评论
打印
Mr. Biden has rebutted any suggestion that Washington is looking to force a “regime change” – not, obviously, in the allied democracy of Ukraine, but not in Russia either.
拜登驳斥了任何关于华盛顿正在迫使其他国家“更迭政权”的说法——显然不是在民主联盟国家乌克兰，也不是在俄罗斯。
The Iraq War explicitly sought to depose Saddam Hussein and, in an overweening act of geopolitical engineering, plant democracy in Iraq and transform the wider Muslim Middle East.
伊拉克战争的目的显然是推翻萨达姆·侯赛因，通过傲慢自大的地缘政治工程，在伊拉克种植民主，对更广泛的中东穆斯林进行改革。
It ended up strengthening America’s main regional foe, Iran, as well as spawning a Sunni jihadist army, the Islamic State.
这最终壮大了美国在中东地区的主要敌人伊朗，并催生了一支逊尼派圣战军队——伊斯兰国。
And while the Bush administration deployed intelligence reports on Saddam’s alleged chemical weapons program to justify the invasion – intelligence that turned out to be wrong – Mr. Biden has taken care to use satellite information and other equally reliable political intelligence to make the case for deliberately more limited, and calibrated, U.S. involvement in Ukraine.
布什政府调用有关所谓的萨达姆化学武器计划的情报报告，以证明美国入侵的正当性——结果表明这些情报并不正确——而拜登谨慎利用卫星信息和其他同样可靠的政治情报，为美国有度有节地介入乌克兰事务提供理由。
Above all, while Mr. Bush went to war with just one major ally, Britain, President Biden assembled a wide coalition of European and other allies ready to hit back against a Russian invasion with unprecedentedly tough sanctions.
最重要的是，布什总统只与一个主要盟友英国合作开战，而拜登总统组建了一个由欧洲和其他盟友组成的广泛联盟，准备用前所未有的严厉制裁来反击俄罗斯的入侵。
In the months since, he has acted in close coordination with U.S. allies to provide funds and weapons for Ukraine’s resistance.
在那之后的几个月里，拜登一直在与美国盟友密切合作，为乌克兰的抵抗提供资金与武器。
But what of the “hard” part of the Iraq legacy – the wider question of whether all forms of values-based military action should be consigned, along with the other aspects of the Iraq War, to an unlamented dustbin of history?
但是，伊拉克遗留问题中“难”的部分——这个更广泛的问题是，基于这个价值观的各种军事行动，是否应该与伊拉克战争的各种事务一起，被扔进无人惋惜的历史垃圾箱里?
In Ukraine, interestingly, Mr. Biden has in effect dodged that question.
有趣的是，在乌克兰，拜登实际上回避了这个问题。
Yes, he has framed the war as pitting an autocratic Russia against democratic Ukraine.
没错，他将这场战争描述为专制的俄罗斯与民主的乌克兰之间的较量。
But his core justification for U.S. action has been that Mr. Putin’s attack was an unprovoked assault on a neighboring country’s sovereignty in clear violation of the U.N. Charter.
但他为美国的行动辩护的核心理由是，普京的袭击是对邻国主权的无端攻击，明显违反了联合国宪章。
It is that argument that has galvanized overwhelming opposition in the U.N. General Assembly to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
正是这个理由引发了联合国大会上对俄罗斯入侵乌克兰的压倒性反对。
Whether future U.S. or other Western leaders might revisit the doctrine that came to be known as “liberal interventionism” may depend on how willing they are to look beyond the many failures of the Iraq War and recall other recent conflicts.
未来的美国或其他西方领导人是否会重新审视被称为“自由干涉主义”的信条，可能取决于他们有多愿意考虑伊拉克战争的许多错误，以及回顾其他近期的冲突。
Conflicts like the Kosovo War, for instance, when then-President Bill Clinton was ultimately persuaded by British Prime Minister Tony Blair to back a “humanitarian intervention” by NATO countries to protect Kosovar Albanian civilians and force Yugoslav forces to pull out.
比如科索沃战争，美国的时任总统比尔·克林顿最终被英国首相托尼·布莱尔说服，支持北约国家的“人道主义干预”，保护科索沃的阿尔巴尼亚平民，迫使南斯拉夫军队撤出。
