|
|
Anybody might think that Susan Rice is gearing up for aconfirmation hearing. Last week, the US ambassador to the UNtweeted: “I condemn today’s cowardly terrorist attack targetinginnocents on a Tel Aviv bus.” Yet trawling back through herTwitter feed over the previous week, there is no indication thatinnocents might be dying anywhere else in the Middle East. Theword “Gaza” is noticeable by its absence – although the ambassador did find time to hail America’sTransgender Day of Remembrance.
在人们眼里，苏珊 赖斯(Susan Rice)的确在全力备战任命听证会。上周，这位美国驻联合国大使在Twitter上写道：“我谴责今天针对特拉维夫公交车上无辜平民的懦弱恐怖袭击。”但是，从她在此前一周的Twitter帖子看，中东其他地方似乎没有无辜平民死亡。她只字未提“加沙”，这一点令人关注，尽管这位大使有时间赞扬美国的“跨性别纪念日”(Transgender Day of Remembrance)
A bit of solidarity with Israel never goes amiss if – like Ms Rice – you are quite likely to be nominatedto be America’s next secretary of state. But the ambassador’s selective tweeting reflects a broaderproblem for US foreign policy. Even under Barack Obama, America cannot shake off the chargethat its moral authority is regularly undermined by the use of double standards. Israel is not theonly beneficiary. The Americans’ robust condemnation of repression in Syria, Libya and (latterly) Hosni Mubarak’s Egypt makes a striking contrast with its embarrassed muttering about Saudi-backed repression in Bahrain. The administration’s response to human rights violations by otherAmerican friends such as Rwanda or Sri Lanka has also been muted.
如果你很有可能被任命为美国的下一任国务卿（就像赖斯一样），展示一些与以色列的团结是不会错的。但大使在Twitter上选择性的言论，反映出美国外交政策的一个普遍问题：即便是在巴拉克 奥巴马(Barack Obama)任下，美国也无法摆脱双重标准削弱其道义权威的指控。以色列并不是唯一的受益者。美国对叙利亚、利比亚以及（后来）胡斯尼 穆巴拉克(Hosni Mubarak)统治的埃及的镇压活动大加挞伐，但对巴林在沙特阿拉伯撑腰下展开的镇压只是尴尬地搪塞过去，两者形成反差。对于美国其他盟友（如卢旺达和斯里兰卡）侵犯人权的行为，奥巴马政府也保持了沉默。
In the real world, American concern for human rights is always going to be balanced by otherconcerns – preserving alliances, avoiding conflict, flattering domestic constituencies. Given thedifficulty of consistency on human rights, some might suggest that silence is a more seemlyalternative. But that is no good either. Many of those who decry American double standards wouldbe even more appalled by a US that cheerfully embraced a completely amoral foreign policy.
在现实世界，美国对人权的关切总要与其他关切一起得到权衡——维护同盟关系、避免发生冲突、讨好国内选民群体。鉴于难以实施一视同仁的人权政策，可能有人提出“沉默”是更得体的选择。但这也并非可行之道。如果美国欣然拥抱完全无视道德的外交政策，那么很多鄙夷美国双重标准的人将更加震惊。
What is needed in Mr Obama’s second term is an America that is bolder in speaking out for humanrights, political freedom and the protection of civilians – and more willing to make the point thatthese are universal principles that are not just applied when it is convenient.
在奥巴马的第二个任期内，美国需要在人权、政治自由和保护平民方面更加敢于直言，并且更愿意展示，这些是普世原则，而不是只在对自己便利的场合搬出来的说词。
In his first term, the president’s cool pragmatism was a welcome antidote to the hot-headedmoralism of George W. Bush. But in his determination to avoid ideas such as the “axis of evil”, MrObama overcorrected for the mistakes of his predecessor. As a result, the Iranian uprising of 2009 wrongfooted him, and so did the Arab Spring.
在奥巴马的第一个任期内，他那种冷静的务实主义是对乔治·W·布什(George W. Bush)冲动的道德主义的可喜纠正。但在决心回避“邪恶轴心”之类的概念之际，奥巴马对前任的错误矫枉过正。结果，2009年伊朗民众示威和后来的阿拉伯之春让他措手不及。
When the president made his Cairo speech in 2009, calling for better relations between the US andthe Muslim world, many commentators (including me), hailed it as a masterpiece. But rereading thespeech in the aftermath of the Arab Spring, its failure to highlight the political stagnation of theMiddle East is striking. By contrast, the Cairo speech made in 2005 by Condoleezza Rice looks bothbrave and prescient in its insistence that the “Egyptian government must fulfil the promise it hasmade to its people – and to the entire world – by giving its citizens the freedom to choose”.
总统在2009年开罗演讲中呼吁改善美国与穆斯林世界的关系，当时很多评论人士（包括我）将其誉为杰作。但在阿拉伯之春后重读这篇演讲，我们明显注意到它未能提到中东的政治停滞。相比之下，2005年康多莉扎 赖斯(Condoleezza Rice)的开罗演讲不仅大胆，而且有先见之明。她坚称，“埃及政府必须履行对人民和全世界的承诺，赋予公民选择的自由。”
President Obama and his team must also surely regret their failure to speak out more strongly insupport of the “Green” uprising in Iran in 2009. As Iranians died in the streets, protesting against astolen election, the voice of the US was disappointingly hesitant.
奥巴马总统及其团队肯定也后悔没能更强有力地声援2009年伊朗“绿色”革命。就在伊朗人为抗议选举舞弊而在街头流血抗争之际，美国的声音犹豫得令人失望。
All presidents are caught off-guard by world events, at some point – whether it is September 11, the fall of the Berlin Wall or the Arab Spring. The key point is how they react. Mr Obama seems tohave started his second term determined to place a fresh, albeit still selective, emphasis on theimportance of human rights to US foreign policy.
总统都会在某一时刻被世界大事弄得猝不及防，不论是“9/11”、柏林墙的倒塌还是阿拉伯之春。关键在于他们如何应对。奥巴马似乎决意在开始第二个任期之际，重新强调人权对美国外交政策的重要意义，尽管这种强调仍然具有选择性。
His first visit abroad, after securing re-election, was to Myanmar – which gave him the chance toembrace Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nelson Mandela of her day. His aide, Samantha Power, argued thatby visiting Myanmar, the “president is sending a signal to other countries where reform is nothappening, or where repression is happening”.
奥巴马连任后的首次出访目的地是缅甸，这让他有机会拥抱昂山素季(Aung San Suu Kyi)——昂山素季是她这个时代的纳尔逊 曼德拉(Nelson Mandela)。奥巴马的助理萨曼莎 鲍威尔(SamanthaPower)认为，总统通过缅甸之行“向没有开展改革、或者正在镇压民众的国家发出一个信号”。
Cynics might respond that a presidential visit to Myanmar has as much to do with the competitionfor influence with China as with support for human rights. What is certainly true is that the reallyhard cases, with human rights diplomacy, involve taking on your friends.
怀疑者或许会说，总统访问缅甸，既是为了支持人权，也是为了与中国竞争影响力。但毫无疑问的是，就人权外交而言，真正难办的是把矛头对准你的盟友。
Nothing arouses greater cynicism about America’s role in the world than its one-eyed support forIsrael. It is completely appropriate for the Obama administration to defend Israel’s right to respondto rocket attacks by Hamas. But President Obama could surely have afforded to show moreconcern about the death of innocent Palestinians, including 30 children, in Gaza.
对以色列的偏袒是美国在国际事务中最受非议的一点。奥巴马政府捍卫以色列反击哈马斯火箭弹攻击的权利，这是完全合适的。但奥巴马总统完全可以对加沙无辜的巴勒斯坦平民死亡（包括30名儿童）展示出更大关切。
One extra reason for the president’s reticence is that his own record on avoiding civilian casualtiesin warfare is hardly spotless. Reliable numbers are impossible to find but there seems little doubtthat many innocents have been killed by American drone strikes aimed at terrorists in Pakistan.
奥巴马保持缄默的一个额外原因是，他在避免作战造成平民伤亡方面的记录远非无懈可击。尽管可靠数据无从查找，但美国针对巴基斯坦境内恐怖分子的无人机攻击造成大量无辜平民伤亡似乎已是不争的事实。
In fact, it is one of the ironies of the Obama years that, despite his liberal rhetoric, the president’ssignature foreign policy achievement is the killing of Osama bin Laden and the shredding of al-Qaeda’s leadership through drone strikes. As the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr Obama wouldsurely like his foreign policy legacy to be about more than success in a war on terror. A re-emphasis on human rights, democracy and the protection of civilians all over the world – includingGaza – would be a good place to start.
事实上，颇具讽刺意味的是，言论偏向自由主义的奥巴马，在任期间最具标志性的外交政策成就却是击毙奥萨马 本 拉登(Osama Bin Laden)，并且用无人机攻击摧毁基地组织的领导力量。作为诺贝尔和平奖得主，奥巴马肯定希望自己的外交政策遗产不局限于反恐战争的成功。重新强调人权、民主和保护全世界平民（包括加沙），将是一个好的开始。 |
|
发表于 2016-7-11 09:55:50