To Intervene, or Not to Intervene: US Role in Middle East and Inner Asia | 美國應否介入內亞和中東事務


Foreign intervention in Inner (non-coastal) Asia, high-cost and low-yield, disrupts local evolution of spontaneous order, and can only be borne by powers with little regard for lives. Given the depressed oil prices, even the Middle East is no longer worth direct US intervention, which sacrifices American lives. US naval and air dominance would be better employed in the vast Pacific ocean: Pacific states are wealthy enough to pay for US protection.
外力介入內亞,成本高而效益低,徒然擾亂當地的自發演化,只有賤視人命的政權才能承受。石油跌價後,連中東都不值得美國浪費生命。美國的海空優勢,用在遼闊的太平洋更好。這裡的國家有足夠的財富,為美國的保護買單。

Intervention in the Middle East and Inner Asia is not in America’s best interests, for these regions brim with failed states. Similar to Lebanon and Cambodia in the 70s, the failed states have little state capacity. They are unable to protect their citizens, nor are they capable of preventing infiltration by foreign militant groups.

美國不宜干涉中東和內亞的局勢,还因為這些地區布滿了失敗國家。這些失敗國家類似二十世紀七十年代的黎巴嫩和柬埔寨,沒有在國內實施有效統治的能力。他們既不能保護本國人民,又無法阻止外來武裝團體的滲透。

International terrorist groups and other anti-US forces can easily emulate the strategies employed by the Central Office for South Vietnam or Iran: the former set up bases in Cambodia; the latter funded Hezbollah in Lebanon. Terrorists were able to assault South Vietnam from Cambodia, or Israel from Lebanon. But were South Vietnam or Israel to retaliate, Cambodia or Lebanon would become victims. North Vietnam and Iran were, however, in safe areas and had little concern for their shields.

國際恐怖主義團體或其他反美勢力很容易模仿越共南方局在柬埔寨邊界建立基地的策略,或是模仿伊朗在黎巴嫩扶植真主黨的策略。恐怖分子可以從柬埔寨進攻南越,從黎巴嫩進攻以色列。南越或以色列如果報復,受害者只是柬埔寨或黎巴嫩。北越或伊朗處在安全地位,不會憐惜人肉盾牌。

Direct intervention, costing American lives and resources, does not strike at the roots of Anti-US forces. Two cost-effective strategies, both eschewing direct engagement, are: 1) aiding — only with military supplies and technical support — regional allies such as Israel or the Kurds; and / or 2) employing precision strikes or economic sanctions against the patrons of terrorism, and disentangling from battling roving militant groups.

美國的直接干涉只會消耗自己的生命和資源,不能對反美勢力實施有效打擊。性價比有利的策略只有兩種,都以避免直接接觸為前提。其一是扶植以色列或庫爾德這樣的地區代理人,美國只提供軍事物資和技術支援。其二是針對恐怖主義保護者的遠距離打擊或經濟絞殺,不去糾纏流動的武裝團體。

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Zhongjing Liu | 劉仲敬’s story.