|
| 阅读上一个主题 :: 阅读下一个主题 |
| 作者 |
 一位驻欧洲外交官向鲍威尔递交的辞呈（节译） |
 |
藏獒
[博客]
[个人文集]
游客
|
|
|
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
从特拉维夫到卡萨布兰卡再到雅典，几十年来John Brady
Kiesling一直是美国政府在地中海地区忠诚的外交官。然而今年二
月底他却向鲍威尔递交了辞呈，信中痛苦地写道："我们被要求执行
的政策，不仅仅不符合美国的价值观，甚至也不符合美国的利益。我
们对于对伊战争的狂热追求，已经使我们失去了国际上的合法性.从
威尔逊时代开始，这种合法性一直是我们最有力的进攻性武器和防御
性武器。我们曾经拥有过这样一个国际关系网，她的巨大和高效世所
未闻，而现在我们自己毁掉了她。”
在信的开头承认国际政策的自利传统之后，他没有掩饰自己对美国极
端外交政策的沉重感受：“911之后我们比任何时候都强大,历史上第
一次我们周围有如此巨大的国际联盟,紧密系统地开展反恐事业.但这
届政府没有进一步推动这些胜利,反而把恐怖主义当作了国内政治武
器,把四散溃逃的基地组织当作了政治盟友.我们对公众散布了不必要
的恐慌和困惑，自说自话地把伊拉克和没有联系的恐怖主义问题扯到
一起。结果是（也许目的本来就是）：我们把缩水中的公众财富大量
转给了军队，并削弱了防止政府滥用权力的公民保护措施。我们决心
毁掉的美国立国之本，比911毁掉的还要多.我们的榜样难道真的是晚
期罗曼诺夫王朝：一个自私、迷信的帝国在一个没有希望的现状下走
向自取灭亡？我们难道真的已经瞎掉了眼睛，就像在俄国人在车臣的
疯狂，就像以色列人在所占领土上的疯狂？”
"我们应该问问自己，为什么我们没有让更多的人相信这场战争是必
要的. 在过去的两年里，我们过分宣扬了狭隘而吝啬的美国利益比我
们伙伴们珍视的价值更重要。”
“就算我们的目的没有错，我们的原则却成了问题：阿富汗模型一点
也没有让我们的盟友相信我们重建中东的计划有什么理由。”
“我要求您听一听世界各地的美国之友们在说什么。即使在希腊，这
个被认为是欧洲反美主义温床的地方，我们所拥有的朋友比美国报纸
读者所能想象的还要多，还要亲密。即使当他们抱怨美国的傲慢的时
候，希腊人也知道这世界是一个困难和危险的地方，他们希望有一个
强大的国际系统，美国和欧盟密切合作。当我们的朋友怕我们而不是
支持我们的时候，担点心的时候就到了。而现在他们很害怕。谁还能
让他们相信，美国还是以前那个美国，这颗行星上自由、安全和正义
的灯塔？”
“国务卿先生，我对您的人格和能力深表敬意。我们的政策甚至不配
您努力保存下来的美国国际名望。您从一个意识形态中心和为政客服
务的政权里面，抢救出来了一些积极的东西。但您对这位总统的忠心
有些太过分了。我们正在超越这样一个国际体系所能容忍的极限：这
个体系由法律、公约、组织和公认价值组成，她对我们敌人的限制远
比对我们防务措施的限制大得多。”
“我曾经尝试过让我的良心和对这届政府的代表力取得和解，我失败
了，只能辞职。我坚信我们的民主程序最终将纠正自身的错误，并希
望自己能在体制外对政策改良略尽绵薄。我们的政策应该更好地为美
国人民以及我们共有的世界服务，追求安全和繁荣。”
全文：
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign Service of the United States and from my position as Political Counselor in U.S. Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so with a heavy heart. The baggage of my upbringing included a felt obligation to give something back to my country. Service as a U.S. diplomat was a dream job. I was paid to understand foreign languages and cultures, to seek out diplomats, politicians, scholars and journalists, and to persuade them that U.S. interests and theirs fundamentally coincided. My faith in my country and its values was the most powerful weapon in my diplomatic arsenal.
It is inevitable that during twenty years with the State Department I would become more sophisticated and cynical about the narrow and selfish bureaucratic motives that sometimes shaped our policies. Human nature is what it is, and I was rewarded and promoted for understanding human nature. But until this Administration it had been possible to believe that by upholding the policies of my president I was also upholding the interests of the American people and the world. I believe it no longer.
The policies we are now asked to advance are incompatible not only with American values but also with American interests. Our fervent pursuit of war with Iraq is driving us to squander the international legitimacy that has been America's most potent weapon of both offense and defense since the days of Woodrow Wilson. We have begun to dismantle the largest and most effective web of international relationships the world has ever known. Our current course will bring instability and danger, not security.
The sacrifice of global interests to domestic politics and to bureaucratic self-interest is nothing new, and it is certainly not a uniquely American problem. Still, we have not seen such systematic distortion of intelligence, such systematic manipulation of American opinion, since the war in Vietnam. The September 11 tragedy left us stronger than before, rallying around us a vast international coalition to cooperate for the first time in a systematic way against the threat of terrorism. But rather than take credit for those successes and build on them, this Administration has chosen to make terrorism a domestic political tool, enlisting a scattered and largely defeated Al Qaeda as its bureaucratic ally. We spread disproportionate terror and confusion in the public mind, arbitrarily linking the unrelated problems of terrorism and Iraq. The result, and perhaps the motive, is to justify a vast misallocation of shrinking public wealth to the military and to weaken the safeguards that protect American citizens from the heavy hand of government. September 11 did not do as much damage to the fabric of American society as we seem determined to so to ourselves. Is the Russia of the late Romanovs really our model, a selfish, superstitious empire thrashing toward self-destruction in the name of a doomed status quo?
We should ask ourselves why we have failed to persuade more of the world that a war with Iraq is necessary. We have over the past two years done too much to assert to our world partners that narrow and mercenary U.S. interests override the cherished values of our partners. Even where our aims were not in question, our consistency is at issue. The model of Afghanistan is little comfort to allies wondering on what basis we plan to rebuild the Middle East, and in whose image and interests. Have we indeed become blind, as Russia is blind in Chechnya, as Israel is blind in the Occupied Territories, to our own advice, that overwhelming military power is not the answer to terrorism? After the shambles of post-war Iraq joins the shambles in Grozny and Ramallah, it will be a brave foreigner who forms ranks with Micronesia to follow where we lead.
We have a coalition still, a good one. The loyalty of many of our friends is impressive, a tribute to American moral capital built up over a century. But our closest allies are persuaded less that war is justified than that it would be perilous to allow the U.S. to drift into complete solipsism. Loyalty should be reciprocal. Why does our President condone the swaggering and contemptuous approach to our friends and allies this Administration is fostering, including among its most senior officials. Has "oderint dum metuant" really become our motto?
I urge you to listen to America's friends around the world. Even here in Greece, purported hotbed of European anti-Americanism, we have more and closer friends than the American newspaper reader can possibly imagine. Even when they complain about American arrogance, Greeks know that the world is a difficult and dangerous place, and they want a strong international system, with the U.S. and EU in close partnership. When our friends are afraid of us rather than for us, it is time to worry. And now they are afraid. Who will tell them convincingly that the United States is as it was, a beacon of liberty, security, and justice for the planet?
Mr. Secretary, I have enormous respect for your character and ability. You have preserved more international credibility for us than our policy deserves, and salvaged something positive from the excesses of an ideological and self-serving Administration. But your loyalty to the President goes too far. We are straining beyond its limits an international system we built with such toil and treasure, a web of laws, treaties, organizations, and shared values that sets limits on our foes far more effectively than it ever constrained America's ability to defend its interests.
I am resigning because I have tried and failed to reconcile my conscience with my ability to represent the current U.S. Administration. I have confidence that our democratic process is ultimately self-correcting, and hope that in a small way I can contribute from outside to shaping policies that better serve the security and prosperity of the American people and the world we share.
Reprinted from the NY Times publisihing under FAIR USE.
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
| |
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题
您不能在本论坛回复主题
您不能在本论坛编辑自己的文章
您不能在本论坛删除自己的文章
您不能在本论坛发表投票
您不能在这个论坛添加附件
您不能在这个论坛下载文件
|
based on phpbb, All rights reserved.
|
