Goldilocks crisis

G-Zeroなどの言葉を生み出している政治コンサルのIan Bremmer。今回の危機をGoldilocks crisisと表現していました。過去にGoldilocks economyは取り上げましたが、Goldilocks crisisはどういう意味なのか見ていきます。

（オーレックス）

Goldilocks economy

〖経済〗ゴールディロックス経済 ｟インフレでも不況でもない適切な経済状態．特に 1990年代後半の米国の経済状態を指す｠

（オックスフォード）

Goldilocks

without extremes; just right

The planet is in what astronomers call the Goldilocks zone: neither too hot, nor too cold.

CNNの質問に聞かれて答えているのが以下の部分。最初にウクライナ人にとってはGoldilocks cirisis（ちょうどいい危機）ではなく危機そのものであることを断っています。

WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT, A GOLDILOCKS CRISIS?

>> IT'S NOT A GOLDILOCKS CRISIS FOR THE UKRAINIANS IN MARIUPOL, THE CITY THAT'S BEEN DESTROYED.

IT'S NOT A GOLDILOCKS CRISIS FOR THE 6 MILLION UKRAINIANS THAT ARE NOW FORCIBLE REFUGEES LIVING ACROSS EUROPE.

BUT WHAT'S CLEAR IS THAT NATO HAD BEEN ERODING.

IT WAS A DRIFT, IT WAS MISSIONLESS.

THE UNITED STATES BELIEVED THAT, THE FRENCH PRESIDENT BELIEVED THAT.

THIS IS EUROPE POST BREXIT.

THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THAT PUTIN BELIEVED IT.

HE THOUGHT, LIKE IN 2008, LIKE IN 2014, IF HE UPPED THE ANTE AGAIN AND ROLLED INTO KYIV, AND REMOVED ZELENSKYY FROM GOVERNMENT THAT THERE WOULD BE NO EFFECTIVE RESPONSE FROM THE WEST.

HE WAS WRONG.

THIS IS THE WORST MISJUDGMENT BY A MAJOR LEADER ON THE GLOBAL STAGE SINCE THE SOVIET UNION COLLAPSED.

AND FRANKLY, THAT HAS PROVIDED AN ENORMOUS OPPORTUNITY.

NOT ONLY FOR THE UKRAINIANS TO FIGHT AND SHOW THAT THEY CAN AND SHOULD BE A PART OF THE EUROPEAN UNION BUT ALSO HAS ALLOWED NATO TO GET STRONGER TO FOCUS ON DEFENSE IN A WAY THE EUROPEANS HAVE REFUSED TO FOR DECADES.

HAVE ALLOWED FINLAND AND SWEDEN TO JOIN AND THEY WILL AT THE END OF THE MONTH IT'LL BE APPROVED AT THE MADRID SUMMIT.

AND I THINK MOST PEOPLE AGREE THEY HATE PUTIN MORE THAN THE UNITED STATES.

WHEN I WAS WATCH THE NANCY PELOSI AND THEN THE MITCH McCONNELL CONVOYS TO KYIV, THE MESSAGE WAS IDENTICAL.

THIS IS A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY, THE RULE OF LAW, AND THE ALLIES AROUND THE WORLD, AND ALLIES IN ASIA ARE NOT GOING TO STAND FOR IT.

I CALL THAT A GOLDILOCKS CRISIS.

CNNでは欧米の結束を促している危機であることを説明していますが、どういう意味で「ちょうどいい」のか分かりづらいです。彼のサイトでの説明では、現状を揺るがす危機だが、ひたすら耐えて終わるのを待たなければいけないほどの酷い危機ではないという意味でGoldilocksが使われているようです。

Ian Bremmer: power of the "Goldilocks crisis"

May 16, 2022

For those reasons, the Russian invasion of Ukraine increasingly looks to me, what I call a "Goldilocks crisis". It's not so great that we want to curl into a ball and just wait for the end to come, but it's not so small that we aren't shaken out of our complacency. I think both of those things actually means that going forward on the back of the Russia crisis, our institutions and our leadership are going to be stronger and more robust than they were before the crisis came. That's Russia.

政治コンサルという職業柄、何かうまいことを言うことが求められているのかもしれませんが、今回のは分かりにくいですね。CNNでは最初に断りを入れていましたが、それでもウクライナの人にとってGoldilocksなわけがないですから、不謹慎さを免れずこの語が広まるのは難しいかもしれません。

NHKのグローバルアジェンダという討論番組でイアンブレマーが出ていたのですが、ウクライナはロシアに勝とうという気は起こさないほうがいいと上目線で言っていました。今回のgoldilocks crisisもそんな態度をどうしても感じてしまいます。。。東野先生の反論も含めて下記の通りです。

Russia's Invasion of Ukraine: Can the World Stop It?

GLOBAL AGENDA 50m 00s Broadcast on April 16, 2022

18m39s [BREMMER]

This is a big part of the problem. The Ukrainians are fighting very courageously. They're winning the information war. But as a consequence of that, many in the West are starting to believe that Ukraine can win, and they're starting to provide enormous amounts of military material to the Ukrainians, offensive capabilities as well. And I want to be very clear here that if the Ukrainians get to the point they might be able to actually retake the territory that Russia took in Ukraine in 2014, the occupied territories of the Donbas, Crimea, if they're able to start engaging in regular strikes inside Russian territory, we've already seen a couple of those already, strikes and sabotage, the Russians aren't going to capitulate. They spend ten times the amount on defense that the Ukrainians do. They will engage in scorched-earth policies. They will take this fight to every Ukrainian. So, I of course am morally aligned 100 percent with the fight of the independent Ukrainians, 44 million people that did nothing wrong other than want to simply have the right to elect their own government and determine their own future. But the danger of believing that the Ukrainians are capable of defeating the Russians on the battlefield is grave, serious, and we are presently heading in that direction.

23m36s [HIGASHINO]

Yes. But I have a big question of whether we can call it as a danger. I think it is natural, absolutely natural for the Ukraine people to believe that they should win this war. They did nothing wrong. So they have to go through this war without losing anything at all. And I can totally understand it just as much as Professor Bremmer understands it as well. So providing fighters and tanks, for my mind, is absolutely reasonable and something that we've got to do. And so I think Zelenskyy made it crystal clear in his speech at the NATO conference that they need just one percent of tanks, one percent of their fighters so that they can defend the eastern part of their territory. And I think that is perfectly understandable. On the contrary, whether we can say, "No, no, you shouldn't believe that you are winning this war because that's too dangerous. Russia will probably respond by using chemical weapons or probably nuclear weapons, things like that," can we say that? So in my view, even though it might be escalating this war, the only option for the Western part of the world is to support Ukraine militarily.