16基辛格.docx
《16基辛格.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《16基辛格.docx(13页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
16基辛格
16.Kissinger
亨利·基辛格(HenryKissinger,1923-),美国著名国际政治学家、外交家和国务活动家。
生于德国,因纳粹迫害而移民美国,第二次世界大战结束后进入哈佛大学,1954年获哲学博士学位,后执教于哈佛大学,同时兼任美国半官方的对外关系委员会研究部主任和美国国务院、国防部、军备控制与裁军署、国家安全委员会顾问。
1969-1977年相继任总统国家安全事务助理和国务卿。
基辛格于1957年出版了两本立身之作《重建的世界:
梅特涅、卡斯尔雷与和平问题(1812-1822)》(AWorldRestored:
Metternich,CastlereaghandtheProblemsofPeace,1812-1822)和《核武器与对外政策》(NuclearWeaponandForeignPolicy)。
前者研究了19世纪初期欧洲政治家和外交家重建均势和国际体系的各种谋划与努力,基辛格在其中不仅考察了国际政治结构与外交政策的关系,而且分析了意识形态在国际关系中的作用;他提出,以秘密谈判和军事实力为基础的外交政策,其目标不仅仅是和平,而应当是一个更为宏大的和平结构,和平只能是稳定的国际秩序的副产品。
后者是对艾森豪威尔政府大规模报复战略进行反思的产物,它基本否定了以核大战为最终目标的大规模报复战略,提出了有限核战争的概念。
基辛格由此成为知名的军事战略家和外交政策权威。
基辛格入阁后,以均势思想和有限核战争理论为指导,在美苏中三大国中纵横捭阖,结束越南战争,推动中东和平进程,并于1973年获诺贝尔和平奖。
基辛格退出政坛后仍从事国际关系和外交政策研究,并于1994年出版了新作《大外交》(Diplomacy)。
该书以均势外交为主线,回顾了500年来的重大国际事件,深刻剖析了叱咤于国际舞台的外交家思想轨迹及其作为,这也是作者心路历程的写照。
本篇选自《大外交》,体现了基辛格一贯的外交思想,认为未来的世界秩序应建立在均势的基础之上。
TheNewWorldOrder
Almostasifaccordingtosomenaturallaw,ineverycenturythereseemstoemergeacountrywithpower,thewill,andtheintellectualandmoralimpetustoshapetheentireinternationalsysteminaccordancewithitsownvalues.Intheseventeenthcentury,FranceunderCardinalRichelieu1introducedthemodernapproachtointernationalrelations,basedonthenation-stateandmotivatedbynationalinterestasitsultimatepurpose.Intheeighteenthcentury,GreatBritainelaboratedtheconceptofthebalanceofpower,whichdominatedEuropeandiplomacyforthenext200years.Inthenineteenthcentury,Metternich’s2AustriareconstructedtheConcertofEuropeandBismarck’sGermanydismantledit,reshapingEuropeandiplomacyintoacold-bloodedgameofpowerpolitics.
Inthetwentiethcentury,nocountryhasinfluencedinternationalrelationsasdecisivelyandatthesametimeasambivalentlyastheUnitedStates.Nosocietyhasmorefirmlyinsistedontheinadmissibilityofinterventioninthedomesticaffairsofotherstates,ormorepassionatelyassertedthatitsownvalueswereuniversallyapplicable.Nonationhasbeenmorepragmaticintheday-to-dayconductofitsdiplomacy,ormoreideologicalinthepursuitofitshistoricmoralconvictions.Nocountryhasbeenmorereluctanttoengageitselfabroadevenwhileundertakingalliancesandcommitmentsofunprecedentedreachandscope.
ThesingularitiesthatAmericahasascribedtoitselfthroughoutitshistoryhaveproducedtwocontradictoryattitudestowardforeignpolicy.ThefirstisthatAmericaservesitsvaluesbestbyperfectingdemocracyathome,therebyactingasabeaconfortherestofthemankind;thesecond,thatAmerica’svaluesimposeonitanobligationtocrusadeforthemaroundtheworld.Tornbetweennostalgiaforapristinepastandyearningforaperfectfuture,Americanthoughthasoscillatedbetweenisolationismandcommitment,though,sincetheendoftheSecondWorldWar,therealitiesofinterdependencehavepredominated.
Bothschoolsofthought—ofAmericaasbeaconandofAmericaascrusader—envisionasnormalaglobalinternationalorderbasedondemocracy,freecommerce,andinternationallaw.Sincenosuchsystemhaseverexisted,itsevocationoftenappearstoothersocietiesasutopian,ifnotnaive.Still,foreignskepticismneverdimmedtheidealismofWoodrowWilson,FranklinRoosevelt3,orRonaldReagan4,orindeedofallothertwentieth-centuryAmericanpresidents.Ifanything,ithasspurredAmerica’sfaiththathistorycanbeovercomeandthatiftheworldtrulywantspeace,itneedstoapplyAmerica’smoralprescriptions.
BothschoolsofthoughtwereproductsoftheAmericanexperience.Thoughotherrepublicshaveexisted,nonehadbeenconsciouslycreatedtovindicatetheideaofliberty.Noothercountry’spopulationhadchosentoheadforanewcontinentandtameitswildernessinthenameoffreedomandprosperityforall.Thusthetwoapproaches,theisolationistandthemissionary,socontradictoryonthesurface,reflectedacommonunderlyingfaith:
thattheUnitedStatespossessedtheworld’sbestsystemofgovernment,andthattherestofmankindcouldattainpeaceandprosperitybyabandoningtraditionaldiplomacyandadoptingAmerica’sreverenceforinternationallawanddemocracy.
America’sjourneythroughinternationalpoliticshasbeenatriumphoffaithoverexperience.SincethetimeAmericaenteredthearenaofworldpoliticsin1917,ithasbeensopreponderantinstrengthandsoconvincedoftherightnessofitsidealsthatthiscentury’smajorinternationalagreementshavebeenembodimentsofAmericanvalues—fromtheLeagueofNationsandtheKellogg-BriandPacttotheUnitedNationsCharterandtheHelsinkiFinalAct5.ThecollapseofSovietcommunismmarkedtheintellectualvindicationofAmericanidealsand,ironically,broughtAmericafacetofacewiththekindofworldithadbeenseekingtoescapethroughoutitshistory.Intheemerginginternationalorder,nationalismhasgainedanewleaseonlife.Nationshavepursuedself-interestmorefrequentlythanhigh-mindedprinciple,andhavecompetedmorethantheyhavecooperated.Thereislittleevidencetosuggestthatthisage-oldmodeofbehaviorhaschanged,orthatitislikelytochangeinthedecadesahead.
Whatisnewabouttheemergingworldorderisthat,forthefirsttime,theUnitedStatescanneitherwithdrawfromtheworldnordominateit.Americacannotchangethewayithasperceiveditsrolethroughoutitshistory,norshoulditwantto.WhenAmericaenteredtheinternationalarena,itwasyoungandrobustandhadthepowertomaketheworldconformtoitsvisionofinternationalrelations.BytheendoftheSecondWorldWarin1945,theUnitedStateswassopowerfulthatitseemedasifitwasdestinedtoshapetheworldaccordingtoitspreferences.
JohnF.Kennedy6declaredconfidentlyin1961thatAmericawasstrongenoughto“payanyprice,bearanyburden”toensurethesuccessofliberty.Threedecadeslater,theUnitedStatesisinlessofapositiontoinsistontheimmediaterealizationofallitsdesires.OthercountrieshavegrownintoGreatPowerstatus.TheUnitedStatesnowfacesthechallengeofreachingitsgoalsinstages,eachofwhichisanamalgamofAmericanvaluesandgeopoliticalnecessities.Oneofthenewnecessitiesisthataworldcomprisingseveralstatesofcomparablestrengthmustbaseitsorderonsomeconceptofequilibrium—anideawithwhichtheUnitedStateshasneverfeltcomfortable.
WhenAmericanthinkingonforeignpolicyandEuropeandiplomatictraditionsencounteredeachotherattheParisPeaceConferenceof1919,thedifferencesinhistoricalexperiencebecamedramaticallyevident.TheEuropeanleaderssoughttorefurbishtheexistingsystemaccordingtofamiliarmethods;theAmericanpeacemakersbelievedthattheGreatWar7hadresultednotfromintractablegeopoliticalconflictsbutfromflawedEuropeanpractices.InhisfamousFourteenPoints,WoodrowWilsontoldtheEuropeansthat,henceforth,theinternationalsystemshouldbebasednotonthebalanceofpowerbutonethnicself-determination,thattheirsecurityshoulddependnotonmilitaryalliancesbutoncollectivesecurity,andthattheirdiplomacyshouldnolongerbeconductedsecretlybyexpertsbutonthebasisof“openagreements,openlyarrivedat”.Clearly,Wilsonhadcomenotsomuchtodiscussthetermsforendingawarorforresortingtheexistinginternationalorder,ashehadtorecastawholesystemofinternationalrelationsasithadbeenpracticedfornearlythreecenturies.
ForaslongasAmericanshavebeenreflectingonforeignpolicy,theyhaveascribedEurope’stravailstothebalance-of-powersystem.AndsincethetimeEuropefirsthadtoconcernitselfwithAmericanforeignpolicy,itsleadershavelookedaskanceatAmerica’sself-appointedmissionofglobalreform.Eachsidehasbehavedasiftheotherhadfreelychosenitsmodeofdiplomaticbehaviorandcouldhave,wereitwiserorlessbellicose,selectedsomeother,moreagreeable,method.
Infact,bothAmericanandtheEuropeanapproachestoforeignpolicyweretheproductsoftheirownuniquecircumstances.Americansinhabitedanearlyemptycontinentshieldedfrompredatorypowersbytwovastoceansandwithweakcountriesasneighbors.SinceAmericaconfrontednopowerinneedofbeingbalanced,itcouldhardlyhaveoccupieditselfwiththechallengesofequilibriumevenifitsleadershadbeenseizedbythebizarrenotionofreplicatingEuropeanconditionsamidstapeoplewhohadturnedtheirbacksonEurope.
TheanguishingdilemmasofsecuritythattormentedEuropeannationsdidnottouchAmericafornearly150years.Whentheydid,AmericatwiceparticipatedintheworldwarswhichhadbeenstartedbythenationsofEurope.Ineachinstance,bythetimeAmericagotinvolved,thebalanceofpowerhadalreadyfailedtooperate,producingthisparadox:
thatthebalanceofpower,whichmostAmericansdisdained,infactassuredAmericansecurityaslongasitfunctionedasitwasdesigned;andthatitwasitsbreakdownthatdrewAmericaintointernationalpolitics.
ThenationsofEuropedidnotchoosethebalanceofpowerasthemeansforregulatingtheirrelationsoutofinnatequarrelsomenessoranOldWorld8loveofintrigue.IftheemphasisondemocracyandinternationallawwastheproductofAmerica’suniquesenseofsecurity,Europeandiplomacyhadbeenforgedintheschoolofhardknocks.
Europewasthrownintobalance-of-powerpoliticswhenitsfirstchoice,themedievaldreamofuniversalempire,collapsedandahostofstatesofmoreorlessequalstrengtharosefromtheashesofthatancientaspiration.Whenagroupofstatessoconstitutedareobligedtodealwithoneanother,thereareonlytwopossibleoutcomes:
eitheronestatebecomessostrongthatitdominatesalltheothersandcreatesanempire,ornostateiseverquitepowerfulenoughtoachievetha