U.S. Troop Withdrawal Points to Iran and China

Published in Zaobao
(Singapore) on 24 June 2011
by Wu Yifeng (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Yipeng Xie. Edited by Derek Ha.
On June 23 (Afghanistan time), U.S. President Barack Obama announced the troop withdrawal plan. This is a wise choice on Obama’s part and his contribution to world peace, since it was International Olympics Day.

The spirit of the Olympics emphasize the tolerance and comprehension of cultural differences. The International Olympics Day, which began in 1948, encourages people to replace prejudice and conflict with fair competition. On Sept. 11 , 2001, under the protection of Afghan Taliban government, al-Qaida, with an initial prejudice, attacked U.S. citizens and world citizens, causing calamity.

Intending to defend national interests and display the U.S.’s determination to the terrorists, the U.S. government started the Afghanistan war on Oct. 7, 2001, 10 years ago. There are currently 100,000 U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan. The army costs a monthly expenditure of $10 billion. In the past 10 years, the U.S. army, besides having lost many soldiers, has also suffered the corruption of the Afghan government.

The U.S. is a nation that emphasizes pursuit of national interests. When the U.S. army headed to Afghanistan, one of the purposes was to overthrow the Taliban government. This purpose has been achieved, but the price is too high, because many people in Afghanistan regard suicide and murder as hobbies. The poverty of Afghanistan cannot be reversed in one day; the corruption among Afghan officials cannot be eliminated in one day. In the past 10 years, the U.S. has spent a large amount of taxpayers’ money to let the soldiers sweat, bleed and cry.

Obama’s decision to withdraw the troops is correct, because the U.S. has tried its best in Afghanistan; the U.S. can never do everything perfectly since Afghanistan’s poverty is “a suicide bomb.” Vietnam, as a similar example, with help from other countries, frustrated Lyndon Johnson, leaving Nixon to clean up the mess.

The Soviet Union’s experience in Afghanistan teaches the U.S. a lesson: when a large amount of people don’t care to die, any preaching of principles is useless. The Soviet Union, in order to obtain illegal fortunes, was determined to send troops. The failure is predictable. The U.S.’s counterterrorism, even though justified, still failed when encountering those covetous Afghanistan officers and the Taliban, who don’t care about deaths. However, the U.S. has a long tradition of having two-pronged strategies. In this case, the strategy is to build a closer relationship with the Taliban and the Afghan government.

The Soviet Union was taught the U.S. lessons not only in Afghanistan, but also in Eastern Europe. When George Marshall, in order to save post-WWII Europe, put forward the renowned Marshall Plan, the Soviet Union also set up the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance. However, since the fall of the Berlin Wall on Nov. 9, 1989, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia have been reformed one by one. Now, who has ever calculated how much the Soviet Union spent on its overseas troops over 50 years?

The current international situation has changed. According to the Americans’ deep-seated opinions, “anti-communism” and “counterterrorism” are still the main targets of “the new crusade.” Nevertheless, since “counterterrorism” doesn’t have a uniform definition in this world, Obama doesn’t always use this term but instead expresses it as the diplomacy of “universal rights.” This expression is similar to Carter’s “human rights diplomacy,” but has wider influence and entertains stronger power so that the effect will be more powerful.

America’s “anti-communist” ways are malicious. For example, the U.S. triggered an entanglement between China and Vietnam in the South China Sea and caused the leader of North Korea to pay “unofficial visits” frequently. As the saying goes, “Generous rewards rouse heroes, while juicy meat brings ferocious dogs.” The U.S. is happy to obtain the free "juicy meat” while Vietnam and North Korea exhaust China. After the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, Iran should be the most concerned since all the events in the Middle East are under America's control, and the U.S.'s ultimate target is Iran. Obama scored one point in his decision to withdraw troops from corrupt Afghanistan. After Syria and Yemen overthrew their autocratic governments as they had wished, Iran, a “Persian empire” which is neither very autocratic nor democratic, should surrender without fighting.


美国总统奥巴马于阿富汗时间2011年6月23日宣布了从阿富汗撤军的计划。这是奥巴马总统的明智之举,也是奥巴马总统对于世界和平的贡献,因为这一天正好是“国际奥林匹克日”。

  奥林匹克精神强调的就是对于文化差异的容忍和理解。奥林匹克日设立于1948年,鼓励世人用公平的竞争代替偏见和冲突。2001年9月11日,在阿富汗塔利班政权的庇护下,极端宗教基地组织用自己的偏见作为出发点,对美国公民和世界民众进行了攻击,酿成了大祸。

  为了维护美国的国家利益,为了向恐怖组织表示美国的坚强意志,美国政府于2001年10月7日打响了阿富汗战争,至今历时10年。目前美军在阿富汗驻军10万人,每月花费100亿美元。在过去十年时间里,美军除了承受士兵伤亡的损失外,还要承受阿富汗政权的贪腐。

  美国是一个追求国家利益的国家。当年美军开赴阿富汗的时候,其目的之一就是推翻塔利班政权。这个目的已经达到,但是代价不菲,因为阿富汗很多人的生活乐趣就是自杀和谋杀。阿富汗的贫穷不是一夜之间就能扭转的;阿富汗官员的贪污本性也不是一夜之间就能改邪归正的。十年的时间里,美国花费了纳税人大量的钱财,让美国军人流汗,流血,同时也流泪。

  奥巴马决定撤军是正确的,因为美国在阿富汗已经人尽义尽了;美国永远不会有尽善尽美的那一天,因为阿富汗的贫穷就是最大的“自杀炸弹”。当年的越南也是如此-不穿鞋的不怕穿皮鞋的,在他国帮助下,搞得林登-约翰逊焦头烂额,迫使尼克松仓皇收拾残局,颜面尽失。

  前苏联在阿富汗的教训就是美国的一个经验。当一大批人视死如归的时候,任何的公理和道义说教都是不管用的。前苏联为了不义之利,悍然出动了不义之师,失败当是意料中的事。美国反恐,名正言顺;但是,遇到不要脸的阿富汗贪官和不要命的塔利班,也只好“归去非迟”(陈人杰《沁园春-问杜鹃》)。不过,美国一贯有两面手法,也就是拉拢塔利班入阿政府。

  前苏联不但在阿富汗有教训,在东欧也有教训。当年马歇尔为了拯救二战后的欧洲,提出著名的“马歇尔计划”;前苏联也建立了“经互会”。可是,随着“柏林墙”于1989年11月9日轰然倒塌,当年的波兰,捷克斯洛伐克,匈牙利,罗马尼亚,保加利亚,南斯拉夫联邦纷纷瓦解和改朝换代。如今有谁算过,50多年的铁幕日子里,前苏联的海外驻军花了多少钱?

  当今的国际形势已经发生了变化。在美国人根深蒂固的理念中,“反共”和“反恐”仍然是“新十字军东征”的主轴。不过,由于“反恐”的定义在世界范围内没有统一的标准;所以,奥巴马已经不太用“反恐”这个说法了,取而代之的是“普世价值外交”。这和当年卡特的“人权外交”是异曲同工的-范围更加的广泛,威力更加的强大,反弹当然也会更加的强劲。

  美国人“反共”的手法是很毒的,比如可以让越南和中国在南海纠缠,让朝鲜领导人三天两头地来中国进行“非正式访问”。常言道,重赏之下必有勇夫;油骨之前必有恶犬。当越南和朝鲜把中国拖得气喘吁吁了,美国再来拣“免费白肉油”,不亦乐乎?美国从阿富汗撤军之后,最为胆颤的应该是伊朗,因为中东的一切变局都在美国人的意料之中,而美国的最终目标就是伊朗。美军撤离腐败的阿富汗之后,奥巴马一定得分。当叙利亚和也门也如愿地推翻独裁政府之后,伊朗这个其实不算最民主,也不算很独裁的“波斯帝国”就该不战而降了。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: NATO Secretary-General Showers Trump with Praise: Seems Rutte Wanted To Keep the Emperor Happy

Colombia: The Horsemen of the New Cold War

Israel: In Washington, Netanyahu Must Prioritize Bringing Home Hostages before Iran

Canada: Elbows Down on the Digital Services Tax

Topics

Turkey: Europe’s Quiet Surrender

Austria: Trump, the Bulldozer of NATO

     

Israel: In Washington, Netanyahu Must Prioritize Bringing Home Hostages before Iran

Ukraine: Why Washington Failed To End the Russian Ukrainian War

United Kingdom: Trump Is Angry with a World That Won’t Give Him Easy Deals

Nigeria: The Global Fallout of Trump’s Travel Bans

Australia: Donald Trump Just Won the Fight To Remake America in 3 Big Ways

Colombia: The Horsemen of the New Cold War

Related Articles

Singapore: Trump’s America Brings More Chaos, but Not Necessarily More Danger

Singapore: No Ukraine Cease-fire – Putin Has Called Trump’s Bluff

Singapore: Lessons from the Trump-Zelenskyy Meltdown – for Friends and Foes

Singapore: In Trump and Musk’s America, Echoes of China’s Past Emerge