您现在的位置: 纽约时报中英文网 >> 纽约时报中英文版 >> 观点 >> 正文

美国面临的局面有多危险?

更新时间:2017-4-2 10:46:39 来源:纽约时报中文网 作者:佚名

When the President Is Ignorant of His Own Ignorance
美国面临的局面有多危险?

How prepared is our president for the next great foreign, economic or terrorist crisis?

我们的总统有没有为下一次重大的外交、经济或恐怖主义危机做好准备?

After a little more than two months in office, President Trump has raised doubts about his ability to deal with what the former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld famously described as the “known unknowns” and the “unknown unknowns.”

前国防部长唐纳德·拉姆斯菲尔德(Donald Rumsfeld)曾经提出“已知的未知”和“未知的未知”这两个著名概念,上任两个多月以来,特朗普总统应对二者的能力已经遭到怀疑。

“President Trump seems to have no awareness whatsoever of what he does and does not know,” Steven Nadler, a professor of philosophy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, wrote me. “He is ignorant of his own ignorance.”

“特朗普总统似乎根本没有意识到自己知道什么,不知道什么,”维斯康星大学麦迪逊分校的哲学教授史蒂文·纳德勒(Steven Nadler)写道,“他对于自己的无知一无所知。”

During his first 63 days in office, Trump made 317 “false or misleading claims,” according to The Washington Post.

根据《华盛顿邮报》的统计,在任职的前63天里,特朗普就做出了317个“虚假或误导性的断言”。

The FBI, the Treasury Department and two congressional committees are probing whether Trump’s campaign aides and advisers — including Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn — were complicit in alleged Russian interference.

联邦调查局、财政部及两个国会委员会正在调查特朗普的竞选助手和顾问——包括保罗·马纳福特(Paul Manafort)、卡特·佩奇(Carter Page)、罗杰·斯通(Roger Stone)和迈克尔·弗林(Michael Flynn)——是否涉嫌与俄罗斯合谋,对大选进行据称的干涉。

Without an obvious mandate (as the world knows, he lost the popular vote by 2.87 million), Trump has proposed a profound retrenchment of domestic policy.

特朗普没有得到明确的授权(举世皆知,他的全民票输了287万票),便提出对国内政策进行极大的开支缩减。

His 2018 budget, the potential impact of which he does not seem to grasp, calls for cutting $54 billion from programs that pay for education, housing and child care assistance for low- and moderate-income families, protection against infectious diseases, enforcement of environmental, worker and consumer protection regulation, national parks and a host of other social programs. See the accompanying chart, which illustrates the depth of these changes. It shows, to give a few examples, Trump’s proposal to cut the Environmental Protection Agency budget by 31 percent; the Labor Department by 21 percent; and the Health and Human Services budget by 16 percent.

他的2018年预算要求削减540亿美元,这笔钱原本用于支持低收入和中等收入家庭的教育、住房和儿童保育;防止传染病;执行环境、工人和消费者保护条例;维护国家公园;以及其他一系列社会计划,对于这一预算的潜在影响,他似乎并不清楚。附图可以说明这些变化有多么深刻。例如,特朗普的提案将环境保护局(Environmental Protection Agency)的预算削减了31%;劳工部预算削减了21%;卫生和公众服务部预算削减16%。

Trump proposed these cuts in spite of what Richard N. Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, described in an essay titled “The World Without America” as threats to “the domestic foundations of American Power,” including “crumbling infrastructure, second-rate primary and secondary schools, outdated immigration system, and slow economic growth.”

外交关系协会(Council on Foreign Relations)主席理查德·N·哈斯(Richard N. Haass)在一篇题为《没有美国的世界》的文章中描述了“美国实力的国内基础”所面临的威胁,包括“残破的基础设施、二流的小学和中学、过时的移民制度、经济增长缓慢。”然而特朗普提出的削减完全无视这一切情况。

In addition, Trump has antagonized the leaders of allied countries like Mexico, Australia and Germany, and he has repeatedly demonstrated an extraordinary lack of knowledge about foreign affairs.

此外,特朗普还惹恼了墨西哥、澳大利亚、德国等盟国的领导人,并一再表现出对外交事务非常缺乏了解。

This is the president who faces what Warren Christopher, President Clinton’s first secretary of state, called problems from hell. A partial list, compiled by Project Syndicate, includes: intensifying conflicts and dissent within the European Union; the rise of illiberal forces, including welfare chauvinism and exclusionary nationalism; the danger to the continued independence of the buffer states surrounding Russia; a frayed consensus in support of western liberal democratic principles; aggression from a nuclear-armed North Korea and counter threats from the Trump administration of a pre-emptive strike; a foreign policy that The Economist reports has left America’s allies “aghast” — a policy that “seems determined to destroy many of the institutions and alliances created in the past half century.”

这位总统所面临的情况,曾被克林顿(Clinton)总统的第一任国务卿沃伦·克里斯托弗(Warren Christopher)称为来自地狱的问题。由评论汇编(Project Syndicate)整理的部分问题包括:欧盟内部日益加剧的冲突和异议;专制力量的兴起,包括福利沙文主义和排外民族主义;俄罗斯周边缓冲国的独立性受到威胁;支持西方自由民主原则的共识日益损耗;有核朝鲜的敌对姿态,以及特朗普政府以先发制人打击的威胁作为回应; 《经济学人》(The Economist)报道中令美国盟友“惊恐”的外交政策——该政策“似乎决心摧毁过去半个世纪以来缔造的许多制度和联盟”。

How dangerous is the situation that the United States faces?

美国面临的局面有多危险?

I asked a range of foreign policy analysts and other scholars to assess the ability of President Trump and his administration to effectively manage the developments listed above.

我请教了一系列外交政策分析师和其他学者来评估特朗普总统及其政府有效应对上述事态的能力。

Steve Nadler of the University of Wisconsin had more to say:

威斯康星大学的史蒂夫·纳德勒还有更多话要说:

Donald Trump and the people with whom he has filled his cabinet are perfectly unqualified and unprepared to handle any and all of those developments and trends. The lack of experience and understanding of the world, especially of our historical and contemporary relationship with our European allies and rivals is frightening, especially in today’s world, where the stakes and the dangers are so much greater than ever.

唐纳德·特朗普和他用来填补内阁的人选完全不合格,没有为应对任何事态和趋势做好准备。他们缺乏经验以及对世界的理解,特别是对我们与欧洲盟国和对手的历史及当代关系的理解,这非常可怕,尤其是在当今这个世界,风险和危机远远超过以往任何时候。

Andrew Bacevich, professor emeritus of international relations and history at Boston University and a retired Army colonel, wrote that Trump is “utterly unqualified, both intellectually and by temperament, for the office he holds,” adding that “the possibility that Trump will disastrously mishandle” foreign policy “is real.”

波士顿大学国际关系与历史荣休教授、退役陆军上校安德烈·巴切维奇(Andrew Bacevich)写道,特朗普“在智力上和性格上完全不能胜任他的职务,”他补充说,在外交政策方面,“特朗普做出灾难性不当处理的可能性”是“真实存在的”。

Bacevich makes an intriguing argument to downplay the danger of a Trump presidency:

巴切维奇提出了一个有趣的论点来说明,没必要太过担忧特朗普总统的危险性:

Because Trump is manifestly unprincipled, there are very few things he actually believes in.

因为特朗普显然是不讲原则的,他实际上几乎并不信仰任何东西。

Bacevich cites

巴切维奇列举了

the growing list of things he seemed certain to do where that certainty has now largely disappeared: “tearing up” the Iran nuclear deal; jettisoning NATO; abandoning the “One China” policy; moving the US embassy to Jerusalem; reinstituting torture.

那些特朗普原本似乎肯定会做,但是可能性已经基本消失的事情,这样的事情还在变得越来越多:“撕毁”同伊朗的核协议;抛弃北约;放弃“一个中国”政策;把美国大使馆搬到耶路撒冷;重新使用刑讯。

Gambling the future of the country on the possibility that Trump will turn out to be a weak reed is, however, a high-risk proposition.

特朗普其实有可能只是一枝柔弱的芦苇,然而,把美国的未来押在这种可能性之上,风险实在太高了。

Charles A. Kupchan, a professor of international affairs at Georgetown, wrote me, arguing that Trump’s “America First” agenda is a retreat “into an illusory and dangerous isolationism.”

乔治城大学国际事务教授查尔斯·A·库普坎(Charles A. Kupchan)给我写信称,他认为特朗普的“美国优先”议程是一种倒退,“陷入了虚幻和危险的孤立主义之中”。

“If Washington walks away from the rules-based order it has defended for the last seventy years,” Kupchan explained,

“如果华盛顿摆脱它在过去70年中所保护的、建立于规则基础上的秩序,”库普切解释说,

its democratic allies will be ill-placed to defend it on their own. Whether by design or by default, Trump may well preside over the closing of the era that began when the bombing of Pearl Harbor awakened the United States to the responsibilities and privileges of international leadership.

美国的民主国家盟友将在自我保护时处于不利地位。美国对国际领导者这一责任和特权的领悟是从珍珠港遇袭那一刻开始,无论是出于刻意还是不作为,这个时代可能在特朗普的主持之下结束。

Of the multiple international tensions that could turn into crises at any time, North Korea could lead the way.

在可能随时出现危机的多重国际紧张局势中,朝鲜问题可能会首当其冲。

Toby Dalton, co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment, focuses on this growing threat. In an email, he writes:

卡内基基金会核政策项目(Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment)联合主任托比·道尔顿(Doby Dalton)关注这一日益增长的威胁。他在电子邮件中写道:

Between an impulsive president who seems uninterested in details, an advisory system that does not (yet, at least) produce good advice, a general lack of respect for expertise, and a distrust of intelligence, a crisis with North Korea could go very poorly.

总统性格冲动,似乎对细节兴趣不大,顾问系统(至少是目前)不能产生良好建议,他们普遍缺乏对专业知识的尊重,对情报并不信任,在这样的情况下,朝鲜危机可能会变得非常糟糕。

The current situation is not stable, Dalton said,

目前的情况并不稳定,道尔顿说,

and probably not sustainable. I wish I had greater confidence that Trump could distinguish between the imperatives and distractions, discern the worst outcomes and least worst outcomes, weigh up the options, and come up with a reasoned approach.

而且可能不能维持下去。我希望自己有更大的信心,相信特朗普可以区分紧急事项和旁支末节,区分最坏的结果和最不坏的结果,权衡各种选择,并提出一个合理的方法。

David Bell, a historian at Princeton, emailed his thoughts on Trump’s capacity to handle the difficulties that will face his administration:

普林斯顿大学的历史学家大卫·贝尔(David Bell)在电子邮件中写了自己对于特朗普处理困境能力的想法:

Trump himself is abysmally ignorant about both international and domestic affairs, and he is nearly always guided by a single principle: his own self-interest.

特朗普本人对国际和国内事务极度无知,他几乎总是以一个原则做为指导:那就是他自己的利益。

Normally, there is quite a lot of expertise available in institutions such as the State Department to guide administrations during crises, but Trump seems to be doing his best to decimate the institution.

通常情况下,在国务院等机构中有相当多的专家可以在危机期间对行政部门提供指导,但特朗普似乎正在竭尽全力扼杀这一机制。

Mark Leonard, a British political scientist who directs the European Council on Foreign Relations, suggests that Trump is part of a much larger phenomenon encompassing Brexit and the rise of right wing populism. In a Project Syndicate essay at the end of February, Leonard argued that the collapse of the Soviet Union ushered in what he calls “Liberal Order 2.0,” which no longer sought to uphold “national sovereignty at all costs” but instead “sought to pool sovereignty and to establish shared rules to which national governments must adhere:”

指导欧洲对外关系委员会(European Council on Foreign Relations)的英国政治学家马克·伦纳德(Mark Leonard)表示,特朗普是一种更广泛的现象中的一部分,英国脱欧和右翼民粹主义的兴起也在其内。在“评论汇编”二月底发表的一篇文章中,伦纳德认为,苏联的崩溃引发了他所谓的“自由主义秩序2.0”,各国不再追求“不惜一切代价维护国家主权”,而是“寻求集合主权,并制定各国政府都必须坚持的共同规则:”

Before too long, sovereignty-obsessed powers like Russia and China halted its implementation. Calamitous mistakes for which Western policy makers were responsible – namely, the protracted war in Iraq and the global economic crisis – cemented the reversal of Liberal Order 2.0.

很快,俄罗斯和中国这样执着于主权的大国便停止了对这一新秩序的最求。西方决策者在伊拉克长期战争和全球经济危机中犯下的严重错误进一步令“自由主义秩序2.0”出现逆转。

In this context, Trump arrives ill equipped to manage a larger, more dangerous process that Leonard argues has the potential to become “a new kind of globalization that combines the technologies of the future with the enmities of the past.”

在这种情况下,特朗普糟糕的能力不足以处理一个更大、更危险的进程,伦纳德认为这一进程有可能成为“将未来的技术与过去的敌意结合起来的新型全球化”。

In this emerging system, according to Leonard,

伦纳德认为,在这个新兴的体系中,

modern and pre-modern forms will prevail: support for government repression, like Russia has provided in Syria, or ethno-religious proxy wars, like those that Saudi Arabia and Iran have waged across the Middle East. The internet, migration, trade, and the enforcement of international law will be turned into weapons in new conflicts, rather than governed effectively by global rules. International conflict will be driven primarily by a domestic politics increasingly defined by status anxiety, distrust of institutions, and narrow-minded nationalism.

近代和近代之前的形式将占据优势:诸如对政府镇压的支持,像俄罗斯在叙利亚提供的那种支持,或者像沙特阿拉伯和伊朗在中东进行的民族宗教代理战争。互联网、移民、贸易和国际法的执行在新的冲突中将变成武器,而不是有效地受到全球规则的管辖。国际冲突主要是由于国内政治所驱动,而国内政治又日益由地位焦虑、对制度的不信任和狭隘民族主义所决定。

So how prepared is our president for what’s next? Given the magnitude of the problems that lie ahead and the embedded contradictions that make them difficult to solve, we face precisely the kind of world President Trump is least equipped for, mentally and morally.

那么我们的总统有没有为下一步做好准备呢?鉴于我们所面临的问题的严重性,以及其中根深蒂固、令问题更加难以解决的种种矛盾,我们面对的世界正好是特朗普最不擅长应付的那一种,无论是从智力上还是从道德上。

“全文请访问纽约时报中文网,本文发表于纽约时报中文网(http://cn.nytimes.com),版权归纽约时报公司所有。任何单位及个人未经许可,不得擅自转载或翻译。订阅纽约时报中文网新闻电邮:http://nytcn.me/subscription/”

相关文章列表