The Republican Party used to have a label for the kind of foreign policy hawk that President-elect Donald J. Trump named on Tuesday as his national security adviser and is considering as his secretary of state: neocons.

候任总统特朗普周二任命的国家安全顾问以及正在考虑的国务卿人选都是曾被共和党人称为“新保”（neocons，即新保守主义者。——译注）的外交政策鹰派。

But while they once were neoconservatives, over the past few years Representative Michael Waltz and Senator Marco Rubio, both of Florida, have gradually shifted their positions. Sounding less like former Vice President Dick Cheney or John R. Bolton, who served as Mr. Trump’s third national security adviser, they no longer talk about foreign interventions or the prospects of regime change. Instead, they speak the language of the “America First” movement, and fit more comfortably within Mr. Trump’s often erratic worldview, in which deal-making reigns over ideology.

不过，虽然曾经是新保守派，佛罗里达州众议员迈克尔·瓦尔兹和参议员马克·卢比奥在过去几年已经逐渐转换立场。他们听上去不再那么像前副总统迪克·切尼或特朗普的第三任国家安全顾问约翰·博尔顿，不再谈论外国干预或政权更迭的可能性。现在他们用上了“美国优先”运动的言辞，与特朗普那时显怪诞的世界观更舒适地契合在一起，在这个世界里，做交易要比意识形态更重要。

The result is that Mr. Trump may end up with a foreign policy team composed of deep loyalists, but with roots in familiar Republican approaches. The shift that the two men have made reflects the broader marginalization of neocons throughout the Republican Party after the disaster in Iraq and the rise of America First.

其结果是，特朗普最终可能会拥有一个由高度忠诚于他的人组成的外交政策团队，但其根源却是熟悉的共和党路线。这两人的转变反映出，伊拉克战争的灾难和美国优先主义崛起后，共和党内对“新保”的广泛边缘化。

For Mr. Rubio and Mr. Waltz, the drift from their previous positions to their current ones has been slow, evident in shadings of what they said at conservative conferences or in interviews on Fox News, and in how they altered their votes at key moments in the past few years. Ukraine has been a litmus test.

具体到卢比奥和瓦尔兹，立场的转变是个缓慢的过程，体现在他们在保守派大会或福克斯新闻采访中的发言的细微变化，以及在过去几年中，他们如何在一些关键投票中做出与以往不同的表态。乌克兰就是一个决定性的检验。

迈克尔·沃尔兹在外交领域相对不知名，不过他是福克斯新闻的观众——包括特朗普——所熟悉的评论员。

When Russia first invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Mr. Rubio, the No. 2 on the Senate Intelligence Committee, applauded the rush to send arms, aid and intelligence to the Ukrainians. So did Mr. Waltz, a former Green Beret, who enthusiastically supported giving President Volodymyr Zelensky everything he needed to drive out Russian troops.

2022年2月俄罗斯入侵乌克兰时，作为参议员情报委员会二号人物的卢比奥对向乌克兰人紧急提供武器、协助和情报的做法表示了赞赏。曾是“绿色贝雷帽”（即美国陆军特种部队——译注）队员的瓦尔兹也是如此，他热情的表示支持尽全力帮助泽连斯基总统把俄罗斯军队赶出去。

But by this spring, each for their own reasons, Mr. Rubio and Mr. Waltz voted against the last major aid package to support Ukraine. And to justify their new position, Mr. Rubio declared that the United States could not afford to fight for Ukraine’s freedom while illegal immigrants were coming over the southern U.S. border.

然而到了今年春天，各自出于自己的原因，卢比奥和瓦尔兹都投票反对最新的大规模援乌计划。为了解释自己的这种新立场，卢比奥宣称，在非法移民正从南部边境涌入之际，美国已经无力为乌克兰的自由而战。

For his part, Mr. Waltz wrote in an opinion essay for Fox News that President Biden “has neither explained the American objective in Ukraine nor his strategy to achieve it. Will American military spending continue until Ukraine has pushed Russia back to its prewar boundaries? Its pre-2014 boundaries? Or until the Putin regime collapses?”

瓦尔兹则在为福克斯新闻撰写的观点文章中说，拜登总统“既没有解释美国在乌克兰问题上的目标，也没有说明实现这些目标的策略。美国的军事支出是要一直持续到乌克兰将俄罗斯推回到战前边界吗？还是2014年之前的边界？还是直到普京政权倒台？”

In fact, Mr. Biden’s objectives have shifted. His often-repeated statement that the United States will stand by Ukraine “for as long as it takes” has morphed into “as long as we can.”

事实上，拜登的目标也发生了转变。他曾经反复表示美国会一直与乌克兰站在一起，“需要站多久就多久”，后来变成了“能站多久就多久”。

But his aides largely describe their goal as a simple one: to help put the Ukrainians in a position that they could one day enter negotiations with Russia, preferably with the upper hand on the battlefield. It seems unlikely that day will come in the 10 weeks remaining in Mr. Biden’s presidency. So almost immediately, defining objectives will fall to Mr. Waltz and, if he is nominated and confirmed, Mr. Rubio.

但他的助手给出了一个简单的目标：帮助乌克兰方面有朝一日坐上与俄罗斯的谈判桌，最好是在战场上占优的情况下。如今拜登的总统任期还剩下10周，那一天似乎不太可能在这段时间里到来。因此，对目标的定义几乎将第一时间成为瓦尔兹和卢比奥的任务——如果后者最终得到提名和确认的话。

It may be a challenge, since their boss has insisted only that there should be a deal — the details of which he has never described. Presumably, it would give Russia a large chunk of the country in return for peace and a declaration that Ukraine would not enter the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for years or decades to come.

这将是个困难的任务，因为他们的老板只是坚称需要达成一笔交易——但从来没明确这交易具体有什么。估计是需要将很大一片国土割让给俄罗斯换取和平，同时发声明表示乌克兰在未来几年或几十年里不会加入北大西洋公约组织。

7月，乌克兰总统泽连斯基向参议院领导层颁发奖牌。瓦尔兹和卢比奥都放弃了最初对乌克兰的大力支持。

“They are still internationalists,” said Richard Haass, a longtime Republican national security official and diplomat, who worked for President George H.W. Bush in the aftermath of the fall of the Berlin Wall and President George W. Bush in the run-up to the war in Iraq. “But the test of what kind of internationalist will come in how far they are willing to distance themselves from Ukraine. And it will come again in what kind of tools they would use to confront China.”

“他们仍然是国际主义者，”资深共和党国家安全官员和外交官理查德·哈斯说，他曾经先后供职于柏林墙倒塌后的乔治·H·W·布什政府和伊拉克战争前夕的乔治·W·布什政府。“但究竟是哪一种国际主义者，要看他们愿意在多大程度上与乌克兰保持距离。然后还要看他们在与中国的对抗中会使用什么样的手段。”

Nearly 10 years ago, when Mr. Rubio was running for the Republican nomination for president against Mr. Trump, the Florida senator spoke at the Council on Foreign Relations — the heart of the traditional foreign policy establishment. He quoted John F. Kennedy and made the case that the younger Mr. Bush had made: that American power must be “motivated by a desire to expand freedom, rather than simply expand its own territory.”

近10年前，在与特朗普竞争共和党总统提名的卢比奥在外交关系委员会发表讲话，该委员会是传统外交建制派的核心组织。这位佛罗里达州参议员引用了约翰·肯尼迪，给出了和小布什一样的论点，即美国的力量必须“受到一种扩展自由的欲望所鞭策，而不只是扩张自己的领土”。

“While America did not intend to become the world’s indispensable power, that is exactly what our economic and political freedoms have made us,” he told the crowd, castigating President Barack Obama and the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, for being too timid in facing up to dictators from Syria to China. “The free nations of the world still look to America to champion our shared ideals.”

“美国并不想成为世界上不可或缺的大国，但我们的经济和政治自由恰恰让我们变得不可或缺，”他对现场观众说，他谴责奥巴马总统和民主党提名人希拉里·克林顿，说他们面对从叙利亚到中国的众多独裁者时表现过于怯懦。“世界上的自由国家仍然在指望美国来捍卫我们共同的理想。”

Today Mr. Rubio makes a different, more pragmatic and more Trumpian case: that the way to keep America out of wars is to build up its strength, invest in key technologies and domestic supply chains for critical materials, and use tariffs to block threatening imports.

今天的卢比奥给出了一种不同的、更务实、更特朗普主义的主张：要让美国避免卷入战争，需要积攒自己的实力，投资关键技术以及关键材料的本土供应链，用关税来阻挡构成威胁的进口。

Mr. Waltz is less known in the foreign policy world, though he is familiar as a commentator to viewers of Fox News, including Mr. Trump. He received four Bronze Stars after multiple combat tours in Afghanistan and Africa, and worked as a junior adviser to defense secretaries Donald H. Rumsfeld and Robert M. Gates, both of whom served in the administration of George W. Bush. Mr. Waltz also advised Vice President Dick Cheney on counterterrorism. Once, that pedigree granted a young foreign policy professional entry into the neocon inner circle.

瓦尔兹在外交领域相对不知名，不过他是福克斯新闻的观众——包括特朗普——所熟悉的评论员。他多次被派往阿富汗和非洲执行作战任务，获得四枚铜星勋章，曾是乔治·W·布什的国防部长唐纳德·拉姆斯菲尔德和罗伯特·盖茨的低级别顾问。瓦尔兹还曾任副总统迪克·切尼在恐怖主义问题上的顾问。这段履历让一个年轻的外交政策专业人员得以进入“新保”核心圈。

But during his time in Congress, Mr. Waltz has espoused a national security doctrine that has increasingly jelled with Mr. Trump’s. A member of the House committees on the armed services, intelligence and foreign affairs, he has chastised NATO allies for not meeting their defense military spending commitments.

但在进入国会后，瓦尔兹所信奉的国家安全方针渐渐在向特朗普靠拢。作为众议院军事、情报和外交委员会成员，他痛斥北约盟友没能兑现防务支出承诺。

He was a vociferous critic of Mr. Biden’s withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. “What no one can ever do for me, including this administration right now, is articulate a counterterrorism plan that’s realistic without us there,” Mr. Waltz said in an interview in the days after the withdrawal.

他高声斥责拜登从阿富汗撤军的决定。“没有人——包括本届政府——能明确地告诉我一个现实的反恐计划，是能做到让我们不需要呆在那里的，”瓦尔兹在撤军几天后的一次采访中说。

Of course, Mr. Trump had proposed a similar withdrawal just months before. Mr. Waltz had opposed that as well, introducing legislation to prevent a significant troop drawdown from Afghanistan unless the director of national intelligence could certify that the Taliban would not associate with Al Qaeda.

当然，就在此几个月前，特朗普提出了类似的撤军计划。瓦尔兹也表示反对，他曾提出立法，要求除非国家情报总监能够证明塔利班不会与基地组织联系，否则不得从阿富汗大幅撤军。

In 2023, Mr. Waltz led legislation that would authorize the president to use military force against Mexican drug cartels because of fentanyl trafficking, production and distribution. The bill echoed the war powers Congress gave Mr. Bush before the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

2023年，瓦尔兹领导了一项立法，该立法针对芬太尼的贩运、生产和分销，授权总统使用军事力量打击墨西哥贩毒集团。该法案呼应了国会在入侵阿富汗和伊拉克之前赋予布什的战争权力。

Both Mr. Rubio and Mr. Waltz are supporters of a more hard-line economic approach toward China, as well. Although Mr. Trump’s pending picks for Treasury secretary, commerce secretary and trade representative will take a larger part in shaping tariff and trade policy, Mr. Rubio and Mr. Waltz could play an influential role. Both have supported removing permanent normal trading relations with China — a move that would result in higher tariffs on products from the country — as well as barring U.S. investment from flowing to certain Chinese companies.

卢比奥和瓦尔兹都支持对中国采取更强硬的经济政策。尽管特朗普目前尚未任命的财政部长、商务部长和贸易代表将在制定关税和贸易政策方面发挥更大作用，但卢比奥和瓦尔兹可能会发挥影响力。两人都支持取消与中国的永久正常贸易关系——此举将导致对来自中国的产品征收更高的关税——并禁止美国投资流向某些中国公司。

Mr. Rubio has also favored sweeping economic sanctions to penalize Beijing for human rights violations. He was the co-sponsor of a 2021 law that banned the importation of any products into the United States that were made with any materials or labor from Xinjiang, a far-western province where China has carried out a crackdown against Muslim minorities.

卢比奥还支持全面的经济制裁，以惩罚北京侵犯人权的行为。他是2021年一项法律的共同提案人之一，该法律禁止向美国进口任何使用来自新疆生产的材料或劳动力制造的产品。中国对生活在这个西部省份的穆斯林少数民族进行镇压。

But those bills now read as if they come from a different era, before China’s economic downturn created new vulnerabilities, and before its uneasy partnership with Russia posed a very different, more complex threat to the West.

但这些法案现在读起来像是来自一个不同的时代，发生在中国经济低迷造成新的脆弱性之前，在中国与俄罗斯不稳定的伙伴关系对西方构成非常不同的、更复杂的威胁之前。

These are issues that did not confront the first Trump administration. And the solutions are also complex. Are they addressed with Mr. Trump’s tariffs, which the president-elect describes as a cure-all, but could cost American consumers billions and fuel inflation? With more restrictions on shipping high-end semiconductors and equipments to China — a step Mr. Biden has pioneered? Or with pouring more military resources into the Pacific region, which Democrats and Republicans have promised, but don’t have the naval resources to make happen on the scale they have imagined?

这些都是特朗普的第一个任期没有遇到的问题。解决方案也很复杂。这些问题是否可以用特朗普的关税来解决？这位候任总统称关税是万灵药，但可能会让美国消费者付出数十亿美元的代价，并加剧通货膨胀。是向中国出口高端半导体和设备施加更多限制，还是向太平洋地区投入更多军事资源？前者是拜登率先采取的措施，后者是民主党和共和党都曾承诺过的，但没有海军资源来实现他们想象中的规模。

Outside experts say Mr. Trump learned something from the chaos of the first term and has adjusted accordingly. “Over the past eight years, he has collected enough acolytes to staff his foreign policy and national security team with like-minded officials,” Daniel W. Drezner, a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, wrote this week in Foreign Affairs.

外部专家表示，特朗普从第一个任期的混乱中学到了一些东西，并做出了相应的调整。“过去八年里，他聚集了足够多的助手，让他的外交政策和国家安全团队里有志同道合的官员，”弗莱彻法律与外交学院的国际政治学教授丹尼尔·德雷兹纳本周在《外交事务》杂志上写道。

“He is far less likely to meet resistance from his own political appointees. Other checks on Trump’s policy will also be far weaker,” he said, and the result will be that “the United States will speak with one voice on foreign policy, and that voice will be Trump’s.”

他不太可能遇到来自他自己任命的政治官员的阻力。对特朗普政策的其他制约也会弱得多，”他说，结果将是“美国在外交政策上用一个声音说话，而这个声音将是特朗普的”。