善意地獄 美國外交政策精英與美國主導地位的衰落

善意地獄：美國外交政策精英與美國主導地位的衰落

作者：史蒂芬·沃爾特 2018 年 1 月 1 日
https://www.amazon.ca/Hell-Good-Intentions-Americas-Foreign/dp/0374280037

《紐約時報》暢銷書作家斯蒂芬·沃爾特 (Stephen M. Walt) 的《善意地獄》剖析了美國近期外交政策的錯誤和缺陷，解釋了為什麽美國會受到伊拉克和阿富汗“永遠的戰爭”等災難的困擾，並概述了美國外交政策的哪些問題。 可以修複它。

1992年，美國站在世界強國的頂峰，美國人對和平與繁榮的新時代即將到來充滿信心。 二十五年後，這些希望已經破滅。 與俄羅斯和中國的關係惡化，歐盟搖搖欲墜，民族主義和民粹主義抬頭，美國陷入代價高昂且毫無意義的戰爭，這些戰爭浪費了數萬億美元並削弱了其在世界各地的影響力。

沃爾特認為，這一慘淡記錄的根源在於美國外交政策機構對“自由霸權”戰略的頑固承諾。 自冷戰結束以來，共和黨人和民主黨人都試圖利用美國的力量將民主、開放市場和其他自由主義價值觀傳播到地球的每一個角落。 這一戰略注定要失敗，但其在外交政策精英中的支持者卻從未被追究責任，並不斷重蹈覆轍。

唐納德·特朗普贏得總統職位，承諾結束外交政策“Blob”的誤導性政策，並采取更明智的做法。 但他反複無常、衝動的執政風格，加上對世界政治的深刻理解存在缺陷，正在使本已糟糕的局勢變得更糟。 沃爾特認為，最好的選擇是回歸“離岸平衡”的現實主義戰略，避開政權更迭、國家建設和其他形式的全球社會工程。 美國人民肯定會歡迎更加克製的外交政策，允許更多地關注國內問題。 這種遲來的轉變需要放棄對自由霸權的徒勞追求，並建立一個對美國實力有更現實看法的外交政策機構。

斯蒂芬·M·沃爾特（Stephen M. Walt）的《善意地獄》清晰、坦率、文筆優美，既對美國最近的外交政策愚蠢行為做出了令人信服的診斷，又為重新取得成功提供了行之有效的公式。

The Hell of Good Intentions: America's Foreign Policy Elite and the Decline of U.S. Primacy 
by Stephen M. Walt  Jan. 1 2018
https://www.amazon.ca/Hell-Good-Intentions-Americas-Foreign/dp/0374280037

From the New York Times–bestselling author Stephen M. Walt, The Hell of Good Intentions dissects the faults and foibles of recent American foreign policy―explaining why it has been plagued by disasters like the “forever wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan and outlining what can be done to fix it.

In 1992, the United States stood at the pinnacle of world power and Americans were confident that a new era of peace and prosperity was at hand. Twenty-five years later, those hopes have been dashed. Relations with Russia and China have soured, the European Union is wobbling, nationalism and populism are on the rise, and the United States is stuck in costly and pointless wars that have squandered trillions of dollars and undermined its influence around the world.

The root of this dismal record, Walt argues, is the American foreign policy establishment’s stubborn commitment to a strategy of “liberal hegemony.” Since the end of the Cold War, Republicans and Democrats alike have tried to use U.S. power to spread democracy, open markets, and other liberal values into every nook and cranny of the planet. This strategy was doomed to fail, but its proponents in the foreign policy elite were never held accountable and kept repeating the same mistakes.

Donald Trump won the presidency promising to end the misguided policies of the foreign policy “Blob” and to pursue a wiser approach. But his erratic and impulsive style of governing, combined with a deeply flawed understanding of world politics, are making a bad situation worse. The best alternative, Walt argues, is a return to the realist strategy of “offshore balancing,” which eschews regime change, nation-building, and other forms of global social engineering. The American people would surely welcome a more restrained foreign policy, one that allowed greater attention to problems here at home. This long-overdue shift will require abandoning the futile quest for liberal hegemony and building a foreign policy establishment with a more realistic view of American power.

Clear-eyed, candid, and elegantly written, Stephen M. Walt’s The Hell of Good Intentions offers both a compelling diagnosis of America’s recent foreign policy follies and a proven formula for renewed success.

斯蒂芬·馬丁·沃爾特 Stephen Martin Walt

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/smwalt/files/waltcv06.pdf

Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs
John F. Kennedy School of Government
Harvard University 

79 John F. Kennedy St.
Cambridge, MA
[phone]  FAX: [phone] 
 [e-mail]  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Walt

斯蒂芬·馬丁·沃爾特（Stephen Martin Walt，1955 年 7 月 2 日出生）是一位美國政治學家，現任哈佛大學肯尼迪學院國際關係學羅伯特和蕾妮·貝爾弗教授。

沃爾特是國際關係現實主義學派的成員，對新現實主義理論做出了重要貢獻，創立了威脅平衡理論。 他撰寫或合著的書籍包括《聯盟的起源》、《革命與戰爭》、《以色列遊說與美國外交政策》。

Stephen Martin Walt (born July 2, 1955) is an American political scientist currently serving as the Robert and Renee Belfer Professor of international relations at the Harvard Kennedy School.

A member of the realist school of international relations, Walt has made important contributions to the theory of neorealism and has authored the balance of threat theory. Books that he has authored or coauthored include Origins of Alliances, Revolution and War, and The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy.

美國的力量和文化

在伊拉克戰爭 20 周年之際，沃爾特將基於規則的世界秩序描述為“我們（美國）在製定過程中發揮了巨大作用的一套規則，當然，隻要不方便，我們就可以隨意違反這些規則”。 我們跟隨他們。”

沃爾特在 2005 年發表的綜合性文章《馴服美國實力》中指出，美國應該“通過謹慎使用軍事力量、加強與主要盟友的合作，以及最重要的是，通過重建其主導地位，讓其主導地位為其他國家所接受”, 國際形象崩潰。”他建議美國“恢複其作為‘離岸平衡者’的傳統角色", "僅在絕對必要時"進行幹預，並保持 "盡可能小的軍事存在。"

沃爾特在 2011 年末發表於《國家利益》的文章《美國時代的終結》中寫道，美國正在失去其世界主導地位。

沃爾特2013年在挪威國防研究所發表演講，題為“為什麽美國外交政策總是失敗？” 該研究所後來形容他認為“美國外交政策機構對激進外交政策存在壓倒性偏見”和“誇大威脅的傾向，並指出自 2001 年以來被閃電擊中的可能性遠遠大於死於恐怖襲擊的可能性"。“他還形容美國缺乏“外交技巧和技巧”，並建議歐洲人“為自己著想，不要依賴美國來解決安全問題的指導或建議”。 最終，他認為“美國根本沒有足夠的能力來管理世界。”

2013年，沃爾特問道：“為什麽美國人如此願意納稅來支持困擾世界的國家安全機構，卻又如此不願意納稅來擁有更好的學校、醫療保健、道路、橋梁、地鐵、公園、博物館、 圖書館，以及富裕和成功社會的所有其他標誌？” 他說，這個問題尤其令人費解，因為“美國是曆史上最安全的國家，除非它繼續重複過去十年左右的錯誤，否則它將保持非常安全的狀態。”

American power and culture

On the 20th anniversary of the war against Iraq, Walt characterized the rules-based world order as "a set of rules that we [the U.S.] had an enormous role in writing, and of course which we feel free to violate whenever it's inconvenient for us to follow them."

In the comprehensive 2005 article "Taming American Power", Walt argued that the U.S. should "make its dominant position acceptable to others – by using military force sparingly, by fostering greater cooperation with key allies, and, most important of all, by rebuilding its crumbling international image." He proposed for the US to "resume its traditional role as an 'offshore balancer'", to intervene "only when absolutely necessary", and to keep "its military presence as small as possible."

In a late 2011 article for The National Interest, "The End of the American Era", Walt wrote that America is losing its position of world dominance.

Walt gave a speech in 2013 to the Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies, "Why does US foreign policy keep failing?" The institute later described him as seeing "an overwhelming bias among US foreign policy institutions toward an activist foreign policy" and "a propensity to exaggerate threats, noting the chances of being struck by lightning have been far greater since 2001 than death by terrorist attack." He also characterized the US as lacking "diplomatic skill and finesse" and advised Europeans "to think of themselves and not rely on the US for guidance or advice on solving their security issues." Ultimately, he argued that "the United States is simply not skilled enough to run the world."

In 2013, Walt asked "Why are Americans so willing to pay taxes in order to support a world-girdling national security establishment, yet so reluctant to pay taxes to have better schools, health care, roads, bridges, subways, parks, museums, libraries, and all the other trappings of a wealthy and successful society?" He said that the question was especially puzzling given that "the United States is the most secure power in history and will remain remarkably secure unless it keeps repeating the errors of the past decade or so."

對外政策

作為軍事幹預主義的批評者，沃爾特表示："鷹派喜歡將軍事幹預的反對者描繪成‘孤立主義者'，因為他們知道這是一個聲名狼藉的政治標簽。然而，有一個連貫的理由表明對美國的大戰略采取更加超然和有選擇性的方法，這也是我們的外交政策體係發揮作用的原因之一 , 很難否認他們的懷疑，如果不是不斷地提醒他們遠方迫在眉睫的外國危險，許多美國人可能會發現這種懷疑是有說服力的。支持更加克製的大戰略的論點絕非愚蠢，而且, 這種方法比新保守派對全球主導地位的幻想或自由派鷹派對改革整個地區無休止的準人道主義努力的喜愛更有意義。"

Foreign policy
A critic of military interventionism, Walt stated: "Hawks like to portray opponents of military intervention as 'isolationist' because they know it is a discredited political label. Yet there is a coherent case for a more detached and selective approach to U.S. grand strategy, and one reason that our foreign policy establishment works so hard to discredit it is their suspicion that a lot of Americans might find it convincing if they weren't constantly being reminded about looming foreign dangers in faraway places. The arguments in favor of a more restrained grand strategy are far from silly, and the approach makes a lot more sense than neoconservatives' fantasies of global primacy or liberal hawks' fondness for endless quasi-humanitarian efforts to reform whole regions."