Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Exit from comment view mode. Click to hide this space
4

外交选择

丹佛—一位反对朝鲜和伊朗的俄罗斯高级外交官曾经对我说:“朝鲜半岛就像是一对旗鼓相当的邻家对头小孩。伊朗才是真正需要担心的。”

 “P5+1”(联合国安理会五大常任理事国和德国)和伊朗于4月14日在伊斯坦布尔举行、并将于5月23日在巴格达再次进行的谈判能否取得任何成果还远未可知。明智的赌徒都会把注投给失败。但不抱希望者需要明白一个关于此类谈判的基本道理(尽管这一道理有时会难以理解):它们本来就带着两个目的。

第一个目的当然是说服问题国家按另一方的要求行事。但谈判也必须证明所有能做的事情在考虑采取下一步行动前都做过了——特别是存在高度风险、令人忧心忡忡的动武决策。军事手段要求广泛的国际认可,而这一条件只有在诚信外交的环境下才能达到。

有效外交不仅包括实质问题,也包括时机和顺序。那些支持以武力解决伊朗核野心问题而不首先支持现在正在实施中的针对伊朗出口品的外交和经济手段的人都忽略了这一点。如今,很少会有高级政治领导人赞成发动战争。大谈动武的高级领导人也只能推高国际油价,因为市场由于担心军事行动对该地区的影响而对伊朗的好战行为反应激烈。

认为不需在伊朗问题上继续进行外交努力的还有另一个源头:处于伊朗核弹头射程内的以色列,它将受有核伊朗威胁最大的国家。以色列誓将流尽最后一滴血正是那些不愿自冒风险者所熟悉的模式。但鼓动以色列去做办法更多者不准备承担之事是在指望一个有着诸多大问题(最显著的是其与邻国之间的矛盾)的中东小国去办大事。

说到底,以色列一直带着日渐加深的警惕而不是希望观察着埃及的政治发展态势。以色列人对叙利亚可能的新政权的性质的认识也比其他人更清楚(注意,可能并不局限于Facebook和Twitter用户)。

诚然,许多阿拉伯国家日夜忧虑伊朗拥有核武器,但他们绝不会支持以色列进行军事干预。毕竟这是在中东,它们都是一条绳上的蚂蚱。

战争是一种严厉的手段,会导致严重的后果,这是克劳塞维茨在200年前就观察到的。亲身经历过战争的国家会比其他国家更能理解战争给子孙后代带来的痛苦。毕竟,战争充满着意外后果的人类活动。号召将武力排除于其他努力方式序列之外(即使这些努力的成功机会很小),不仅要求可能支持战争的国家这样做,更重要的是,也要求必须承担战争后果的人民这样做。

处理世界棘手问题的合理步骤顺序是获得进一步行动的国际支持的关键。阻止米洛舍维奇紧抓科索沃(以及后来他紧抓塞尔维亚)不放的空袭之所以可行,是因为美国、欧盟和俄罗斯对此做出了漫长的外交努力。

当时,所有人都认为已经给了和平足够的机会。(没有给和平足够的机会,这正是为什么号召在外交努力已被认为无法取得任何成果时时马上结束通常是错误的。)许多国家不会支持军事行动,除非它们看到其他所有劝说(和强制)手段的诚恳努力都已经失败。

即使不动武并不在进一步行动的选择范围内,外交仍能产生好处。在旨在让朝鲜去核的六方会谈开始前夕,许多韩国民意调查显示,民众中有相当大的比重指责美国是造成朝鲜和威胁的源头。尽管六方会谈距离结束核威胁还相去甚远,但将美国视为罪魁的情形已经基本上看不到了。

伊朗的核野心是这样一个问题:如果不能解决,就可能导致危险的事态升级,因为沙特、土耳其、美国和以色列等国家将考虑单独采取行动。但先进行精心安排的外交努力能够让单独行动变得更清晰、更可持续。

Exit from comment view mode. Click to hide this space
Hide Comments Hide Comments Read Comments (4)

Please login or register to post a comment

  1. CommentedIlan Bajarlia

    I agree with the author in the main point: I also think diplomacy is the best option in order to solve international conflicts.
    But I think the article it is missing another very important point: besides explaining why diplomacy is better than war as an abstract, general idea, in order to decide what to do on the iranian debate, it is also important to explain what Iran has to negociate with the P5 + 1.
    That is, diplomacy, economic sanctions or war are three very different ways for countries on trying to achieve their goals in international politics; there are part of a bigger foreign policy stategy.
    So the key question here is asking and trying to explain why Iran is developing a nuclear bomb: it is not the same if it is for destabilizing the status quo with hegemonic aspirations, or becouse Iran feels insecure from a neorrealistic understanding of the anarchical international system in theory and of the hostility in the middle eastern reality in particular.
    Only after answering this question we can analyze which is the most accurate method for stopping the iranian bomb. And yes, I think diplomacy is the best for that.

  2. CommentedSteven Gilbert

    At the risk of neither being cool nor intellectual, let's be blunt and state the obvious - we (US) are the good guys and the Iranians are the bad guys.

    Iran's actions at home, in Syria, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Lebannon, Gaza, Bolivia, Bahrain, and Yemen just to name a few are well understood except by those in a state of willful denial. The solution, in principle, is simple; put their lie (peaceful research and use of nuclear energy) to the test. Provide them with fuel plates for generation of electricity and the tiny quantities of materiel with which to conduct medical research. Deny them everything else. If this strikes some as falling short of "negotiating in good faith" as it lacks the give and take of diplomacy, too bad. Remember, they're the bad guys. If you're not sure, book a stay in Even Prison. Remember, we're the good guys; they're the bad guys.

  3. CommentedKevin Lim

    "The Israelis also see with greater clarity than many in the world the nature of the likely successor regime in Syria (hint: it will probably not be comprised exclusively of Facebook and Twitter users)."

    Spot on.

  4. CommentedHamid Rizvi

    "CommentsIran’s nuclear aspirations are a problem that, if not resolved, could lead to dangerous escalation, as countries such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the US, and Israel review their options."

    Problem for whom? Israel and their paranoia. How long will the US tow the line for Israel?

    So as a result of this unruly country and it's powerful AIPAC in the US the rest of the World suffers not to mention the Iranians themselves.

    Get over your double standards of hoarding enough nuclear devices to destroy the World ten times over while pretending to be holier the thou!

Featured