Comments 4

不那么光荣的孤立

Dec 30, 2014 Dominique Moisi

巴黎——十九世纪末，大英帝国奉行其所谓“光荣孤立”的政策，反映了其领导人在国际交往中置身事外的决心。拥有经济实力和海军优势的坚强后盾，英国有能力避免在别国事务中纠缠不清。

今天，最新的事态发展显示孤立往往最终演变成一种错误，是政策失败所导致的并不值得艳羡的困境。古巴走出长达数十年的强制孤立是这个岛国的胜利，而朝鲜被抛弃的地位已经令国家走到了崩溃的边缘。同样，以色列的争议政策和外交风险令这个犹太国家前所未有的孤立无援。受累于各自领导人强烈的自我意识，俄国和土耳其实行的内向政策很可能只会带来损失。

通过启动关系正常化，古巴和美国从两败俱伤——禁运的失败和古巴经济的失败——的魔爪中夺走了胜利。十二月达成的协议使古巴总统劳尔·卡斯特罗得以在未作显著政治让步的情况下成功地修复关系。对美国总统奥巴马而言，突破是一个继承其偶像亚伯拉罕·林肯和富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福的衣钵，巩固其作为变革总统地位的机遇——虽然他结束近六十年失败政策的功绩更接近理查德·尼克松，后者在执政期间放开了对华关系。

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To read this article from our archive, please log in or register now. After entering your email, you'll have access to two free articles every month. For unlimited access to Project Syndicate, subscribe now.

Featured

The Sino-American Cold War’s Collateral Damage

Oct 19, 2018 Minxin Pei
The End of Scandinavian Non-Alignment

Oct 17, 2018 Carl Bildt
Will Italy Sink Europe?

Oct 17, 2018 Jim O'Neill
The Martyrdom of Jamal Khashoggi

Oct 15, 2018 Daoud Kuttab
The Brexit Endgame

Oct 16, 2018 Robert Skidelsky

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 4 in all 4 Comments on this article

j. von Hettlingen Jan 4, 2015

When Britain pursued a policy of diplomatic and commercial non-involvement in the late 19th Century, the Empire could afford such a "splendid isolation". Yet, in our world of interdependence, "isolation is less a splendor than a blunder" and there is a sense of sarcasm in it.
Today the concept of "splendid isolation" is still deep in the psyche of many, who indulge in nationalism and reject globalisation or supranationalism. In Britain, the collective memory of the Empire is not wholly dead. In recent years the word "Brexit" has emerged, which is the idea of one man - Nigel Farage, fighting for his concept of "democratic values" and Englishness. He and his supporters have come to think of the European Union as source of all the worst threats.
Plans to normalise diplomatic relations between the US and Cuba demonstrate Obama's acumen to write a new chapter of world history and Castro's pragmatism in the face of Venezuela's economic woes. Both leaders have realised that the 50 years of isolation had not worked, and that it is time for a new approach. They are prepared to work out their ideological differences. In fact Pope Francis and Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper deserve a Nobel Peace Prize for promoting the dialogue between the US and Cuba.
As reclusive as North Korea is, the regime has been propped up by China for decades. Since Kim Jong-un came to power, relationship has gone sour due to Beijing's fury over Pyongyang's nuclear tests. North Korea now tries to reduce its reliance on China and responds to Russia's courtship.
Israel has been widely criticised in recent years for its aggression in Gaza and its settlement policy in the occupied Palestinian territory. Supporters of far-right parties are to blame for plunging Israel into isolation.
Moisi criticises Putin and Erdogan for "fanning the flames of misguided nationalism and religious chauvinism", and putting their personal quests ahead of their people's interests. Indeed both leaders have realised that they stand alone in their 21st Century aspiration to seek to restore the glory of their lost empires. The two powers had fought wars over the Black Sea throughout history and their interests might clash again in the future. The annexation of Crimea has presented Turkey with a dilemma, because the Tatars feel marginalised by the Russian residents. Despite Ankara's instinctive reaction to protect the Tatars, it's reluctant to damage its relations with Moscow. Turkey and Russia have recently put geopolitical conflicts aside to promote trade, as a way to defy the West!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Curtis Carpenter Jan 2, 2015

There are times, I think, when a state, in light of its own interests as it sees them, may choose to distance itself from "entanglements in others' affairs." Does this make that state "isolationist?" Or does choosing one's battles and timing reflect the action of a mature, rational, prudent, and perhaps even wise state?

What is the opposite, in Mr. Moisi's view, of "isolation?"

Can a state be excessively engaged in others' affairs?

Is isolation necessarily a "blunder" in every case?

To my view, it's an error to define isolation in absolutist terms. It comes in degrees, and there can be either too much or too little of it. History may show that, in fact, isolation is in fact more splendid than endless meddling.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Petey Bee Jan 1, 2015

Some nitpicks, please forgive me!

The British isolation referred to the system of continental alliances at the time, I suspect. Their superpower status freed them from the need for such things. I doubt their policy was really to be isolated, however -- with their global colonial system.

Cuba and North Korea's isolation was not their choice, so is not a policy. Cuba's victory was *surviving* US attempts to isolate them, the price they paid for refusing to submit and insisting on self-determination in the 1960s.

Israel, of course, with the full backing of the global superpower, is 0% isolated.

Russia has had no policy of isolation. It wished very much to be accepted as a modern European state. This desire was actively torpedoed by the US, with some success. However, Russia is trying hard to cement economic ties with their less politically constrained trading partnes (including the world's leading economy). So there is not a policy of isolation, but once again, a test of being able to survive attempts to have isolation forced on it.

Turkey, likewise, does not have a policy of isolation. As the bridge between the EU and the middle east, with the ability to relate to their neighbors on both sides, including the dual status US ally-enemy ISIS, Turkey is in a position to develop into a trade center.

So, true to the title, the term "isolation" refers not to the splendid isolation of the UK at the height of their power, but to the sabotaged and vindictively-kicked-while-they're-down isolation of the Cuban nation.

The operative question is will the US have the means to impose the latter form of isolation on Russia and Turkey. If I were considering matters of US policy, and if I were asking myself if it is realistic that enforcing such an isolation could be successful, I would wonder that if isolation failed to defeat Cuba, how would it defeat Russia or Turkey. Also, if I wished to ever have a job working for the US government, I probably wouldn't ask such a question about Israel.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Chet C. Dec 31, 2014

Turkey is trying to establish peace with its Kurdish separatists. This is evidence contrary to the article's point. I am surprised such a simple point is ignored.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

http://prosyn.org/ANXcZqL/zh;

不那么光荣的孤立

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

Featured

The Sino-American Cold War’s Collateral Damage

The End of Scandinavian Non-Alignment

Will Italy Sink Europe?

The Martyrdom of Jamal Khashoggi

The Brexit Endgame

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

The Powerlessness of the Most Powerful

What Has Google Ever Done for Us?

China’s Repressed Memory

The Economics of the Climate Crisis

The Sino-American Cold War’s Collateral Damage

The Disruptive Power of Ethnic Nationalism

When Agricultural Workers Go Hungry

Are Britons Really Softening on Immigration?

Cookies and Privacy

Log in/Register