格魯吉亞：西方的戰略失誤(Kishore Mahbubani)

格魯吉亞：西方的戰略失誤

作者：馬凱碩(Kishore Mahbubani)為英國《金融時報》撰稿
2008-08-25


有時，小事件能預示著大變革。格魯吉亞的慘敗也許便是這樣一個小事件。它預示著後冷戰時代的結束，但並不標誌任何新冷戰的回歸。它標誌著更大的回歸：歷史的回歸。

後冷戰時代的序幕是由西方勝利拉開的，法蘭西斯•福山(Francis Fukuyama)的著作《歷史的終結》(The End of History)最早提出了這一理論。其書名相當大膽，但抓住了西方的時代精神。歷史以西方文明的勝利進行了終結。世界其他地區毫無選擇，只能屈從於西方世界的前進步伐。

在格魯吉亞，俄羅斯高聲宣佈，將不再屈從於西方。蒙羞20年後，俄羅斯已決定突然重返這裏。不久以後，其他勢力將同樣這樣做。由於其壓倒性的勢力，西方已侵入其他蟄伏國家的地緣政治空間。這些國家將不再蟄伏，尤其是亞洲國家。

實際上，世界上大部分地區都為西方在格魯吉亞問題上的說教感到困惑。美國不會容忍俄羅斯侵入其在拉美的地緣政治空間。因此，拉美國家清楚地看到了美國的雙重標準。所有提及美國非法入侵伊拉克的穆斯林評論也一樣。印度與中國都沒有向俄羅斯提出抗議。這表明，西方世界在格魯吉亞問題上的觀點是何等孤立：它們認為，全世界都應該支持受迫害的格魯吉亞反對俄羅斯。事實上，大多數國家都支持俄羅斯，反對恃強欺弱的西方。西方世界與世界其他地區之間的隔閡已擴大至極致。

因此，西方世界從格魯吉亞事件中汲取正確的教訓非常重要。它需要從戰略上考慮其有限的選擇。自蘇聯解體後，西方思想家想當然地認為，西方再也不需要進行地緣政治妥協了。它可以開列條件。但現在必須承認現實。北美、歐盟和澳大拉西亞等西方人口總和為7億，占全世界人口的10%左右。其餘90%正從世界歷史的被動者轉變成主動者。2008年8月18日英國《金融時報》上的大字標題“西方在格魯吉亞問題上形成統一戰線”(West in united front over Georgia)應該寫成：“世界其他地區在格魯吉亞對西方挑錯”。原因為何？是因為西方缺乏戰略思維。

縱然有缺點，毛澤東仍為一位偉大的戰略思想家。他曾說過，中國永遠要解決主要矛盾，協調次要矛盾。當蘇聯成為主要矛盾時，毛澤東與美國和解，即使這意味著要蒙受恥辱——與一個當時承認蔣介石為合法統治者的大國打交道。西方必須效仿毛澤東的實用主義，集中力量解決主要矛盾。

俄羅斯遠不是西方面臨的主要矛盾。真正戰略上的選擇在於其主要挑戰是來自伊斯蘭世界還有中國。自2001年9月11日以來，西方表現得好像伊斯蘭世界是其主要挑戰。然而，西方毫無策略地跳入伊斯蘭世界，而不是制定一個長期戰略來贏取12億穆斯林。因此，在阿富汗與伊朗，失敗已隱隱顯現，而整個伊斯蘭世界形成了一個更為敵視的環境。

很多歐洲思想家敏銳地意識到許多美國政策的愚蠢。但他們不願面對把安全保障工作外包給美國武裝力量的危險。在安全方面，地理要高於文化。由於地理原因，歐洲不得不擔心伊斯蘭的憤怒。而由於橫隔大西洋，美國這樣做的動機不大。

在美國，新保守派的領軍人物視中國為他們的主要矛盾。然而，他們也熱心於支持以色列，卻沒有意識到，這一立場對中國是一份地緣政治上的禮物。它保證了美國要面對整個敵對的伊斯蘭世界，使其注意力從中國身上轉離。毫無疑問，中國是9/11事件的更大贏家。當美國注意力被轉移時，中國已穩定了周邊地區。

西方面臨的最大悖論是：現在終於有可能創建一個更安全的世界秩序。想成為“負責任的利益攸關者”(responsible stakeholders)的國家數量之多前所未有。包括中印在內的多數國家都想與美國和西方合作。但建立一個穩定的世界秩序的最大障礙在於，西方缺乏對整個世界的長期連貫的戰略，並未能作出地緣政治讓步。西方國家領導人稱，世界正變得越來越危險，但很少有人承認，這是由於他們的思維方式有問題。格魯吉亞事件揭示了缺乏戰略性思維的後果。

作者是新加坡國立大學李光耀公共政策學院院長，新著《亞半球大國崛起──亞洲強權再起的衝擊與挑戰》(The New Asian Hemisphere: the Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East)

譯者/陳雲飛


The west is strategically wrong on Georgia

By Kishore Mahbubani
2008-08-25


Sometimes small events can portend great changes. The Georgian fiasco may be one such event. It heralds the end of the post cold-war era. But it does not mark the return of any new cold war. It marks an even bigger return: the return of history.

The post-cold-war era began on a note of western triumphalism, symbolised by Francis Fukuyama's book The End of History. The title was audacious but it captured the western zeitgeist. History had ended with the triumph of western civilisation. The rest of the world had no choice but to capitulate to the advance of the west.

In Georgia, Russia has loudly declared that it will no longer capitulate to the west. After two decades of humiliation Russia has decided to snap back. Before long, other forces will do the same. As a result of its overwhelming power, the west has intruded into the geopolitical spaces of other dormant countries. They are no longer dormant, especially in Asia.

Indeed, most of the world is bemused by western moralising on Georgia. America would not tolerate Russia intruding into its geopolitical sphere in Latin America. Hence Latin Americans see American double standards clearly. So do all the Muslim commentaries that note that the US invaded Iraq illegally, too. Neither India nor China is moved to protest against Russia. It shows how isolated is the western view on Georgia: that the world should support the underdog, Georgia, against Russia. In reality, most support Russia against the bullying west. The gap between the western narrative and the rest of the world could not be greater.

It is therefore critical for the west to learn the right lessons from Georgia. It needs to think strategically about the limited options it has. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, western thinkers assumed the west would never need to make geopolitical compromises. It could dictate terms. Now it must recognise reality. The combined western population in North America, the European Union and Australasia is 700m, about 10 per cent of the world's population. The remaining 90 per cent have gone from being objects of world history to subjects. The Financial Times headline of August 18 2008 proclaimed: “West in united front over Georgia”. It should have read: “Rest of the world faults west on Georgia”. Why? A lack of strategic thinking.

Mao Zedong, for all his flaws, was a great strategic thinker. He said China always had to deal with its primary contradiction and compromise with its secondary contradiction. When the Soviet Union became the primary contradiction, Mao settled with the US, even though it involved the humiliation of dealing with a power that then recognised Chiang Kai-shek as the legitimate ruler. The west must emulate Mao's pragmatism and focus on its primary contradiction.

Russia is not even close to becoming the primary contradiction the west faces. The real strategic choice is whether its primary challenge comes from the Islamic world or China. Since September 11 2001, the west has acted as though the Islamic world is the primary challenge. Yet rather than devise a long-term strategy to win over 1.2bn Muslims, the west has jumped into the Islamic world with no strategy. Hence there are looming failures in Afghanistan and Iraq and an even more hostile environment in the Islamic world.

Many European thinkers are acutely aware of the folly of many US policies. But they are reluctant to confront the dangers of outsourcing their security to US power. In security, geography trumps culture. Because of geography, Europe has to worry about Islamic anger. Because of the Atlantic Ocean, the US has less reason to do so.

In the US, leading neo-conservative thinkers see China as their primary contradiction. Yet they also support Israel with a passion, without realising this stance is a geopolitical gift to China. It guarantees the US faces a hostile Islamic universe, distracting it from focusing on China. There is no doubt China was the bigger winner of 9/11. It has stabilised its neighbourhood, while the US has been distracted.

The biggest paradox facing the west is that it is at last possible to create a safer world order. The number of countries wanting to become “responsible stakeholders” has never been higher. Most, including China and India, want to work with the US and the west. But the absence of a long-term coherent western strategy towards the world and the inability to make geopolitical compromises are the biggest obstacles to a stable world order. Western leaders say the world is becoming a more dangerous place, yet few admit that their flawed thinking is bringing this about. Georgia illustrates the results of a lack of strategic thinking.

The writer, dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (National University of Singapore), has just published The New Asian Hemisphere: the Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East