8 u, ~! r& K: ~& b- l他们在所有的地方都表示支持和平、人权，但是，埃及政府摇摇欲坠时，他们心里却非常矛盾。说起政府倒台，轮到巴林，美国会担心；利比亚----高兴；也门----不安；沙特----惊恐；轮到伊朗，美国人就要狂喜了。 5 V; q# C( e+ |坏蛋成为历史之后 ' L: m5 E3 h9 ]6 P3 k+ t# L. \# L7 _
奥巴马当选是因为他反布什，他不希望美国被外人批评指手画脚、主观强权，不愿意让理想凌驾于美国利益之上。但是，我有一种感觉，看到大街上和平的抗议人群，他的心跳加快了一点。 9 D, L# |9 G4 k0 n0 f+ F8 J 2 E [5 N8 K D: J为什么这么说呢？ " ~5 a: b$ Q! a$ \4 s . c/ E3 _% l. Y6 D; t3 k奥巴马才华横溢，但却是个很奇怪的演说家。一半的时候，他苍白、冷酷，好像不加思索地背着写好的稿子，只有间或的语调起伏，才让听讲人相信，说话的人还活着呢。 3 I4 r" {$ Z& O! k5 o# \, W# }" H. t3 q+ ?, _, @
当他真想让你脊梁骨上的汗毛跳舞的时候，演讲，可能也真是发自肺腑的。 . n/ N, {1 ~$ a: v0 U2 t' P+ H. c3 \ G; c
穆巴拉克倒台，解放的好像是奥巴马，而不是埃及。他发表的演讲慷慨激昂。6 ?' y2 ~1 T$ Z5 G7 q
f" F& ^- `& c) F3 ]8 w当他开始引用历史名言----“宇宙的道德轨迹终究归于正义”（马丁·路德·金根据19世纪一位主张奴隶解放的白人牧师的名言改编）的时候，你知道，奥巴马是势如破竹、要乘胜出击了。( b+ k$ ^% [ ^: |1 R
4 z2 |( o/ D, R) u但是，这不过是奥巴马的一次演讲。随后，他并没有向巴林、也门、约旦人讲话，更甭提就中国的抗议示威说教了。6 z/ a. P% _* M* Z
8 c/ W7 j- d' Q, t7 t9 }" j也许，这不过是政治。当示威者被指控为与险恶的外国权势结伙的“蟑螂”时，美国总统最好保持沉默。+ s) S1 F/ Q. J6 `/ I, H3 t
9 ]# _. e5 `3 `( x
但是，宇宙的道德轨迹可能并不永远朝着美国自私的战略利益倾斜……只有当“坏蛋”成了历史的时候，总统才会给他贴上坏蛋的标签。/ y3 S0 Y3 R# l& T
: o) p* d' m3 |8 M& d+ P, j. W
$ U/ G6 _3 l5 q - V1 c9 G# f: t" ~, rWhy does the US so often back the bad guys? $ x# T' b" |7 a8 {1 A, d6 h- p; l0 ^' |& b) h+ W( p3 e- P
Why is it that the United States - forged as a nation in a revolution against tyranny, explicitly dedicated to liberty - has so often found itself backing the bad guys? 7 R8 V, j& U( ^. uBarack Obama has now put himself on the side of democracy in Egypt, but it took a time. Indeed, it took the US more than 30 years. / E( L4 b3 o6 [9 _ d! b
4 |" `2 y/ k6 N4 I# sThe quandary is not new. Part of the problem is deciding who the bad guys are. One of the founding fathers and the third president, Thomas Jefferson, believed the American Revolution had sparked a fire that would set the world alight.& D3 J+ w0 B" c& R
5 A$ p) j+ A- Z+ QHe was an enthusiast for the French Revolution, defending it even when its nascent democracy descended into dictatorship and terror. , f/ @0 m# e" S+ |' B1 s' a, T
By contrast, his old sparring partner, fellow founding father and the second President, John Adams, was more sceptical from the start and signed a treaty with the country many Americans saw as the foe of liberty: Great Britain.4 n! f7 Z1 b- y6 |+ x- h
- H! }/ Z" ]3 @And so it has gone on. Skip lightly over the Spanish war. A war against one imperialism for sure, but American domination might not have felt like liberty to the people of Cuba and the Philippines. 2 G' c( T" L. f/ V0 }7 }( N3 I; e+ H* C A
9 X* S Z: ^' W6 VPresident Franklin Delano Roosevelt couldn't have been more forthright in his early belief that Hitler was a threat to the whole world. To Churchill's irritation, he demanded that the post-war world should banish the days of empire and colonialism. He didn't live to see it, but the new problem was the clash of new empires. ' p6 E# x* i3 j4 n: y6 F# k5 B0 ?$ C 0 v" N2 Y: {1 wBelief in universal liberty comes up hard against the real world where policymakers often see the choice as between the bad guys, and the worse guys.7 b: v/ v; |. {
$ y+ G8 T. R7 V. yThe real problem for the US came with its opposition to the expanding Soviet empire. Communism was a new tyranny, but it cloaked itself in the language of liberty, and attracted those fighting foreign rule and domestic domination. In opposing the Soviet Union and its allies, the USA often found itself in bed with a promiscuous parade of the dodgiest of characters - dictators, torturers and thieves - whose only virtue was not being "Commies". % D6 t% y1 |1 t( k2 T! {7 k. U. @- \+ a7 Q7 i9 w% o* [9 E V
The US never successfully pulled off the trick of encouraging genuine liberal democracies.# l$ o- P* t$ n9 K3 F3 A Z
4 p6 P9 Q- Z" b M K, R& B; rWhen the Iron Curtain was torn down, the US was definitely on the right side of history but did not seize the opportunity to knock down the bulwarks against communism they no longer needed. Reagan, the first Bush and Clinton did not urge people living in dictatorships in the Middle East and Central Asia to seize the freedoms newly enjoyed in the European east. 3 z& ~- Z R% [8 h7 [ 8 m& T- p' x- h/ gOf course, the neo-cons wanted a revolution against this hypocrisy. They wanted the United States to aggressively promote democracy with revolutionary fervour. But in power they targeted old enemies, never old friends. Saddam Hussein and the Taliban were dictators, but in the scale of sin, their enmity weighed more heavily than their tyranny. As jihadists replaced communists as America's favourite existential threat, the old corrupt and undemocratic bulwarks were again seen as better than the alternative. , d6 [4 F/ F3 D6 r ) ~3 \+ W6 z& zIt is Barack Obama's reaction to this pattern that initially locked his administration into an awkward ambivalence to the Egyptian revolution. He was elected, in part, in reaction to George W Bush's foreign policy. : p, a8 x4 ?# k3 F- P: e( j% A1 x# r. r$ T9 n( U: T/ {
So on the one hand Mr Obama seems to genuinely believe that it is not the place of the leader of the world's only superpower to pick and choose the leaders of other countries. That is a value consistent with the American Revolution. So is his other instinct, pulling him in the opposite direction. He believes it is the USA's job to promote what he sees as universal values, and he grows more forthright about this day by day.2 M& s2 Z7 k) a+ t; k1 Z5 E2 M+ e+ {
& X% S) y$ }* @% l q' r8 n8 ^2 dIt will be interesting to see if he follows up with tough conversations with Saudi King Abdullah, Uzbek President Islam Karimov, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and other allies who may not share his enthusiasm for the freedoms the president is urging upon Egypt.% v6 Z* F9 i* R: [+ A' `
' k' V7 Z, A9 |/ _/ x( x. q7 L yFor the old dilemma remains. There is some worry in Washington about what follows, and the possibility of the Muslim Brotherhood playing a big role in the future. Many observers warn against building them up into a huge bogeyman. But it is also true that any new Egyptian government that encompasses them would be less friendly to Israel, the peace process and the West in general.8 T6 V/ d; f7 t# q$ q0 O, p( O
5 M, o0 i3 u5 |3 F# }& y
The danger of backing revolution and democracy is that the moral arc of the universe does not always bend towards American foreign policy interests.
$ U/ G6 _3 l5 q
图片附件: bad guys.jpg (2011-3-4 20:11, 27.51 KB) / 下载次数 107