细微差别对于政策制定者和学者来说都至关重要。挑战在于找到解决合理安全担忧的方法，而不陷入可能导致进一步紧张和冲突的军事化陷阱。