英语阅读：The quest for power and its recent mutation
In recent times the phrase “smart power” has been used and several of ourreaders and bulletin board users have expressed an interest in this topic.
Offering a simple definition we would contrast “smart power” with that of
“soft power” and “hard power” and mention that it refers to a nation’s foreign
affairs approach.
For example, when the US invaded Iraq and executed that nation’s sovereign
leader, Saddam Hussein, this was an example of “hard power”. Another example
would be last month’s airstrikes by Israel on the Palestinian population living
in the Gaza Strip. The emphasis here is on the physical aspect of strength to
solve problems and meet objectives.
So next if we look at “soft power” we would include more diplomatic,
humanistic responses that do not use violence or physical force to get results.
Such examples could be sanctions, such as that being imposed on Iran for alleged
intent to manufacture nuclear weapons or the blockade on trade with Myanmar by
the US in response to the rulers there who they do not approve of. Other methods
would also include aid, infrastructure building, favored nation policies
etc.
Understanding the above two methods brings us to “smart power” which in
some respects is an amalgamation of both. The concept arose in the US several
years ago by foreign policy experts who realized the rest of the world was
starting to despise them. Many global commentators were finding it appalling
that successive US governments from the time of their Korean incursion in the
1950’s, to their failed Indo China invasions in the 60’s and early 70’s, to
their behavior in central and southern America in the 80’s to the 90’s and
actions in north western Africa, the former Yugoslavia and middle east and more
recently Iraq and Afghanistan were evidence of the abuse of power, which often
did not have success in trying to meet the desired objectives.
Appreciating the complexity of the above, US foreign policy commentators
wanted to see their government engage the world better, to try and promote the
ideals of freedom and equality, yet in a manner that was more successful and
less likely to be misinterpreted as super power aggression. Hence by using more
diplomatic means, by forging alliances with other supportive nations, by
resisting the urge to use force and violence, the US under the present Secretary
of Defense Hilary Clinton is embarking on a new campaign to try and rebuild
their nation’s image abroad, while still exacting change, for purposes they
believe are good for the planet.
Within this new agenda developments over recent years, particularly
concerning the internet and the ability to express information, are making their
job both easier and more problematic. With more transparency and accountability
for their government’s actions both towards their own citizens and citizens of
the world, great interest is being shown towards this new “smart power”
initiative.
For a deeper understanding of the history of this strategy and its major
proponents log online to a recent New Yorker article at
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2009/01/26/090126ta_talk_hertzberg
the Center for Strategic and International Studies
http://www.csis.org/smartpower/
and the original article in Foreign Affairs journal that proposed the
change in strategy
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040301faessay83211/suzanne-nossel/smart-power.html
页:
[1]