对于里根政府,乔治凯南的态度尤其地冒犯,他认为里根简单幼稚,无法理解地天真,根本不配担负起在有危险的世界指导一个超级大国事务如此之重任。冷战结束后他也没有改变自己的看法。1992年乔治凯南曾阐述自己的观点,认为冷战无赢家。这场旷日持久,代价高昂的悲剧,将对另一方意图和力量进行了不现实和扩大估算的双方同时埋葬。
Mr Gaddis disagrees. He closes his study by condemning Kennan for having blinded himselfto the fact that, in Mr Gaddis s opinion, Reagan brought Kennan s strategy to its successfulconclusion. If Kennan were alive, he would probably still disagree, and not withoutreason. If the elder man s concern for the costs of bellicose foreign policy, rather than theyounger man s enthusiasm for imperial exercise of American power, had dominated thelast decade, it would have made for a sounder grand strategy. In ways that this biographyseems not entirely to appreciate, Kennan s far-sighted opposition to Americanover-militarisation makes his personal career history less gripping than his legacy.
约翰加迪斯对此并不认同。在传记结尾他责备了乔治凯南对事实的视而不见,按照约翰加迪斯的观点,是里根的采纳成就了乔治凯南的战略。但是如果乔治凯南还健在,他可能还会反对,而且还自有道理。如果这位老人担心的是好战外交政策所付出的代价,而不是在其后的十年起决定性作用的青年人对美国超级力量运用的热情,那么它将会是一个更加合理的宏伟战略。如此来看这部传记对乔治凯南也不全是赞誉,乔治凯南颇有远见地反对美国过度军事化使其个人职业生涯的精彩程度比其传记略逊一筹。
【2015考研英语阅读外交往事】相关文章:
最新
2016-10-18
2016-10-11
2016-10-11
2016-10-08
2016-09-30
2016-09-30