[转帖]乌克兰危机使美国的公信力处于危险之中

满 江 红

本文在3月2日的 CNN’s GlobalPublicSquare (GPS)上发表。其作者为Andrew C. Kuchins，CSIS的高级研究研员，俄国欧亚项目主任。

本文选自CISI的网站

[ 转自铁血社区 http://bbs.tiexue.net/ ]

为了方便大家阅读，我就将英文和中文分开了。因为本人自身水平有限，可能有错译误译漏译的情况，希望大家指出，谢谢。

U.S. credibility at stake in Ukraine

By Andrew C.Kuchins

MAR 3, 2014

Vladimir Putin has dramatically raised the stakes with what amounts to a stealth annexation of Crimea this weekend, securing in the process a unanimous vote from the Russian parliament allowing for the deployment of Russian military forces in Ukraine.

To date, the Obama administration's response, including Friday's vague warning about "costs," has amounted to little more than a threat to boycott the G8 meeting taking place in Sochi in June. Did the president's team forget that Putin did not even show up when Obama hosted the G8 in 2012? Was that not a crystal clear message about what Putin really thinks about the G8 in general, and Obama in particular?

[ 转自铁血社区 http://bbs.tiexue.net/ ]

Regardless, the administration has clearly been caught flat-footed again by Putin. It is less clear, though, how the United States will respond.

What has taken place over the past two days merely underscores in the most urgent way that we must, together with our European allies, immediately step up with economic and security assistance to bolster the capacity and credibility of the interim government in Kiev. And in doing so, the Obama administration must abandon its oxymoronic inclination to "leadfrom behind" because the imminent danger is that of a broader use of military and quasi-military tools to effectively separate other eastern regions of Ukraine from the rest of the country. This would have disastrous consequences for Ukrainians and U.S. credibility around the world. Just imagine, for example, the takeaway for Japanese and Chinese leaders about U.S. commitment as they spar in their own territorial dispute.

Yes, Crimea may already be gone. But we have to make absolutely clear – and in the most credible way possible – that Russian military intervention in other regions of Ukraine is a red line that will mean war with Ukrainian and NATO military forces if it is crossed. U.S. and NATO naval forces need to be deployed to the Black Sea in close proximity to the Ukrainian Coast. Military forces of neighboring NATO member countries, meanwhile, should be deployed closer to the Ukrainian border.

This all presupposes that the government in Kiev will request such support, and that Ukrainian military forces, which have been largely absent for the past two days, also need to be ready to be deployed. If Ukraine's military and/or NATO is not prepared to take such measures, then we are simply letting ourselves look foolish with empty threats. But doing nothing would be a terrible misjudgment. Putin has proven agile in asserting Russianinterests, and for the West to be effective in its response will require immediate, focused, and forceful action to make Putin recalculate his risk/reward equation.

In addition, the U.S. should work with its European allies to flesh out a package of economic assistance for the interim Ukrainian government. Significant commitments of money must be made immediately available to demonstrate a commitment to Ukrainians. Of course, Moscow and Kiev both have enough historical experience to be highly skeptical that we are ready to make significant financial commitments to Ukraine – that is the core factor that ignited this crisis back in November of last year. And Washington and the EU also have plenty of reason to doubt that any Ukrainian government can sustain its commitment todeep and sustained economic reforms that will get to the root of the endemic corruptionamong Ukrainian elites that has left its economy so weak and vulnerable.

But while such doubts are understandable, we must force ourselves to make the leap offaith that this time Ukraine will get it right, and the West should hope that the very real threat of the fragmentation of the country creates the sense of crisis necessary to break down the old patterns of behavior.

[ 转自铁血社区 http://bbs.tiexue.net/ ]

Ultimately, time is of the essence. And although the reality is that many Americans might feel perfectly able to live with a Ukraine without Crimea, any further fragmentation could be catastrophic not just for those living in Ukraine, but also for European security and the credibility of the U.S. commitment to it. Even if Ukraine is not at the center of Europe, it is still a part of it, and our failure to defend its sovereignty in this time of need could prove to be the final blow for a NATO that has in recent years struggled to find its place in the world.

Directly confronting Putin would not be as risky as many fear – Putin is, after all, a calculating opportunist who will take advantage of weakness where he sees it. He is extremely unlikely, therefore, to risk war if he clearly understands the "cost" of crossing a real red line. The question is whether he has any belief that the United States and its allies willstep up.

I hope, for the sake of Europe’s security, that President Obama proves him wrong.

乌克兰危机使美国的公信力处于危险之中

俄国议会一致同意在乌克兰境内部署俄军，这一决议让普京的胃口大开，从而使俄国可在本周末占领克里米亚。

至今为止，奥巴马政府的反应，包括周五发表的含糊不清的警告在内，只是仅仅威胁抵制六月份将在索契举行的G8峰会。难道奥巴马的团队忘记了，2012年奥巴马主持G8峰会的时候，普京连面都没露？难道这还不能说明G8在普京心中的位置吗？尤其是奥巴马在他心里的位置。

[ 转自铁血社区 http://bbs.tiexue.net/ ]

很遗憾，美国政府再一次被普京明着玩了。但是美国政府的反应如何，到目前为止还不明朗。

过去两天所发生的，仅仅是我们在最紧急的情况下所能做的底线，我们与欧洲盟国一起立刻提供经济和安全协助，从而加强基辅临时政府的能力和公信力。为了实现这一目标，奥巴马政府必须放弃其“幕后黑手”的矛盾的倾向，因为当前最紧迫的威胁是（俄罗斯方面）使用更强大的军事和准军事力量将乌克兰西部有效的分离出去。这将会给乌克兰人民以及美国的公信力带来巨大的灾难。试想一下，如果美国的公信力降低，那么在中日领土争端时，对双方领导人起关键作用的美方的承诺（的作用将降低）。

是的，克里米亚也许已经归俄罗斯了，但是我们必须清楚的表明，也是最负责任的办法，俄罗斯对乌克兰其他地区的军事入侵是一条红线，一旦踏过这条红线，就意味着与乌克兰人民和北约军事力量的战争。美国和北约的海上力量应该尽可能近的部署到乌克兰沿岸的黑海区域。同时与乌克兰接壤的北约国家的军事力量应部署到该国临近乌克兰的边境地区。

这一切的前提是基辅临时政府提出以上要求，在最近的两天几乎不见踪影乌克兰的军事力量，也应该做好部署准备。如果乌克兰或者北约的军事力量没有做好以上的准备，那么我们会被视为只会傻傻的放嘴炮。但是如果什么都不做，将是对形势糟糕的误判。普京在捍卫俄罗斯所谓利益问题上已经显示了其敏捷性，对于西方国家来说，需要及时、重点、有力的行动确保普京重新评估其风险/回报理论。

除此之外，美国应该与欧洲盟国一道，为乌克兰临时政府提供经济援助方案，马上承诺提供资金，以显示对乌克兰人民的支持。当然，莫斯科和基辅有足够的历史经验怀疑我们是否能提供经济支持，这也是去年11月引发这场危机的核心问题。同时，华盛顿和欧盟也有足够的理由怀疑乌克兰政府是否能遵守其坚持和深化经济改革的承诺，乌克兰精英阶层普遍的贪腐使该国经济极端脆弱。

这些怀疑都是可以理解的，但是我们必须强迫自己相信这次乌克兰会走上正途，西方国家也应该期望（乌克兰）因国家被威胁分裂而产生的危机感可以打破其原有的行为模式。

[ 转自铁血社区 http://bbs.tiexue.net/ ]

最终，时间是首要因素。尽管现实的可能是，很多美国人觉得克里米亚从乌克兰分裂没什么大不了。但是进一步的分裂将对生活在乌克兰的人，欧洲安全和美国对欧洲安全的承诺带来灾难性后果。即便乌克兰不处于欧洲的中心，但它仍是欧洲的一部分，我们如果这次在乌克兰需要我们捍卫其主权的时候失败了，那么这将是对北约的致命一击，尤其是近年来北约一直挣扎着寻求其在世界上的地位。

与普京的直接对抗可能不会像很多人想象的那么恐怖，普京是一个善于算计的机会主义者，一旦找到弱点，他就会直接下手。如果他明白跨过红线的“代价”，他就不会冒险发动战争。问题是他是否相信美国及其盟国会挺身而出。

我希望，为了欧洲的安全，奥巴马总统要让普京知道他错了。