日本語訳をお願い致します。

質問

Two great issues lay as impediments to convocation of a multilateral convention to plan the economic reconstruction of Europe. One was the issue of reparations, regarded as the primary matter of contention between the Triple Entente powers of France and Great Britain in the postwar era. At issue was whether the terms of economic reparations in the Treaty of Versailles, which ended World War I, were to be enforced or amended. On the one hand was the British view that massive reconstruction costs laid upon Germany would undermine European economic recovery and thereby the market for British exports of manufactured goods. The French, on the other hand, believed that if Germany were allowed to skirt the severe financial obligations detailed in the peace treaty, its economic rise would be massively accelerated and its political and military hegemony on the European continent rapidly restored.
France, among the main battlegrounds of the European conflagration, was particularly hard-hit and in need of external funds for reconstruction; Germany, on the other hand, was seen as having largely escaped the destruction of infrastructure and economic capacity during the war and currently engaged in systematic underestimation of their ability to pay. The political and economic weakness of Germany was emphasized by its new Weimar government, which effectively made the argument that it would be unable to maintain the specified payment schedule.
Germany's position came to be regarded as an axiomatic truth by political decision-makers in London and Washington, DC, as well as elsewhere throughout, despite quiet indications from some German authorities themselves that some substantial portion of the reparations bill could be safely managed. German politicians sought to minimize the country's tax burden through the acquisition of foreign loans and the reduction of the overall reparations bill. British, American, and Swiss bankers were for their own part adamant that necessary loans would not be available until a final, achievable reparations bill and repayment schedule could be agreed upon by all main parties in the dispute. In the meantime, German authorities attempted to raise the foreign currency necessary for reparations by dumping paper currency unbacked by gold on the market, triggering a hyperinflation paralyzing the country's economy, which had a desired subsidiary effect of helping make the case that the current schedule of reparations was untenable. It was hoped by Germany, Britain, and the United States and feared by France that the Genoa Conference would provide an opportunity for downward revision of the reparations schedule set forth by treaty.

回答No.1

Nakay702 · ベストアンサー

＞Two great issues lay as impediments to convocation of a multilateral convention to plan the economic reconstruction of Europe. One was the issue of reparations, regarded as the primary matter of contention between the Triple Entente powers of France and Great Britain in the postwar era. At issue was whether the terms of economic reparations in the Treaty of Versailles, which ended World War I, were to be enforced or amended.
⇒欧州の経済復興を計画するための多国間条約の成立にとって、2つの大きな問題が障害となっていた。その１つは、戦後、三国協商のうち英仏の権力間主論争と見なされる賠償の問題であった。問題は、第一次世界大戦の結末を与えた「ベルサイユ条約」のうちの経済賠償の条件が、強制されるか改正されるかということだった。

＞On the one hand was the British view that massive reconstruction costs laid upon Germany would undermine European economic recovery and thereby the market for British exports of manufactured goods. The French, on the other hand, believed that if Germany were allowed to skirt the severe financial obligations detailed in the peace treaty, its economic rise would be massively accelerated and its political and military hegemony on the European continent rapidly restored.
⇒一方では、ドイツに課された大規模な復興費用がヨーロッパの景気回復を阻害し、それによって英国からの工業製品の輸出市場を損なうという英国の見解があった。他方、フランスは、平和条約で詳述されている厳しい財政義務をドイツが負うものとして認められれば、経済の上昇は激しく加速し、ヨーロッパ大陸におけるフランスの政治的・軍事的覇権は急速に回復すると信じていた。

＞France, among the main battlegrounds of the European conflagration, was particularly hard-hit and in need of external funds for reconstruction; Germany, on the other hand, was seen as having largely escaped the destruction of infrastructure and economic capacity during the war and currently engaged in systematic underestimation of their ability to pay. The political and economic weakness of Germany was emphasized by its new Weimar government, which effectively made the argument that it would be unable to maintain the specified payment schedule.
⇒フランスは、ヨーロッパの大砲火の主要戦場の只中で特別激しい打撃を受け、再建のための外部資金を必要としていた。他方、ドイツは、戦争中のインフラと経済能力の破壊を大幅に免れ、目下は支払能力の体系的過小評価に見舞われていると見られていた。ドイツの政治的・経済的弱点が新しいワイマール政府によって強調されたことで、指定された支払いスケジュールを維持できないという主張が効果的に提起された。

＞Germany's position came to be regarded as an axiomatic truth by political decision-makers in London and Washington, DC, as well as elsewhere throughout, despite quiet indications from some German authorities themselves that some substantial portion of the reparations bill could be safely managed. German politicians sought to minimize the country's tax burden through the acquisition of foreign loans and the reduction of the overall reparations bill. British, American, and Swiss bankers were for their own part adamant that necessary loans would not be available until a final, achievable reparations bill and repayment schedule could be agreed upon by all main parties in the dispute.
⇒一部のドイツ当局から、賠償請求書のかなりの部分は安全に管理できるという穏やかな示唆があったにもかかわらず、ロンドンとワシントンDCの政治意思決定者によってドイツの地位（劣位？）は自明の真実とみなされるようになった。ドイツの政治家は、外国の融資の取得と全体的な補償法案の削減を通じて、国の税負担を最小化しようとした。英国、米国、スイスの銀行家は、紛争の主要な当事者全員によって最終的でかつ達成可能な賠償請求書と返済スケジュールが合意されるまで、必要なローンは利用できないと忠告した。

＞In the meantime, German authorities attempted to raise the foreign currency necessary for reparations by dumping paper currency unbacked by gold on the market, triggering a hyperinflation paralyzing the country's economy, which had a desired subsidiary effect of helping make the case that the current schedule of reparations was untenable. It was hoped by Germany, Britain, and the United States and feared by France that the Genoa Conference would provide an opportunity for downward revision of the reparations schedule set forth by treaty.
⇒その間、ドイツ当局は金で裏付けられていない紙幣を市場にどっさり投げ込むことによって賠償金に必要な外貨を引き上げようとして、国の経済を麻痺させるようなハイパーインフレを引き起こした。それは、賠償金の現在のスケジュールは支え切れないという実例を示すことで望まれた補助効果は示した。「ジェノバ会議」が条約によって定められた賠償スケジュールの下方修正の機会を提供することをドイツ、英国、米国は望んだが、フランスは恐れた。

お礼

回答ありがとうございました。