《经济学人》眼中的阿富汗塔利班

美国应该从阿富汗的溃败中吸取教训,避免过度依赖军事外交政策。对于塔利班,一些人主张尽量避免接触,而另一些人认为美国应该积极参与以保留在阿富汗的影响力。如果提供援助,应该分批给予,并与特定条件相关联。
《经济学人》眼中的阿富汗塔利班
icon
网址
type
Post
status
Published
date
Oct 7, 2021
slug
economist-taliban
summary
美国应该从阿富汗的溃败中吸取教训,避免过度依赖军事外交政策。对于塔利班,一些人主张尽量避免接触,而另一些人认为美国应该积极参与以保留在阿富汗的影响力。如果提供援助,应该分批给予,并与特定条件相关联。
tags
新闻
地缘政治
category
翻译
内容形式
完成日期
URL
It might at least be hoped that the lessons of this debacle will be learned. The main one is so obvious: an over-militarised foreign policy that embraces unrealistic objectives is liable to fail. Yet, as Mr Kagan and many others have shown, this appears to be more a feature of American foreign policy than a bug.
💡
美国起码也应该从这场溃败中吸取点教训吧。一个最大的教训就摆在眼前:为了追求不切实际的目的而过度依赖军事的外交政策极难成功。但是,包括Kagan在内的很多人都表示,这大概是美国外交政策的本色,而不是偶尔出的岔子。
For some, the answer is simple. The Taliban are so odious, so violent, repressive and untrustworthy, that America should have as little as possible to do with them. Handing out aid or initiating formal diplomatic ties would only strengthen the new regime, the argument runs; better to leave it to stew. Others make the opposite case. It is no use lamenting the outcome of the war, they say: if America wants to retain any influence in Afghanistan, it had better start engaging now, before China, Iran and Russia turn the country into their client.
💡
对一部分人来说,答案显而易见。塔利班可恶、暴力、压迫、奸诈,美国最好不要跟他们打交道。给他们援助或者建立正式外交关系,只会让他们的政权站得更稳;不如让他们自生自灭。另一部分人则持相反态度:战争完都完了,多说无益;如果美国想重新在阿富汗建立影响力,最好现在就行动,不然中俄伊朗就要把阿富汗收编了。
The Taliban, of course, may prefer pious penury to growth and development. But to the extent that Western help is wanted, it should be dished out in small doses, tied to specific concessions.
💡
当然,塔利班也可能宁肯忍饥挨饿也不要发展增长。但,既然他们还是想要西方援助,那援助最好像挤牙膏一样一点一点给,而且一定要提具体条件。
我觉得,阿塔现在就应该学习新中国成立的榜样,认定一个阵营,就下定决心,一个猛子扎进去。当骑墙派,既要又要,到最后两手空空。
上一篇
最起码的体面
下一篇
脑外科医生的一天
Loading...