再論美國伊拉克、敘利亞政策

現在奧巴馬領導”正義之軍“征伐大敘利亞地區伊斯蘭組織（ISIS，或ISIL，或IS），對該組織在伊拉克、敘利亞的基地大規模轟炸，像是穩住了局麵，但是勝算難言，不少人對此懷疑，此事再提。

此刻正值聯合國召開年會，首腦政要紛紛雲集紐約，給本國施政綱領提出點點，借機評點江山，也好出頭露麵、風光風光。奧巴馬自然不會放過這次機會，做了長篇演講，闡述美國如何站在正義一邊，領導世界與邪惡做鬥爭。說風涼話的也不少，美國右傾輿論更加緊攻擊。

這是美國狐狸台（FoxNews）對奧巴馬聯合國演講的諷刺：

The Difference Between Tough Obama & Tough Bush UN Speech: Bush Actually MEANT What He Said!

不過，諷刺是諷刺，問題是像美國這樣一向以自由世界領袖自居的國家，是怎樣領導世界的呢？以前說過，“從布什到奧巴馬，美國政府、精英壓根兒就沒有什麽深謀遠慮，基本是走一步算一步。你要是相信美國的長遠戰略決策，這兒是一點影子都見不到”，現在又是一次領略這一目光短淺、毫無章法的”領袖“的時候了。

下麵是全球猶太新聞做的一個總結，非常見血：

For Obama at the U.N., what a difference a year makes
Uriel Heilman, September 24, 2014

VIOLENT EXTREMISM

2013: “The world is more stable than it was five years ago. But even a glance at today’s headlines indicates that dangers remain.”

“As recent debates within the United States over Syria clearly show, the danger for the world is not an America that is too eager to immerse itself in the affairs of other countries or to take on every problem in the region as its own. The danger for the world is that the United States, after a decade of war — rightly concerned about issues back home, aware of the hostility that our engagement in the region has engendered throughout the Muslim world — may disengage, creating a vacuum of leadership that no other nation is ready to fill. I believe such disengagement would be a mistake. I believe America must remain engaged for our own security. But I also believe the world is better for it.

“We will dismantle terrorist networks that threaten our people. Wherever possible, we will build the capacity of our partners, respect the sovereignty of nations, and work to address the root causes of terror. But when it’s necessary to defend the United States against terrorist attack, we will take direct action.”

ISIS got nary a mention.

Today: “There is a pervasive unease in our world — a sense that the very forces that have brought us together have created new dangers and made it difficult for any single nation to insulate itself from global forces.

“We have not confronted forcefully enough the intolerance, sectarianism, and hopelessness that feeds violent extremism in too many parts of the globe. As we look to the future, one issue risks a cycle of conflict that could derail … progress: and that is the cancer of violent extremism that has ravaged so many parts of the Muslim world.”

This year, ISIS occupied center stage.

 

IRAQ

2013: “Five years ago, nearly 180,000 Americans were serving in harm’s way, and the war in Iraq was the dominant issue in our relationship with the rest of the world. Today, all of our troops have left Iraq.”

Today: “Iraq has come perilously close to plunging back into the abyss.”

In pursuit of ISIS, America has resumed airstrikes in Iraq and expanded them to Syria. While Obama has vowed not to send U.S. troops back to combat in Iraq, there are some 1,600 U.S. forces in the region in advise-and-assist roles. Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said recently that it’s possible America will have to put boots on the ground if it is to defeat ISIS. Dempsey’s comments were quickly disavowed by the White House.

 SYRIA

2013:  “America and others have worked to bolster the moderate opposition, but extremist groups have still taken root to exploit the crisis. The notion that Syria can somehow return to a prewar status quo is a fantasy. It’s time for Russia and Iran to realize that insisting on Assad’s rule will lead directly to the outcome that they fear: an increasingly violent space for extremists to operate.”

But most of what he had to say about Syria — at 13 paragraphs, the single-largest section of the speech — was about the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons and the U.S.-led effort to destroy Assad’s chemical stockpiles. On the question of whether America would get involved in Syria’s civil war, Obama was clear: “I do not believe that military action — by those within Syria or by external powers — can achieve a lasting peace.”

Today: “Together with our partners, America is training and equipping the Syrian opposition to be a counterweight to the terrorists of ISIL and the brutality of the Assad regime. But the only lasting solution to Syria’s civil war is political — an inclusive political transition that responds to the legitimate aspirations of all Syrian citizens, regardless of ethnicity or creed.”

 

ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT

2013: Obama identified the Israel-Palestinian conflict as one of two issues that “in the near term, America’s diplomatic efforts will focus on.” The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not the cause of all the region’s problems, he said, but it has been “a major source of instability for far too long.”

He also talked about how the time was ripe for peace.

“Earlier this year, in Jerusalem, I was inspired by young Israelis who stood up for the belief that peace was necessary, just, and possible. And I believe there’s a growing recognition within Israel that the occupation of the West Bank is tearing at the democratic fabric of the Jewish state,” Obama said. “The time is now ripe for the entire international community to get behind the pursuit of peace. Already, Israeli and Palestinian leaders have demonstrated a willingness to take significant political risks.”

Today: There’s no way to avoid the gloominess of the Israeli-Palestinian picture.

U.S.-sponsored peace talks fell apart in April when the Palestinian Authority signed a unity government agreement with Hamas and Israel pulled out of the negotiations. Even beforehand, however, there was little evidence that the talks were making any significant progress.

This summer, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict turned deadly again when Hamas rocket fire resumed from Gaza and Israel invaded the coastal strip. Some 2,100 Palestinians and more than 70 Israelis were killed in the war.

 In Wednesday’s speech, Obama offered an implicit rebuke to Israelis’ reactions to the turmoil around them. Noting that the “violence engulfing the region today has made too many Israelis ready to abandon the hard work of peace,” Obama deviated from his prepared remarks and added, “That’s something Israelis should reflect on.”

But he made clear: “The situation in Iraq, Syria and Libya should cure anyone of the illusion that [the Israeli-Palestinian] conflict is the main source of problems in the region.”

IRAN

2013: A year ago, Obama identified Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons as one of the two issues that American diplomatic efforts would be focusing on in the near term and spent a large chunk of his U.N. speech talking about Iran.

Just two months later, the Obama administration achieved an interim success: A six-month deal was reached to ease some sanctions on Iran in exchange for slowing the growth of Iran’s nuclear capacities while the U.S. and other world powers negotiated with Iran on a final agreement.

Today: The interim agreement, which got a four-month extension that expires in October, is at risk of falling apart. Iran has violated several conditions, including failing to explain research it conducted on nuclear weapon detonators and continuing to work on even more powerful centrifuges to make nuclear fuel.

 

這裏並沒有諷刺奧巴馬，但明眼人讀讀，多大的對比，至少可以見到美國和其他國家、團體、個人一樣，大多是摸一步，走一步，壓根兒談不上什麽領袖的眼光，奧巴馬對此也公開承認：

CNN: Obama admits ISIS threat was misjudged as U.S. splits emerge

（所有新聞機構對此都有報道。)別以為奧巴馬這是誠懇，一個月前，奧巴馬在全國電視講話裏，壓根兒就不認他過去一年有什麽錯。說直了，那時張口就說，眼睛都不眨一下的，別人，那就是恬不知恥了。他一個政客而已，不得不公開認錯，可見糟糕到了何種地步。

即使目前美國的策略，也是治標不治本，用中國人的話，不打，隻是麵子都沒地兒擱。完全不是要點，沒有解決整個局勢的根本問題。

【後記，2104年9月30日】
隻是法裏德·紮卡利亞（Fareed Zakaria，美國新聞電視站CNN每周一次的“全球大眾論壇”（GPS-Global Public Square）主持）兩天前剛剛說的（華郵評論）：

...

In Iraq, the central problem remains that the Sunnis do not feel represented in the Baghdad government. Obama keeps saying that there is a new government in Iraq, but the implication that it is inclusive is false. Sunnis continue to have ceremonial posts with little power. The army continues to be dominated by Shiites at the upper echelons. The result is visible on the ground. A recent article in the New York Times pointed out that “after six weeks of American airstrikes, the Iraqi government’s forces have scarcely budged the Sunni extremists of the Islamic State from their hold on more than a quarter of the country, in part because many critical Sunni tribes remain on the sidelines.”

...

In Syria, Washington’s strategy is incoherent. It seeks to destroy the Islamic State there and attack Jabhat al-Nusra and the Khorasan group but somehow not strengthen these groups’ principal rival, the Bashar al-Assad regime. This is impossible. As these terrorist groups lose ground, the army that will most easily take advantage will be that of the Syrian regime, not the disorganized and weak Free Syrian Army. If there is some way to make this strategy less contradictory, it would be to work toward some power-sharing deal in Syria that includes elements of the Assad government — such as generals and intelligence heads. But Washington has no contact or credibility with anyone in the Assad regime. The government that does is in Tehran.

原文主要建議美國與伊朗做交易，可以讀讀。不過這在美國是不可能的，這口氣怎麽也咽不下。況且，行不通：

Netanyahu: Iran greater threat than ISIL

猶太人不批準。