西方應(yīng)該如何遏制俄羅斯？

Relations between the US and Russia have reached their lowest point in 30 years. Not since Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev began the effort to end the cold war have relations between the two been this bad.

美國(guó)與俄羅斯的關(guān)系已跌落至30年來(lái)最低點(diǎn)。自從羅納德•里根(Ronald Reagan)和米哈伊爾•戈?duì)柊蛦谭?Mikhail Gorbachev)啟動(dòng)結(jié)束冷戰(zhàn)的努力以來(lái)，兩國(guó)關(guān)系從未像現(xiàn)在這么糟糕過(guò)。

On October 7, the US intelligence chief General James Clapper announced that the Kremlin’s “senior-most officials” had authorised hacks into the emails of US individuals and institutions to interfere in the election process. This followed a decision by John Kerry, secretary of state, to end a bilateral effort to negotiate an end to the brutal fighting in Syria and his accusation that Russian military actions in Aleppo amounted to war crimes.

10月7日，美國(guó)國(guó)家情報(bào)總監(jiān)(DNI)詹姆斯•克拉珀(James Clapper)宣布，克里姆林宮的“最高級(jí)官員”授權(quán)黑客入侵美國(guó)個(gè)人和機(jī)構(gòu)的電郵，以干擾美國(guó)的大選進(jìn)程。此前，美國(guó)國(guó)務(wù)卿約翰•克里(John Kerry)決定叫停旨在結(jié)束敘利亞血腥戰(zhàn)斗的雙邊努力，并指責(zé)俄羅斯在阿勒頗的軍事行動(dòng)構(gòu)成戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)犯罪。

In turn, President Vladimir Putin ended participation in an agreement with the US to dispose of weapons-grade plutonium. And then Moscow shipped nuclear-capable missile systems to Kaliningrad, sandwiched between Poland and the Baltic states, posing an immediate threat to America’s most exposed Nato allies.

對(duì)此，俄羅斯總統(tǒng)弗拉基米爾•普京(Vladimir Putin)退出了與美國(guó)的武器級(jí)钚處理協(xié)議。接著，莫斯科方面將能夠搭載核彈頭的導(dǎo)彈系統(tǒng)運(yùn)至夾在波蘭與波羅的海國(guó)家之間的加里寧格勒(Kaliningrad)，對(duì)處在最大風(fēng)險(xiǎn)位置的美國(guó)在北約的盟友構(gòu)成直接威脅。

This shows how badly relations have deteriorated since the illegal annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine in early 2014. So far, neither Washington nor its European allies have produced a coherent response to Russia’s increasingly dangerous behaviour.

這表明，自2014年初俄羅斯非法吞并克里米亞并入侵烏克蘭以來(lái)，美俄關(guān)系已惡化到非常嚴(yán)重的程度。迄今為止，美國(guó)及其歐洲盟友都沒(méi)有對(duì)俄羅斯日益危險(xiǎn)的行為做出一致回應(yīng)。

Nato has taken some steps to bolster the defence of its allies in the east, and European members have begun to reverse the decade-long slide in defence spending and capabilities. The US and Canada joined the EU in imposing sanctions on Russia following the invasion of Ukraine and the downing of a Malaysian airliner in July 2014.

北約已采取一些措施加強(qiáng)對(duì)其東翼盟友的防御，歐盟成員國(guó)已開(kāi)始逆轉(zhuǎn)國(guó)防開(kāi)支和軍事實(shí)力長(zhǎng)達(dá)10年的滑坡。在俄羅斯入侵烏克蘭以及馬來(lái)西亞一架民航客機(jī)在2014年7月被擊落以后，美國(guó)和加拿大加入歐盟的行列，一起對(duì)俄羅斯實(shí)施了制裁。

But none of this adds up to a coherent strategy. Too many, in Europe especially, believe that political and economic engagement, coupled with military forbearance, will eventually bring Moscow around to a more constructive attitude. While the attempt to integrate Russia into the western system was a worthwhile experiment, it failed. Integration is Mr Putin’s greatest fear, because it would undermine his control of the Russian system. Like his Soviet predecessors, he needs the antagonism of the west to protect his standing at home.

但所有這些都算不上一致的戰(zhàn)略。太多人(特別是在歐洲)認(rèn)為，政治和經(jīng)濟(jì)上的接觸，加上軍事上的克制，最終將讓俄羅斯拿出更建設(shè)性的態(tài)度。讓俄羅斯加入西方體系的嘗試是有意義的，但失敗了。融合是普京最擔(dān)心的，因?yàn)檫@將削弱他對(duì)俄羅斯體制的控制。與他在蘇聯(lián)時(shí)代的前任一樣，他需要西方的敵對(duì)來(lái)保護(hù)自己在國(guó)內(nèi)的地位。

What, then, would be an effective response to Russia’s behaviour? The answer is a strategy of containment.

那么，什么才是針對(duì)俄羅斯行為的有效回應(yīng)呢?答案是遏制戰(zhàn)略。

In 1946, the American diplomat George Kennan argued that containment was the necessary response to a Soviet system that was driving towards external expansion because of internal weaknesses. Bringing Moscow into the family of nations, as Franklin Roosevelt had attempted to do, was bound to fail. Outside pressure would lead to the internal change necessary to modify external Soviet behaviour, Kennan said.

1946年，美國(guó)外交家喬治•凱南(George Kennan)主張，遏制是對(duì)蘇聯(lián)體制的必要回應(yīng)，當(dāng)時(shí)蘇聯(lián)正因國(guó)內(nèi)虛弱轉(zhuǎn)向?qū)ν鈹U(kuò)張。像富蘭克林•羅斯福(Franklin Roosevelt)那樣試圖把俄羅斯納入國(guó)際大家庭的努力注定要失敗。凱南表示，外部壓力將促成改變蘇聯(lián)對(duì)外行為所必需的國(guó)內(nèi)改革。

During the cold war, the big question for the US and its allies was whether to oppose expansion whenever and wherever it occurred, or to isolate Moscow diplomatically and economically while bolstering the protection of American interests in Europe and Asia.

在冷戰(zhàn)時(shí)期，美國(guó)及其盟友面臨的一個(gè)重大問(wèn)題是，應(yīng)該在擴(kuò)張發(fā)生的任何時(shí)間和任何地方作出反制，還是在外交和經(jīng)濟(jì)上孤立俄羅斯、同時(shí)增強(qiáng)對(duì)美國(guó)在歐洲和亞洲利益的保護(hù)?

The debate is much the same today. Some maintain that we need to oppose Russia everywhere it manifests its power — in Ukraine, in Syria and in cyber space. Others that we need to strengthen Nato and exploit Russia’s deteriorating economy and lack of ideological appeal abroad.

如今的辯論大致相同。一些人堅(jiān)稱(chēng)，我們需要在俄羅斯炫耀實(shí)力的所有地方(烏克蘭、敘利亞和網(wǎng)絡(luò)空間)跟俄羅斯作對(duì)。還有一些人聲稱(chēng)，我們需要加強(qiáng)北約的實(shí)力，同時(shí)利用俄羅斯的弱點(diǎn)，包括經(jīng)濟(jì)日益惡化和在國(guó)外缺乏意識(shí)形態(tài)影響力。

Now, as then, containment must be a long-term strategy, best sustained by emphasising western strengths and Russian weaknesses. The core of our strength is western unity. That is why President Barack Obama and other Nato leaders were right to respond to the invasion of Ukraine by boosting the alliance’s defences. Russia’s greatest vulnerability is its economy, dependent as it is on resource extraction; a strong regime of sanctions will hurt Moscow.

如今，與過(guò)去一樣，遏制必須是一項(xiàng)長(zhǎng)期戰(zhàn)略，強(qiáng)調(diào)西方優(yōu)勢(shì)和俄羅斯劣勢(shì)將最有利于維持這一戰(zhàn)略。我們的力量核心是西方陣營(yíng)的團(tuán)結(jié)。正因如此，美國(guó)總統(tǒng)巴拉克•奧巴馬(Barack Obama)和其他北約領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人通過(guò)增強(qiáng)同盟防御來(lái)回應(yīng)俄羅斯入侵烏克蘭的做法是正確的。俄羅斯的最大脆弱性在于國(guó)內(nèi)經(jīng)濟(jì)依賴(lài)資源開(kāi)采;強(qiáng)大的制裁機(jī)制將觸到莫斯科方面的痛處。

We need to recognise Russia is an insecure power driven by internal weakness. Containment took 40 years to bring about a change in Soviet behaviour and ultimately the collapse of the USSR. Russia is far weaker now than the Soviet Union was then, but it will still take years to change the way it behaves. Like then, containment requires patience and firmness to succeed.

我們需要認(rèn)識(shí)到，俄羅斯是一個(gè)缺乏安全感的大國(guó)，其推動(dòng)力是內(nèi)部虛弱。遏制戰(zhàn)略用了40年時(shí)間讓蘇聯(lián)的行為發(fā)生改變，最終導(dǎo)致蘇聯(lián)解體?，F(xiàn)在的俄羅斯比當(dāng)年的蘇聯(lián)虛弱得多，但仍需堅(jiān)持多年才能改變其行為方式。與那時(shí)一樣，遏制戰(zhàn)略需要耐心和堅(jiān)定才能成功。