Donald Trump's Iran Policy Comes Down to One Word: Chaos
川普的伊朗政策就一个字：乱
原文：The National Interest https://tinyurl.com/ug5usu3
作者：Doug Bandow
美国智库CATO Institute高级研究员，前雷根总统特别助理
中译：观察者
https://www.guancha.cn/DougBandow/2020_01_10_531078_s.shtml
Imagine a neutral Germany carefully balanced between dueling America and the
Soviet Union during the Cold War. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
and celebrated war hero arrived in Berlin, where he was met by the head of a
local pro-U.S. militia. Meetings also were planned with German leaders. As
his vehicle left the airport Soviet planes struck the chairman’s party,
killing him and his host.
让我们想像一下，如果冷战期间德国在剑拔弩张的美国和苏联之间谨慎地保持平衡中立，
美国参谋长联席会议主席同时也是著名战争英雄抵达柏林，得到当地亲美民间武装领袖的
接待，按计画还将受到德国领导人的接见。结果他的座驾刚离开机场，就遭到了苏军飞机
的袭击，和东道主一起当场死于非命。
As stunned U.S. officials processed the news, Moscow announced that the
action was meant for self-defense and to deescalate the situation. America’s
president then called a press conference, telling reporters: “I guess that
makes it okay. No hard feelings. Let’s have those negotiations on U.S.
disarmament that the Soviets proposed.” The lion laid down with the lamb as
Americans and Soviets held mass rallies holding hands while singing Kumbaya.
当美国官方还没有从震惊中缓过神来的时候，莫斯科方面宣布该行动纯属自卫，目的是缓
和局势。美国总统随后在新闻发布会上告诉记者：“我觉得苏联的说法还过得去，别太介
意。接下来我们还要按苏联的提议进行美国裁军谈判呢。”最后，无数美国人和苏联人走
上街头手拉手高唱圣歌。狮子与羔羊同卧，《圣经》里描述的和平终于降临。
No, that’s not what the president would say. Nor what the American people
would do. Nor what would happen. Especially if Donald Trump was president.
可美国总统不会说出那样的话，美国人民也做不出那样的事，故事情节也根本不会那样发
展——如果这个美国总统是唐纳德‧川普，就更不可能了。
https://i.guancha.cn/news/internet/2020/01/07/20200107160732341.jpg
图：美国“国家利益”网站1月4日刊文“川普的伊朗政策就一个字：乱”
Perhaps it is unsurprising that those representing the world’s sole
superpower (or hyperpower or unipower) originally acted as if the U.S. is the
essential nation that stands taller and sees further, in Madeleine Albright’
s infamous words. And which can act unilaterally, imperiously, and recklessly
without consequence—deciding, for instance, again in Albright’s words, that
killing a half million Iraqi babies is a worthwhile price to achieve American
objectives.
代表世界唯一超级大国的那些人的最初行径，用美国前国务卿马德琳‧奥尔布赖特那句臭
名昭著的话来说，就好像美国是一个“地位更尊崇，视野更远大的重要国家”，它可以单
方面地、专横地、鲁莽地采取行动而无需承担后果，比如得出杀死50万个伊拉克儿童对于
实现美国目标来说是“值得的代价”结论——这又是奥尔布赖特的话。
What is shocking is how today’s officials ignore years, even decades, of
interventionist failure. To believe that Washington can kill a top official
of one nation in a strike on a third country without consequence is the
triumph of hysterical arrogance over sustained experience. Yet the Trump
administration targeted Qassim Suleimani, the notorious head of the Quds
Forces of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Also killed was an Iraqi
national, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy commander of the Popular Mobilization
Forces, an Iran-supported militia, and a number of others. Suleimani’s
convoy was hit by missiles as it left the airport.
令人震惊的是，今天的美国官员们竟然还能对干预主义数年甚至数十年以来的失败视而不
见。他们的傲慢得膨胀到多么歇斯底里的程度，才能无视历来的经验，居然认为美国可以
在不产生严重后果的情况下，在外国境内杀死另一个国家的高官。可川普政府就是这样，
把打击目标对准了伊朗伊斯兰革命卫队的“圣城旅”指挥官卡西姆‧苏莱曼尼。苏莱曼尼
的车队在离开机场时遭到火箭弹袭击。在这场行动中，美国还杀死了伊朗支持的伊拉克民
兵组织“人民动员部队”的副司令阿布‧马赫迪‧穆罕迪斯。
https://i.guancha.cn/news/internet/2020/01/07/20200107161054266.png
图：1月3日伊朗名将苏莱曼尼在伊拉克被美军刺杀，一同遇袭的还有伊拉克民兵组织领袖
No one should shed any tears for Suleimani or al-Muhandis (though, ugly truth
be told, neither likely killed as many people as the number of people who
died as a result of George W. Bush’s foolish decision to invade Iraq). But
foreign policy is not an appropriate tool for meting out presumed justice, a
convenient way to eliminate bad people. There are a lot of evil, harmful,
problematic people in the world. Too many to turn over to American “justice.
” Moreover, foreign policy must be concerned with consequences. What will
the impact be on Americans and other peoples? Unfortunately, the
administration apparently thought there would be none, at least nothing
negative.
任何人都不应为苏莱曼尼或穆罕迪德流泪（尽管更丑陋的事实是，没有人能杀死与乔治·
W·布什入侵伊拉克的愚蠢决定而丧生的人数一样多的人）。但是，对外政策不是用来行
使假想中的正义的方便工具，也不是消除坏人的便捷方法。世界上有很多邪恶的，有害的
，有问题的人。太多的事情无法转向美国的“正义”。此外，外交政策必须关注后果。对
美国人和其他人民有什么影响？不幸的是，政府显然认为没有，至少没有负面影响。
Instead, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo played Pollyanna: "The world is a
much safer place today," he said Friday after the strike: "And I can assure
you that Americans in the region are much safer today after the demise of
Qassem Soleimani." Why then did the administration rush another 3000 troops
to Kuwait as a precautionary measure, in addition to the 14,000 sent since
May?
美国国务卿迈克‧蓬佩奥仿佛波丽安娜（译注：《波丽安娜》是美国小说、电影，同名主
角有种美式乐观精神，觉得一切都会好起来）附体，他在袭击行动之后表示：“我可以向
你保证，卡西姆‧苏莱曼尼一死，该地区的美国人今后比以前要安全得多。”既然如此，
美国政府又何须向科威特紧急增调3000名士兵以防不测？不是去年五月才派遣了14,000人
吗？
Moreover, why did the State Department send out a travel alert urging
Americans to rush home: “Due to heightened tensions in Iraq and the region,
we urge U.S. citizens to depart Iraq immediately. Due to Iranian-backed
militia attacks at the U.S. Embassy compound, all consular operations are
suspended. U.S. citizens should not approach the Embassy.” Travelers needing
help were told to go to the U.S. consulate in Erbil, the capital of
autonomous Kurdistan. So much for everyone being safer.
美国国务院又何须发布旅行警报，敦促美国人回国：“鉴于伊拉克和地区紧张局势加剧，
我们敦促美国公民立即离开伊拉克。由于美国大使馆受到伊朗支持的民兵袭击，现暂停所
有领事活动。美国公民请勿前往大使馆。”伊拉克境内需要帮助的美籍旅客不得不前往库
尔德自治区首府埃尔比勒的美国领事馆。也许这种情况在他们看来，叫做“比以前要安全
得多”。
Washington transgressed the usual norms and red lines which govern the
occasional violence between adversaries: countries typically don’t target
other nations’ leaders. One reason is self-preservation. You don’t want
your adversaries to retaliate against you. More open Western societies
probably are more vulnerable than authoritarian ones. And, ultimately, there
has to be someone to negotiate with when the endgame is reached. Truly
decapitating a government can be as problematic for the winner as the loser.
过去，国际上敌对势力之间尽管偶有暴力，但始终遵守某些惯例和规范，均不跨越红线：
一个国家通常不会将另一个国家的领导人作为打击目标。原因之一是自我保护，你不希望
对手进行报复。较为开放的西方社会可能比威权社会更容易受到打击。而且最重要的是，
当博弈进行到终局时，你需要对方有人跟你谈判。这次，华盛顿方面就破坏了规矩，跨过
了红线。对一个政府施展真正的斩首行动，最终会给赢家和输家都造成很大的问题。
In irregular warfare and counterterrorism the U.S. has been more willing to
target leaders, but doing so has had little impact on the level of violence.
New leaders arise. In the case of Afghanistan’s Taliban, many replacements
were more radical than the men they succeeded. Which made a peaceful
settlement less likely. Israel has killed a number of top Hamas and Hezbollah
leaders; these organizations are no less threatening today. Assassination is
ineffective as general strategy.
在非常规战争和反恐行动中，美国更愿意针对敌方领导人，但这样做并不会显著地减少暴
力。杀了本‧拉登，自有后来人。比如阿富汗的塔利班，许多继任者都比前任更加激进。
这使得和平解决方案很难达成。以色列刺杀了哈马斯和真主党的许多领导人，但今天这些
组织的威胁性丝毫不减。暗杀根本不是有效的一般性战略。
Secretary Pompeo naturally contended that the president was defending the
U.S. He claimed: “I can’t talk too much about the nature of the threats.
But the American people should know that the President’s decision to remove
Soleimani from the battlefield saved American lives.” The secretary
contended that Soleimani was “actively plotting” to “take big action, as
he described it, that would have put hundreds of lives at risk.” The threat
was “imminent,” Pompeo claimed, concluding: “The risk of doing nothing was
enormous. Intelligence community made that assessment and President Trump
acted decisively last night.”
蓬佩奥很自然地替总统辩护，称川普这样做是在捍卫美国。他声称：“关于威胁的性质我
不能透露太多。但美国人民应该知道，总统将苏莱曼尼从战场上带走的决定挽救了美国人
的生命。”这位国务卿继续辩称，苏莱曼尼正在“积极策划”采取“导致数百人丧生的大
动作”。 蓬佩奥宣称，这种威胁“迫在眉睫”，因此“无所作为的风险是巨大的，这是
情报部门评估的结论，川普总统昨晚果断地采取了行动。”
https://i.guancha.cn/news/internet/2020/01/07/20200107161431752.jpg
图：美国国务卿蓬佩奥为解释美方刺杀行为，一天接受五个专访
Unfortunately, none of these claims can be taken at face value. The secretary
’s litany of previous falsehoods is long and leaves him with little
credibility. Moreover, the Iraq war provides myriad examples of how to
manufacture and manipulate alleged intelligence, cook the results according
to preferred ideological and political recipes, and selectively interpret
whatever resulted to yield the desired conclusion.
然而，以上说法都不是完全可信。这位国务卿弄虚作假的前科太重，几乎没有什么信誉可
言[注]。此外，伊拉克战争已经无数次向世人证明，所谓情报，太容易被制造和操纵，只
需根据意识形态倾向和政治配方来捏造证据，再对其选择性地加以解释，就能得出想要的
结论。
[注] 蓬佩奥在Texas A&M大学演讲时说：“我曾担任CIA的局长。我们撒谎、我们欺骗、
我们偷窃。我们还有一门课程专门来教这些。这才是美国不断探索进取的荣耀。”
视频：https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPt-zXn05ac
The Iraqi experience warns Americans that even specific citations of specific
plots by specific sources are suspect. True, the corrupt, dishonest Ahmed
Chalabi, who did so much to lie Americans into invading Iraq, is dead.
However, the Mojahedin-e Khalq, or MEK, a cultish one-time terrorist group
has ties to the administration, and the Netanyahu government, desperate to
break Israel’s electoral deadlock, is a Trump favorite. Both have strong
incentives to use any means possible to convince Washington to eliminate the
Islamist regime in Tehran.
美国应该从伊拉克吸取教训，哪怕某个人把某件事说的有鼻子有眼，也不可全信。当年正
是腐败、不诚实的艾哈迈德‧沙拉比（译注：伊拉克前副总理，政党“伊拉克国民大会”
创始人，向美国提供了萨达姆政权拥有大规模杀伤性武器以及与基地组织勾结的大量虚假
情报）编造了种种谎言欺骗美国入侵伊拉克，尽管他现在已经死了；但是，美国政府又跟
曾被列为恐怖组织的“伊朗人民圣战组织”（译注：伊朗反对派，主张推翻伊朗现政权）
勾勾搭搭；而川普钟意的内塔尼亚胡政府现在又尤其渴望打破以色列选举僵局。它们都有
强烈的动机不计手段地说服华盛顿方面出手消灭德黑兰的伊斯兰政权。
https://i.guancha.cn/news/internet/2020/01/07/20200107161741581.JPG
图：2003年2月，美国前国务卿鲍威尔在联合国大会上拿出了伊拉克大规模杀伤性武器的
“证据”
In any case, tweeted Reuters editor Gerry Doyle, “the problem with this is
that it asks us to believe that killing one person undoes an entire military
apparatus, or defuses an operation. that's only true in the movies. unless
Soleimani was planning to personally carry out the attack, this doesn't
physically prevent anything.” The Iranian was no lone wolf or singular
mastermind. He ran an organization and had deputies, assistants, and
multitude of others involved in any plot. They have the incentive and means
to ensure that the show goes on, as it were.
不论美国有何初衷，结果都正如路透社编辑格里‧道尔在推特上所写的那样：“这么做的
问题在于，它指望我们相信杀掉某个人就能拆解整个军事机器，或破坏整个行动。只有电
影才敢这么演。除非苏莱曼尼的计画是亲自动手袭击，否则这么做无助于防止任何事。”
苏莱曼尼不是一匹独狼，也不是各项谋划中唯一的大脑。他运营著一整个组织，每次计画
都有他的副手、助理等许多人参与。他们不乏把事业继续开展下去的动力和手段。
So purposeless, undisciplined, and reckless was the U.S. attack that even Iran
’s extremists were surprised. Tweeted Negar Mortazavi, diplomatic
correspondent for the Independent: “Hardliner in Tehran tells me killing
Soleimani is a disproportionate response to embassy protests and makes no
sense. Says: They either wanted to kill an Iraqi militia commander and hit
Soleimani by mistake, or they are true morons.”
美国的袭击竟如此无目的，如此无纪律，如此无所顾忌，甚至令伊朗的极端分子都感到意
外。英国《独立报》的外交特派记者尼加‧莫尔塔扎维发推文：“德黑兰的强硬派告诉我
，杀害苏莱曼尼是对大使馆受示威冲击不成比例的回应，根本说不通。要么美国只想杀死
伊拉克民兵指挥官，误杀了苏莱曼尼，要么美国是真正的白痴。”
Alas, it almost certainly was the latter. The administration apparently
imagined that it could shock the Islamic republic into quietude. Secretary
Pompeo has been on the hustings claiming the administration wanted to
deescalate. The president sent out a curious tweet presumably intended to
push Tehran toward diplomacy: “Iran never won a war, but never lost a
negotiation!” And the administration reportedly has communicated with
Tehran, presumably to press the president’s request for talks.
唉，几乎可以肯定美国是后者。川普政府显然以为这样做可以震慑伊朗让它噤若寒蝉。蓬
佩奥频频在媒体频频抛头露面宣称美国的本意是缓和局势。或许是想推动伊朗以外交途径
解决问题，川普发了一条奇怪的推文：“伊朗从未赢得战争，但从未输掉谈判！”据消息
，美国政府已经与德黑兰进行了沟通，大概是敦促对方按川普的要求举行会谈。
However, if productive diplomacy leading to a peaceful modus vivendi was the
objective, Washington aimed its missiles much too high. Soleimani was too
important to Tehran, and too popular with the public, making his death
impossible to ignore, even by those who may not have been rivals.
不过，如果美国的目标是通过有效外交实现和平妥协的话，那他未免把导弹瞄得太高了些
。苏莱曼尼对德黑兰政权而言重要性太高，受民众欢迎程度也太高了，伊朗任何人都无法
忽视他的死亡，即使是那些对美国没有敌意的人。
For instance, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declared that
Soleimani’s death was “bitter” but that “the final victory will make life
more bitter for the murderers and criminals.” Defense Minister (and Brig.
Gen.) Amir Hatami said the regime would give a “crushing” response.
伊朗最高领导人阿亚图拉‧哈米尼宣布，尽管苏莱曼尼的死“令人痛苦”，但“最终的胜
利将使凶手和罪犯的生活更加痛苦。”伊朗国防部长阿米尔‧哈塔米表示，伊朗政权将做
出“碾压性”的回应。
Even relative moderates had little choice but to threaten Washington.
President Hassan Rouhani declared that “The flag of General Soleimani in
defense of the country's territorial integrity and the fight against
terrorism and extremism in the region will be raised, and the path of
resistance to US excesses will continue. The great nation of Iran will take
revenge for this heinous crime.” Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who
negotiated the JCPOA, or nuclear agreement, with the Obama administration,
termed the assassination an “act of international terrorism” and declared
that America “bears responsibility for all consequences of its rogue
adventurism.”
即使是伊朗的温和派也别无选择，只能出言威胁美国。伊朗总统哈桑‧鲁哈尼宣布：“将
高举苏莱曼尼将军的旗帜，继续捍卫国家领土完整并与地区内恐怖主义和极端主义作斗争
，继续抵抗美国的放肆暴行。针对十恶不赦的罪行，伟大的伊朗誓将复仇。”曾与奥巴马
政府谈判并达成《联合全面行动计画》（即伊核协议）的伊朗外长穆罕默德‧扎里夫把这
场暗杀形容为“国际恐怖主义行径”，并宣称美国要为“流氓冒险主义的一切后果承担责
任”。
https://i.guancha.cn/news/external/2020/01/07/20200107162254610.jpg
图：伊朗最高领导人哈米尼和总统鲁哈尼在苏莱曼尼灵柩前祈祷
Grant the inevitable posturing and overstatement. After such proclamations,
the regime cannot do nothing. Certainly, its leaders cannot be seen shaking
Donald Trump’s hand after signing an agreement filled with additional
concessions to a government which not only trashed the previous pact but
killed one of Iran’s leading revolutionary figures. Narges Bajoghli of the
School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, warned
that the assassination was highly symbolic, but the sort of symbolism that “
has the power to move people to action.”
尽管伊朗难免夸大其词，但既然已经做出这番表态，伊朗政权就不能无所作为。伊朗领导
人面对一个不但撕毁原有协议还暗杀伊朗革命领袖的政府时，怎么可能进一步退让妥协，
跟川普握手言欢？约翰‧霍普金斯大学高级国际研究学院的纳哲斯‧巴约格里警告说，暗
杀具有很高的象征意义，这种象征意义“具有让人采取行动的力量”。
Then there is the problem of Iraq, currently convulsed by public protests
focused on protecting the nation’s sovereignty. Tehran was the primary
target of the protests, but Washington’s warmaking on Iraqi territory has
shifted the spotlight to America.
然后还有伊拉克问题。目前，以维护国家主权为主旨的民众抗议活动席卷伊拉克。尽管德
黑兰政权是抗议的主要对象，但华盛顿方面在伊拉克领土引战的行为使伊拉克人的矛头掉
转向了美国。
Iraqi leaders overwhelmingly criticized the U.S. raid, which Prime Minister
Adel Abdul-Mahdi called an "assassination." The Daily Beast quoted an Iraqi
official as saying: “Some will celebrate, some will mourn, some will seek
revenge.” However, U.S.-Iraqi relations were in “real jeopardy.”
伊拉克领导人异口同声地批评美国，总理阿迪勒‧阿卜杜勒－迈赫迪总理用“刺杀”来定
性此次突袭行动。美国新闻网站“每日野兽”援引某位伊拉克官员的话称：“有人会庆祝
，有人会哀悼，有人会复仇。”但美国和伊拉克的关系已处于“真正的危险之中”。
Abdul-Mahdi said "the two martyrs were huge symbols of the victory" over
ISIS. He denounced the “aggression against Iraq” and "massive breach of
sovereignty" which violated the conditions governing the American military’s
presence in Iraq. He worried about “a dangerous escalation that will light
the fuse of a destructive war in Iraq, the region, and the world.”
迈赫迪表示，“两名烈士是战胜‘伊斯兰国’的巨大标志”。他谴责了“对伊拉克的侵略
”和“大规模侵犯主权”，这违反了美军在伊拉克维持存在的先决条件。他担心“危险的
升级将点燃导火线，引发伊拉克国内、地区内以及世界范围内的毁灭性战争。”
The premier invited parliament to reassemble in special session to “take
legislative steps and necessary provisions to safeguard Iraq’s dignity,
security and sovereignty.” And that likely means a full-scale assault on
America’s presence. Deputy Speaker Hassan al-Kaabi said they would gather
and make “Decisive decisions that put an end to U.S. presence inside Iraq.”
伊拉克总理召集议会举行特别会议，以“采取立法行动和必要的规定来捍卫伊拉克的尊严
、安全和主权。”这可能意味着美国的军事存在将遭到全面驱逐。副议长哈桑‧卡比表示
，伊拉克将做出“决定性的决定，终止美国在伊拉克境内的存在。”
Perhaps more ominous was the reaction of Shiite extremist religious leader
Muqtada al-Sadr, whose Mahdi Army once battled American occupation troops but
who had turned populist politician, most recently pressing for his nation’s
independence from both the U.S. and Iran. He praised Soleimani and
reactivated the Mahdi Army. On Twitter he instructed his "fighters,
particularly those from the Mahdi Army, to be ready" for action following the
airstrike.
更令人不安的或许是什叶派极端主义宗教领袖穆克塔达‧萨德尔的反应。这位民粹主义政
治家曾经统率迈赫迪军与美军占领部队作战，他近年来迫切寻求伊拉克摆脱美国和伊朗。
他赞扬了苏莱曼尼，并宣布重组迈赫迪军。他在推特上下令“战士们，特别是迈赫迪军的
战士们，（为下一步行动）做好准备”。
At least al-Sadr was ambiguous, only saying that their job was to defend Iraq
—though almost certainly he meant from the U.S. Qais al-Khazali, head of the
Asaib Ahl al-Haq militia, a member of al-Muhandis’ Popular Mobilization
Forces, was more explicit when he also ordered his fighters to get ready. He
declared: “All fighters should be on high alert for upcoming battle and
great victory. The price for the blood of the martyred commander Abu Mahdi
al-Muhandis is the complete end to American military presence in Iraq.”
萨德尔的话还算是模棱两可，他只说他的任务是保卫伊拉克，尽管几乎可以肯定他的意思
是“保卫伊拉克不受美国侵略”。遇刺的穆罕迪斯领导的“人民动员部队”旗下的“正义
联盟”民兵组织领袖卡伊西‧哈扎利让战士积极备战的命令则明确得多。他宣布：“所有
战士都应保持高度警惕，去迎接即将到来的战斗和伟大胜利。美国必须彻底终结驻伊拉克
军事存在，来偿还指挥官穆罕迪斯殉难的血债。”
President Trump’s policy toward Iran continues to bear ill fruit. When he
entered the Oval Office, Tehran’s nuclear program was limited by a tight
inspections and safeguard system. The Islamic regime faced internal tensions
as the young, especially, hoped for greater economic opportunities in the
West. With Iran’s nuclear ambitions tamed, the U.S. and allied states could
follow up with a challenge to Tehran to moderate its regional behavior in
return for additional, appropriate concessions.
川普的伊朗政策持续结出恶果。他刚入主椭圆形办公室时，伊朗核计画受到严格核查和保
障机制的限制。当时伊朗年轻人尤其希望获得更多来自西方的经济机会，给伊斯兰政权造
成内部张力。伊朗既然放弃了成为核大国的雄心，那么美国及其盟友本来可以及时跟进，
挑战德黑兰政权，以适当让步作为交换条件，节制其在地区内的行为。
https://i.guancha.cn/news/internet/2020/01/07/20200107162945451.jpg
图：2015年7月14日，伊朗与伊核问题六国签署《联合全面行动计画》
Instead, the president abandoned the JCPOA, reinstituted sanctions, and added
new ones while demanding that Iran abandon its independent foreign policy.
Tehran naturally refused.
然而，川普抛弃了伊核协议，恢复旧制裁，增设新制裁，同时还要求伊朗放弃独立外交政
策。德黑兰方面对此当然表示了拒绝。
Today Iran is simultaneously facing instability at home and creating
instability abroad, more active than ever throughout the Middle East. The
regime has revived its nuclear research program and breached the negotiated
limits. Tehran’s missiles have become even more important in deterring the
well-armed Saudi royals, who seemingly have Trump administration officials on
retainer. Worse, the U.S. and Iran now are publicly at war. They risk setting
off an escalatory cycle which could result in disaster. So much for the
policy of maximum pressure.
今天，伊朗一方面要处理国内不稳定因素，一方面在国外制造动荡局势，它在整个中东地
区比以往任何时候都更为活跃。它恢复了核研究计画，取消了伊核协议对“离心机数量的
限制”。如今，伊朗的导弹显得尤为重要，因为它要威慑装备精良的沙特——还要考虑到
川普政府官员仿佛是沙特聘用的。更糟糕的是，美国和伊朗现在公开处于战争状态。它们
之间的对抗可能循环升级，酿成灾难。极限施压政策果然英明。
https://i.guancha.cn/news/internet/2020/01/07/20200107163632172.jpg
图：川普推特：“伊朗永远不会有核武器！”（大写）
But there is still time for America to pull back from the brink. U.S.
policymakers must abandon the fantasy that they can manage the world and
especially the Mideast. Rising opposition to America’s presence in Iraq
should become the catalyst for a general withdrawal of U.S. troops from the
region.
不过，美国若要悬崖勒马还为时不晚。美国决策者必须抛弃幻想，不要以为自己可以管理
世界，尤其是中东地区。美国在伊拉克的存在遭到越来越多的反对，这应该促使美国从该
地区全面撤军。
The Middle East no longer matters so much. The cost of continued American
military involvement exceeds any plausible benefits. Allied and friendly
nations should take responsibility for their own defense. Most important, the
U.S. should declare neutrality in the Shia-Sunni struggle, leaving the
players to reach their own accommodation. No more endless wars fought for
others. No more military deployments manipulated for the benefit other
nations. Rather, a foreign policy finally focused on protecting, serving, and
benefitting Americans.
中东地区的重要性已经没有那么高了。从任何合乎情理的角度来看，美国持续军事介入所
付出的代价都大于获得的利益。盟国和友邦的国防问题应该让它们自己解决。最重要的是
，美国应该在伊斯兰教什叶派与逊尼派的斗争中宣布恪守中立，让它们自己寻求妥协方案
。不要再为了别人去打无休止的战争；不要再为了其他国家的利益部署军事力量；美国的
外交政策应该最终回到保护、服务和施惠本国人民上面来。