The Mentality and Technique of Western Nations in Manipulating Color Revolutions

Published in Guangming Daily
(China) on 11 September 2019
by Tian Wenlin (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Tyler Ruzicka. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
Violent protests have recently put Hong Kong's prosperity and stability in severe jeopardy, garnering a great deal of international attention. What merits caution is that, like in the "Occupy Central" movement of 2014, the protesters involved in the violent chaos of Hong Kong today are using radical “street resistance" to attack government institutions and block key transportation routes. They seek to put pressure on the central and Special Autonomous Regional governments. Trying in vain to achieve their political demands, such as the reversal of government policy decisions, the resignation of SAR government officials like the chief executive, and even Hong Kong independence, this illegal movement demonstrates many signs of a color revolution and intervention by foreign powers. These events are no longer simply the normal expression of the people’s opinion; they are subversive activities driven entirely by external forces.

We must clearly recognize the "black hands,” and respond calmly. Protecting Hong Kong's prosperity and stability is a determination shared by 1.4 billion Chinese people. Any attempt to use a color revolution to bring chaos to China and Hong Kong is guaranteed to fail.

In recent years, color revolutions have gradually become the greatest source of unrest to threaten the security of developing nations’ political regimes. Although these color revolutions are called "revolutions" and are driven by the people, they are, in fact, extensively controlled by external forces whose ultimate goal is to overthrow foreign regimes and create "controlled chaos," leading the state and its people to disaster. The Arab Spring of 2011 is a prime example.

Since the end of the Cold War, there have been an increasing number of color revolutions which use nonviolent means to achieve political change. From the revolutions of 1989 in Central and Eastern Europe, to the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia; from the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine, to the 2005 Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan; and from the Arab Spring in 2011 to Ukraine's "Second Color Revolution" in 2014, all are typical examples of color revolutions. In addition, some countries (such as Belarus, Iran and Lebanon, etc.) have experienced failed color revolutions. Statistics show that more than 90% of all regime collapses in the past 30 years were due to "non-violent revolutions."

Color revolutions seem to arise suddenly, but in fact they happen when long-term cultural infiltration by Western nations reaches a tipping point. Typically, many different warning signs appear before a color revolution throws the nation's political, economic and ideological systems into disarray. By and large, any developing nation that eventually erupts into color revolution first experiences different manifestations of unrest. These can be summed up as the following three primary signs. The first sign is severe economic recession. The second is the rise of opposition forces at all levels of society. The third is confusion of ideology. As Zeng Guofan once said, "Since days of old, times of chaos are necessarily preceded by a confusion of right and wrong, and then there is political upheaval; disaster soon follows." Color revolutions are akin to shooting a goal after repeatedly passing the ball up and down the soccer field; the aim is to deal a final, winning blow.

Western powers are fond of color revolutions because they have a big return on investment. Compared to waging war, they mainly use indirect means to achieve regime change, so there is little cost, and large reward. At the end of 2004, during Ukraine's Orange Revolution, the U.S. provided $65 million in political funds to Ukraine's opposition coalition via public organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy and Open Society foundations. These expenses don't even add up to 0.01% of the trillions spent on the war in Iraq. What's more, as a hegemonic tool, color revolutions are effective. They often put the affected government between a rock and a hard place; if the ruling government uses force to suppress protests (and these protesters acting as "human shields" don't even understand that they're being manipulated by political forces), then that government is isolated by Western nations. But if the country does not suppress protest, the government could be overthrown.

Arab Spring: Black Hands Everywhere

In 2011, a political earthquake rocked the Arab world, the likes of which hadn't been seen in decades. On the surface, this sudden change looked like the result of internal causes, a spontaneous political and social movement by the Arab people. However, looking deeper, traces of Western interference are visible in many places. In some sense, it was a Middle Eastern color revolution. Without the intervention of Western powers, the intensity, force and damage of this revolution would not have been so great.

The first thing to note is that the Arab Spring was manipulated by nongovernmental organizations that received financial support from the West. During the Arab Spring movement, all kinds of NGOs, while appearing to act on their own, in fact utilized elaborately designed, simple and practical techniques, characteristics of well-planned organizations. The techniques used by protesters were the same as the strategies employed in Eastern Europe and Central Asia's color revolutions. For example, slogans used by protesters in each country were simple and highly provocative (such as, "The people want to bring down the regime," "Leave," "Respect," "It's over," "We should get to decide," and more). These were similar to strategies shared by Gene Sharp for color revolutions.* Several years ago, in countries like Egypt, Yemen, Algeria and Jordan, the same strategies were used, including slogans, cartoons, diagrams, flags, posters, communication methods, public assemblies, satirical essays, performances, political mourning, organized protests, speeches, contempt for police authority and ambiguous political ideology, etc.

During the process of ousting Egypt's political regime, nongovernmental organizations were indispensable. With the long-term support of external forces like the U.S., the number of NGOs in Egypt continually grew. According to the 2008 Egypt human rights development report, the number of NGOs in Egypt increased annually. Between 1964 and 1973, there were 316 new NGOs per year on average; from 2004 to 2006, that number had grown to 850. By 2007, the number of NGOs in Egypt had reached 21,500. Other statistics show that in 1900, Egypt had just 65 NGOs, in 1925 it had 300, in 1960 it had 3,195, in 1976 it had 7,593, and in 1990 that number grew to 12,832. In 2008, the number doubled, reaching 26,295.

These organizations seemed to mind their own business harmlessly. However, as soon as unrest developed, some of them jumped at the opportunity to make waves and add fuel to the fire. Egypt's 2011 January 25 Revolution seemed to be a "three noes" movement, with no organization, no leading principle, and no leader. However, it was, in fact, controlled and organized by all kinds of nongovernmental organizations. Organizations like the April 6 Youth Movement, the Coptic Youth Movement Organization, the Revolutionary Youth Union, the Alliance for Arab Women, the Egyptian Movement for Change, the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, the Cairo Development Center, the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, the Egyptian Women's Development Association, the Helwan Region Development Foundation, the New Woman Foundation, the July 8 Youth Union and more, all actively planned, organized and participated in anti-government protest activities.

Among these, two organizations are particularly eye-catching. The first is the Egyptian Movement for Change, also known as Kefaya. What's notable about Kefaya is that its name (which means enough) and slogans are exactly the same as those of anti-government organizations from other countries that received training in Serbia. For example, in 2003, during Ukraine's Rose Revolution, the anti-government organization Kmara, whose name also means enough, received training from the National Endowment for Democracy, an American NGO. There's also the April 6 Youth Movement. That organization garnered close attention from the U.S. not long after it was founded. In December 2008, the organization's leaders were invited to travel to New York and participate in the Alliance of Youth Movements summit held by the U.S. Department of State. In the summer of 2009, the spokesman for the April 6 Youth Movement, Mohammed Adel, enrolled in training at the Center for Non-Violent Action and Strategies in Serbia alongside 14 Egyptian and Algerian activists. He publicly admitted to this in a documentary, and stated that through training, he became familiar with techniques for crowd organization and responding to police violence (how to engage with police and military, how to protect oneself and others, etc.). The leaders of the April 6 Youth Movement once promised Americans that they would overthrow the Egyptian regime before the 2011 election, and that promise came true.

In 2011, after Egypt's January 25 Revolution, the U.S. steadily increased its financial aid to nongovernmental organizations in Egypt. According to statistics, from March to June of that year, Egyptian domestic NGOs received a total of $175 million in aid; this was almost three times as much as all previous U.S. aid combined. On March 15, 2011, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Egypt, making a special trip to Cairo's Tahrir Square to demonstrate support for Egypt's democratic movement. A leader of an Egyptian NGO admitted in February 2011 that "in Egypt's uprising, civil society played a definitive role. In the long term, [these organizations] will be everlasting partners to the U.S."

The second feature of note is that social media became a new channel for the West to stir up trouble. During the 2011 Arab Spring, social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter were widely used to communicate, organize protests and contact the outside world. Tunisia and Egypt were the first nations in the Arab world to undergo regime change, and these are precisely the two Arab nations with the largest telecommunications industries. This upheaval in the Middle East began with Tunisia's Jasmine Revolution, and the catalyst of that revolution was WikiLeaks. In December 2010, WikiLeaks published American diplomatic cables which detailed corruption in the Ben Ali government, describing it as a "mafia." The cables also reveal that if conflict arose between the Ben Ali government and the military, the U.S. would not necessarily support him. Because of this, the regime was extremely weak. This essentially sent a powerful signal to Tunisia's anti-government groups. As soon as the contents of these documents were distributed online, the disclosure spurred widespread discontent among the public. Furthermore, an incident in Dec. 17, 2010 involving an unemployed university student's self-immolation was also disseminated over the internet, fully igniting the public's rebellious spirit, which, in the end, resulted in the fall of Ben Ali. Because of this, Tunisia's revolution is also called the "WikiLeaks revolution."

After the Arab Spring, Western countries actively added fuel to the fire, providing protesters with technical assistance, which caused the public protests to grow ever more intense. For example, to help protesters from Middle Eastern countries maintain contact while simultaneously avoid being tracked and captured, Western companies developed a kind of "Onion router," which could be used to connect to the internet without leaving a trace. With this kind of server, users can encrypt all kinds of information and go online anonymously. After this system was introduced by U.S. companies, it was provided for free to Iranian, Tunisian and Egyptian users. The goal was to allow dissident youths who wanted to challenge their own countries' regimes to evade government investigation and surveillance while engaged in political revolt.

To ensure that Tunisian and Egyptian activists could maintain contact with the outside world if internet access was cut off, Google and Twitter quickly introduced a service called "Tell Twitter." This application allows users to dial a number and leave a voicemail for free. This voicemail is automatically converted into a tweet, which is then sent to the internet. The RAND Corporation also spent years developing a nontraditional technique for political revolution called "swarming." These techniques were used to deploy large groups of young people, connected by the internet, to participate in fluid, hit-and-run style protests. Furthermore, the U.S. State Department has prioritized the research and development of an anti-censorship information system and invested over $30 million in the project. The U.S. is also developing a software program called "riot," which allows for a 100% independent wireless broadband network. It can provide wireless internet service without relying on any physical equipment; it doesn't require a telephone, cable or satellite connection. Therefore, its users can avoid any surveillance.

It's fair to say that it's only through the aid of internet technologies that the Arab protesters were able to organize, and cause the Arab Spring to ignite across the Arab world. As one protester stated, "We use Facebook to schedule the protests, and [we use] Twitter to coordinate, and YouTube to tell the world." For this reason, the Arab Spring has also been called the "Facebook Revolution," the "Twitter Revolution," and the "revolution typed on keyboards."

The Arab Winter: Lasting Consequences of Nonviolent Revolution

Color revolutions use nonviolent methods; their organizers intentionally package themselves as a righteous resistance fighting for democracy, protecting human rights, and upholding the interests of civilians. They even create a "carnival-like" atmosphere at protests. However, in reality, color revolutions are like a knife that doesn't draw blood: subtle and subversive. To achieve their goal of seizing power, the masterminds behind color revolutions are always continuously fanning the flames. They go so far as to manufacture violent incidents in order to exacerbate hostility between the government and the public, continually putting pressure on the ruling party. In the end, the regime is overthrown, bringing the affected nation under the West's political and economic domain. Just in this way, color revolutions are meticulously disguised counter-revolutionary movements. The facts show that the Arab Spring has become the Arab Winter. The catastrophe that this revolution has created for the Arab world is no better than total regional war.

Economic hardships were the primary reason that the Arabic people rose up in revolt. During Egypt's January 25 Revolution, "bread, freedom, and social justice" was the slogan that protesters cried out. But since this "revolution," the economic situation is even worse than before. Many economic indicators have dropped below pre-revolution levels and haven’t returned. First, there's the continued reduction in foreign exchange and state revenue. According to official Egyptian data, Egypt's exports have gradually decreased year by year: from $27 billion in 2012-2013, to $26 billion in 2013-2014, and $22.3 billion in 2014-2015, finally dropping to $18.7 billion in 2015-2016. Secondly, the unemployment problem has become increasingly more severe. With political unrest after the 2011 revolution, large quantities of funds flowed out of the country, and the number of physical labor jobs was reduced. Official data show that the pre-revolution unemployment rate of 9.8% rose to 12.8% in 2015. Thirdly, inflation has continued to worsen. In 2016, Egypt's consumer price index reached 10.2%, and basic necessities increased substantially in price, badly hurting ordinary people. Based on data from the World Bank, the U.N. and the World Trade Organization, the Arab Strategy Forum concluded that the Arab Spring and ensuing political unrest cost the countries involved $830 billion. The Middle East is now more unstable and more hopeless than before the Arab Spring.

At the same time, the revolution opened a Pandora’s box, and the region is suffering from all kinds of latent conflicts that are now erupting. One example is more intense religious conflict. After the sudden upheaval in the region, religious political forces have gained strength. Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood still holds power. The rise of these religious political forces has publicized and intensified the conflict between the secular and the religious. A second example is the reemergence of extremist terrorist forces. A new generation of terrorist forces represented by the Islamic State is destabilizing the territories of Middle Eastern sovereign states, and uniting extremist and terrorist forces, making the region into a hotbed of terrorist activity. In addition to this, the turmoil in the Middle East has turned many citizens into refugees. The population of the Arab region is only 5% of the world's total population, but refugees from the Arab world account for over 53% of all refugees worldwide.

Just like the saying "If Qingfu is not dead, then Lu's hardships have not ended," if hegemony and power politics still exist, there is a real risk of color revolution. Looking at the course of history, color revolutions of the modern era will basically extend along a path from Eastern Europe to West Asia, through Central Asia, and finally to East Asia and Southeast Asia. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, China became the key target of Western powers' "Peaceful Evolution" and "color revolutions." While engaged in our own self-development, we must strengthen our awareness of suffering and bottom-line thinking, and prepare to respond.

*Editor’s note: Gene Sharp was an American political scientist and founder of the Albert Einstein Institution, a nongovernmental organization dedicated to advancing the study of nonviolent action. He died in 2018.

The author, Tian Wenlin, is a researcher for the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.


 挥之不去的历史阴霾

西方大国操纵“颜色革命”的心态与手法

作者:田文林(中国现代国际关系研究院研究员)

  编者按

近来,暴力乱港事件严重危害了香港自身的繁荣与稳定,引发了全世界的高度关注。值得高度警惕的是,从2014年的所谓“占中”到今天的暴力乱港,都是以激进的所谓“街头抗争”来冲击政府机构、长期堵塞交通要道,胁迫中央政府和特区政府,妄图实现改变政府决策、要求行政长官等特区官员下台乃至“港独”等所谓“政治诉求”的“非法运动”,完全具备了外部势力深度介入、一手操纵的“颜色革命”的各种特征。这些情况已绝不是正常民意表达的行为,而是彻头彻尾的外部势力驱动的颠覆活动。

看清“黑手”,从容应对。维护香港繁荣稳定是14亿中国人的共同意志,任何用“颜色革命”祸乱中国香港的企图必将失败。

近年来,“颜色革命”日渐成为威胁第三世界国家政权安全的最大动荡源。这些“颜色革命”虽然冠以“革命”之名,并动员民众参与,实则处处受到外部势力操控,最终目的则是颠覆他国政权、制造“可控混乱”,将国家和民众带向灾难的深渊。2011年“阿拉伯之春”就是典型案例。

冷战结束以来,以非暴力方式实现政权更替的“颜色革命”越来越多。从20世纪90年代初苏东剧变到2003年格鲁吉亚“玫瑰革命”,从2004年乌克兰“橙色革命”到2005年吉尔吉斯的“郁金香革命”,从2011年“阿拉伯之春”到2014年乌克兰“二次颜色革命”,都是“颜色革命”的典型案例。此外,还有一些国家(如白俄罗斯、伊朗、黎巴嫩等)发生了未遂的“颜色革命”。据统计,近三十年来,所谓“非暴力革命”推翻的政权占政权垮台总数的90%以上。

“颜色革命”的出现看似突兀,实则是西方国家长期文化渗透后的临界质变。一般来说,在“颜色革命”发生前,对象国的政治、经济和意识形态出现大乱之前,往往会出现种种征兆。凡是爆发“颜色革命”的第三世界国家,基本都是国内先出现种种乱象。归结起来,主要有以下几个方面:一是经济严重衰退。二是朝野上下均出现反对势力。三是意识形态领域混乱。正如曾国藩所说:“自古大乱之世,必先变乱是非,然后政治颠倒,灾害从之。”“颜色革命”则相当于足球场上反复传球后的临门一脚,目的就是实现绝杀。

西方大国热衷“颜色革命”,主要在于:策动“颜色革命”投入小,产出大。相比于发动战争 ,“颜色革命”主要通过间接手段实现政权更替,因此成本更低,收益更大。2004年底,乌克兰“橙色革命”中,美国通过“国家民主基金会”和“开放社会研究所”等民间组织向乌克兰反对派提供了6500万美元政治资金。与伊拉克战争数万亿美元相比,这笔开支不及其万分之一。而且,“颜色革命”也是一种行之有效的霸权手段。它经常使被冲击政府处于两难境地:如果当权者使用武力镇压民众抗议(这些充当“人体盾牌”的抗议者并不清楚他们已经被政治操控),这些政府便会被西方国家孤立。不进行镇压,政府则可能被推翻。

“阿拉伯之春”:黑手无处不在

2011年,阿拉伯世界发生几十年不遇的政治地震。从表面看,这场剧变完全是内因主导,是阿拉伯民众的自发社会政治运动。但透过现象看本质,这场剧变处处能看到西方插手的痕迹,某种程度上就是一场中东版的“颜色革命”。如果没有西方大国介入,这场剧变的烈度、强度以及危害程度不可能这么大。

首先,阿拉伯剧变受到西方资助的非政府组织操控。在“阿拉伯之春”运动中,形形色色的“非政府组织”看似各自为战,实则操作手法都是构思精巧、简单实用,显示出极强的策划组织特征。抗议者采用的所有方式,与发生在东欧、中亚的“颜色革命”策略如出一辙。例如,各国示威者使用的口号都是极具煽动性的简单标语(如“人民希望政权垮台”“离开”“尊严”“结束了”及“该让我们决定了”等等)。这些类似吉恩·夏普提供的“颜色革命”策略,在埃及、也门、阿尔及利亚、约旦等国数年前就已出现,包括:口号、漫画、图标、旗帜、海报、联络方式、公开聚集、讽刺文章、歌舞表演、政治悼念、组织抗议、发表演讲、藐视警察权威、政治倾向模糊等。

在埃及政权更替过程中,非政府组织“功不可没”。在美国等外部势力长期支持下,埃及非政府组织数量不断增加。据2008年埃及人权发展报告统计,埃及非政府组织逐年递增。1964-1973年间,年均新增316个非政府组织,2004-2006年间年均增加850个。到2007年,埃及非政府组织已达21500个。另有统计显示,1900年埃及非政府组织数量仅为65个,1925年增至300个,1960年有3195个,1976年有7593个,1990年增至12832个,2008年又翻了一番,达到26295个。

这些非政府组织看似安分守己,人畜无害,但一旦国家出现动荡,一些非政府组织便乘势而起,兴风作浪,推波助澜。2011年埃及“1·25革命”看似是无组织、无纲领、无领导的“三无运动”,实则受到各种非政府组织的组织和操纵。“四月六日青年运动”“科特普青年运动组织”“革命青年联盟”“阿拉伯妇女联盟”“全国变革运动”“阿拉伯人权信息网络”“开罗发展中心”“开罗人权研究中心”“妇女发展论坛协会”“赫勒万地区发展基金”“新妇女基金”“7月8日青年联盟”等非政府组织,都积极策划、组织、参与了反政府抗议活动。

其中,有两个非政府组织表现最为抢眼。一是“全国变革运动”(也称“卡法亚”)。值得注意的是,“卡法亚”(Kefaya,意思是“受够了”)的名称、行动口号等,与在塞尔维亚接受培训的其他国家的反政府组织如出一辙。例如,在2003年乌克兰“玫瑰革命”中,反政府组织名叫Kmara,意思也是“受够了”,该组织同样受到美国非政府组织美国民主基金会(NED)的培训。二是“四月六日青年运动”。该组织成立不久就受到美国的高度关注。2008年12月,该组织领导人受邀前往纽约,参加了由美国国务院举行的“青年运动联盟”会议。2009年夏天,“四月六日青年运动”发言人穆罕默德·阿德尔曾与14名埃及和阿尔及利亚活动家一起,在位于塞尔维亚的非暴力行动与战略中心(CANVAS)实习。他曾在拍摄的纪录片中公开承认此事,并称经过实习,他熟悉了人群组织技术以及该如何应对警方暴力(如何与警察和军人接触、如何相互保护等)。“四月六日青年运动”领导人曾向美国人承诺,要在2011年埃及大选前“推翻政权”——这一承诺果然应验。

2011年,埃及“1·25革命”发生后,美国不断加大资助埃及非政府组织的力度。据统计,2011年3月至6月,埃及境内非政府组织共接受了1.75亿美元的援助,这是此前美国援助总额的近3倍。2011年3月15日,美国国务卿希拉里访问埃及,专程参观了开罗解放广场,以示对埃及“民主运动”的支持。埃及一名非政府组织领导人2011年2月坦承:“在埃及起义中,公民社会起了决定作用。从长远看,(这些组织)将是美国的永久伙伴。”

其次,网络社交媒体成为西方推波助澜的新渠道。在2011年“阿拉伯之春”中,脸书和推特等社交媒体被广泛应用于组织抗议、相互沟通、外界联络等。突尼斯和埃及是阿拉伯世界最早发生政权更替的国家,这两个国家恰恰也是通信行业占比最高的国家。中东剧变始于突尼斯“茉莉花革命”,而“茉莉花革命”最早触发点就是维基解密。2010年12月,维基解密披露的美国外交电报详细描述了本·阿里政权的腐败,将其形容为“黑手党”,同时这些电文还揭示,如果本·阿里政权与军方有冲突,美国并不必然支持他,因此该政权极度脆弱,这等于向突尼斯的反政府分子发出强烈信号。这些电文内容一经网站散布,便引发国内民怨四起。此外,2010年12月17日发生的突尼斯失业大学生自焚事件,也是经由网络传播,彻底点燃了民众的反抗情绪,最终导致本·阿里下台。因此突尼斯革命也被称为“维基革命”。

在“阿拉伯之春”发生后,西方国家积极推波助澜,他们积极为抗议者提供技术帮助,由此使民众抗议活动愈演愈烈。例如,为帮助中东国家的抗议者保持联络,同时避免被跟踪和抓捕,西方公司研发出一种可以接入网络又不留痕迹的“洋葱路由服务器”。这种服务器可以为所有信息加密,用户可以通过它匿名上网。该项目由美国企业推出后,免费向伊朗人、突尼斯人、埃及人提供,目的就是让那些“想动摇本国政府统治的异见青年”在搞政权颠覆活动时,能躲避政府的审查和监视。

为确保突尼斯、埃及活动分子在断网情况下与外界保持联系,谷歌、推特迅速推出一款名为“对推特说”的服务。这项应用允许用户免费拨号,上传语音留言,该留言再被自动转换成推文,再传至因特网。兰德公司还花费数年研发出被称为“蜂拥”的非传统政权更迭技术。这些技术用来部署由互联网连接的大量年轻人加入“打一枪换一个地方”的流动性抗议活动。此外,美国国务院还将研发“反审查”信息系统作为重要任务,并为该项目注资超过3000万美元。美国还在研发一款名为“暴动”的软件,其允许100%独立的无线宽带网络;频繁提供无线网络服务;不依赖任何实质器械,无须电话、电缆或卫星连接,因此能躲过任何监测。

可以说,正是借助网络技术帮助,阿拉伯抗议民众才得以有效组织,并使“阿拉伯之春”的火种最终星火燎原。正如一位抗议者所说:“脸书用来确定日程,推特用来协调行动,油管用来昭告天下。”因此,“阿拉伯之春”也被称为“脸书革命”“推特起义”“键盘敲击出来的革命”。

“阿拉伯之冬”:“非暴力革命”恶果难除

“颜色革命”使用非暴力手段,组织者有意将自身包装成争民主、护人权、维护公民利益的“正义抗争”,甚至抗议氛围也搞得像“嘉年华”,但实则是“杀人不见血”的软刀子。为实现夺权目标,“颜色革命”的策划者总是不断煽风点火,甚至人为制造流血事件,目的就是加剧政府与民众对抗,给政府不断施压,最终颠覆政权,将对象国纳入西方政治经济版图。就此而言,“颜色革命”是一场精心伪装的反革命运动。现实表明,“阿拉伯之春”已然成为“阿拉伯之冬”,这场剧变给阿拉伯世界造成的浩劫之大,不亚于一场全面地区战争。

阿拉伯民众起身造反,经济困顿是主要动因。埃及“1·25革命”时,抗议者打出的口号是“面包、自由和公正”。但经过这场“革命”后,经济形势反而今不如昔。许多经济指标甚至赶不上剧变前的水平。一是外汇和财政收入持续减少。据埃及官方数据表明,埃及出口额逐年缩减:2012-2013年为270亿美元,2013-2014年为260亿美元,2014-2015年为223亿美元,2015-2016年再减至187亿美元。二是失业问题愈发严重。2011年中东剧变后政局动荡,大批资金外逃,劳动岗位进一步减少。官方统计数据显示,失业率从革命前的9.8%升至2015年的12.8%。三是通货膨胀不断加剧。2016年,埃及消费者物价指数达到10.2%,日用消费品大幅涨价,民众苦不堪言。“阿联酋战略论坛”根据世界银行、联合国和世贸组织的数据得出结论:“阿拉伯之春”及随后政局动荡,使相关国家付出8300亿美元的代价。中东比“阿拉伯之春”之前更不稳定、更看不到希望。

与此同时,中东剧变还在中东打开“潘多拉魔盒”,各种潜在矛盾竞相迸发。一是教俗矛盾更趋激烈。中东剧变后,宗教政治势力实力大涨,埃及的穆兄会还一度上台掌权。宗教政治势力兴起,直接导致世俗与宗教矛盾白热化、公开化。二是极端主义、恐怖主义势力异军突起。以“伊斯兰国”为代表的新一代极端恐怖势力一度动摇中东主权国家版图,使中东极端主义、恐怖主义势力连点成片,使中东成了恐怖活动重灾区。此外,中东剧变还导致大量民众沦为难民。阿拉伯地区人口只占世界总人口的5%,来自阿拉伯世界的难民人数却占世界难民总数的53%以上。

正所谓“庆父不死,鲁难未已”,只要霸权主义和强权政治存在一天,“颜色革命”的风险就现实存在。从历史轨迹看,当代世界上发生“颜色革命”的地区,基本是按照“东欧—西亚—中亚—东亚/东南亚”的轨迹蔓延。苏联解体后,中国成为西方大国“和平演变”和“颜色革命”的重点目标。我们在搞好自身发展的同时,必须增强忧患意识和底线思维,做好应对准备。

  《光明日报》( 2019年09月11日 12版)

[ 责编:徐皓 ]
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: Trump’s Offer and Trump’s Sword

Germany: Trump’s Momentary Corrective Shift

Canada: Tell Me Again Which North American Leader Is Acting like a Dictator?

Austria: Trump’s Film Tariffs Hurt Hollywood

Australia: Played by Vladimir Putin, a ‘Weary’ Donald Trump Could Walk away from Ukraine

Topics

Germany: Trump’s Selfishness

Austria: Trump Ignores Israel’s Interests during Gulf Visit

Germany: Trump’s Offer and Trump’s Sword

Canada: A Guide To Surviving the Trump Era

Canada: Trump Prioritizes Commerce Over Shared Values in Foreign Policy Gamble

Australia: Another White House Ambush Sends a Message to World Leaders Entering Donald Trump’s Den

Australia: Trump Often Snaps at Journalists. But His Latest Meltdown Was Different

Germany: Trump’s Momentary Corrective Shift

Related Articles

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary