militarising

简明释义

英[ˈmɪlɪtəraɪzɪŋ]美[ˈmɪləˌtɛraɪzɪŋ]

vt.使……有军事色彩；为……提供军事力量；把……改作军用（militarise 的现在分词）

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.Compared with Russia, China seems a little less keen on militarising the SCO, and more queasy about Iran's role as an “observer” of the group.

同俄罗斯相比，中国似乎并不那么希望“上合组织”军事化，并对伊朗成为该组织的“观察员”国态度谨慎。

2.Compared with Russia, China seems a little less keen on militarising the SCO, and more queasy about Iran's role as an “observer” of the group.

同俄罗斯相比，中国似乎并不那么希望“上合组织”军事化，并对伊朗成为该组织的“观察员”国态度谨慎。

3.The government is accused of militarising 军事化 the police force to suppress protests.

政府被指控将警察部队军事化以压制抗议活动。

4.The militarising 军事化 of space has become a topic of international concern.

太空的军事化已成为国际关注的话题。

5.Critics warn against militarising 军事化 humanitarian missions, which could compromise their effectiveness.

批评者警告不要对人道主义任务进行军事化，这可能会影响其有效性。

6.The militarising 军事化 of civilian life can lead to increased violence in society.

平民生活的军事化可能导致社会暴力增加。

7.Some argue that militarising 军事化 schools can create a culture of fear among students.

一些人认为在学校中军事化可能会在学生中创造一种恐惧文化。

作文

In recent years, the concept of militarising has gained significant attention in global discussions about security and international relations. The term militarising refers to the process of equipping or preparing a state or society for military action, often leading to an increased emphasis on military solutions rather than diplomatic ones. This trend can be observed in various regions around the world, where governments have chosen to allocate substantial resources to their armed forces, sometimes at the expense of social welfare programs. One prominent example of militarising is seen in the context of national defense strategies. Countries facing perceived threats may decide to enhance their military capabilities by investing in advanced weaponry, expanding their military personnel, and engaging in joint exercises with allied nations. While proponents argue that such actions are necessary for national security, critics warn that militarising can lead to an arms race and heightened tensions between nations. The implications of militarising extend beyond the realm of international politics. In many societies, the increasing presence of military influence can reshape public life. For instance, as governments prioritize military spending, resources that could have been used for education, healthcare, and infrastructure development are diverted to the defense sector. This shift can result in a societal environment where military values and norms begin to permeate everyday life, fostering a culture that glorifies militarism. Moreover, the militarising of law enforcement agencies has become a contentious issue in several countries. The adoption of military tactics and equipment by police forces raises questions about the appropriate role of law enforcement in civilian life. Critics argue that this trend can lead to the excessive use of force and a breakdown of trust between communities and the police. The militarising of police forces often reflects a broader societal acceptance of military solutions to problems that could be addressed through dialogue and community engagement. Furthermore, the militarising of foreign policy poses ethical dilemmas. When nations prioritize military intervention over diplomatic negotiations, the consequences can be dire. History has shown that military interventions often lead to prolonged conflicts, loss of life, and destabilization of entire regions. The challenge lies in balancing the need for security with the imperative to pursue peaceful resolutions. As the world grapples with issues such as terrorism, cyber threats, and geopolitical rivalries, the temptation to resort to militarising responses may overshadow more constructive approaches. In conclusion, the trend of militarising poses significant challenges and risks for societies and nations alike. While the desire for security is understandable, it is crucial to critically examine the implications of prioritizing military solutions over diplomatic efforts. A balanced approach that incorporates both security and diplomacy is essential for fostering a stable and peaceful world. Ultimately, the future will depend on our ability to navigate the complexities of militarising, recognizing its potential dangers while striving for a more peaceful coexistence among nations.

近年来，“militarising”这一概念在全球安全和国际关系的讨论中引起了显著关注。这个术语“militarising”指的是为军事行动装备或准备一个国家或社会的过程，通常导致对军事解决方案的强调超过外交方案。这一趋势可以在世界各地的不同地区观察到，各国政府选择将大量资源分配给其武装力量，有时以社会福利项目为代价。“militarising”的一个显著例子可以在国家防御战略的背景下看到。面临感知威胁的国家可能决定通过投资先进武器、扩大军队人员以及与盟国进行联合演习来增强其军事能力。虽然支持者认为这样的行动是国家安全所必需的，但批评者警告说，militarising可能导致军备竞赛和国家之间的紧张局势加剧。militarising的影响超越了国际政治的领域。在许多社会中，军事影响力的增加可以重塑公共生活。例如，随着政府优先考虑军事支出，原本可以用于教育、医疗保健和基础设施发展的资源被转移到国防部门。这种转变可能导致一个社会环境，在这个环境中，军事价值观和规范开始渗透日常生活，培养一种美化军事主义的文化。此外，执法机构的militarising在几个国家成为一个有争议的问题。警察部队采用军事战术和装备引发了关于执法在平民生活中适当角色的问题。批评者认为，这一趋势可能导致过度使用武力和社区与警察之间信任的破裂。警察部队的militarising往往反映了一个更广泛的社会对军事解决方案的接受，这些问题本可以通过对话和社区参与来解决。此外，外交政策的militarising带来了伦理困境。当国家优先考虑军事干预而非外交谈判时，后果可能是可怕的。历史表明，军事干预往往导致长期冲突、生命损失和整个地区的不稳定。挑战在于平衡安全需求与追求和平解决的必要性。随着世界面临恐怖主义、网络威胁和地缘政治竞争等问题，诉诸于militarising回应的诱惑可能会掩盖更具建设性的方法。总之，militarising的趋势对社会和国家构成了重大挑战和风险。虽然对安全的渴望是可以理解的，但至关重要的是要批判性地审视优先考虑军事解决方案而非外交努力的影响。采取一种同时兼顾安全与外交的平衡方法对于促进一个稳定和和平的世界至关重要。最终，未来将取决于我们能够如何应对militarising的复杂性，认识到其潜在危险，同时努力实现国家之间更和平的共处。