与人道主义的看法相同,干预主义者的论点更加务实。反政府武装正在取得胜利,阿萨德政权的最终覆灭似乎已是板上钉钉,但如果西方国家不为最终的胜利者提供武装援助,西方对战后叙利亚的影响就会大大受限。正如一位美国官员所说:“我们需要有所投入。
The interventionists also make geopolitical arguments. The fall of the Assad regime would be a blow to Iran. Some Americans also fear that by hanging back, they are underlining the perception of declining US influence. How can it be, they ask, that tiny Qatar is having more impact on Syria than the world’s sole superpower?
干预主义者还提出了地缘政治的依据。阿萨德政权的覆灭将对伊朗造成打击。一些美国人还担心,如果在干预问题上犹豫不决,将强化人们对美国影响力式微的印象。他们责问道:弹丸小国卡塔尔对叙利亚的影响力何以能超过世界唯一的超级大国?
One answer to that question is that the Qataris are much less squeamish about funding the various jihadist groups that are fighting Bashar al-Assad. The interventionists counter that by holding back, the west is ensuring that it is precisely the jihadists who are gaining power within the coalition of opposition forces fighting in Syria. In a similar vein, the interventionists argue that all the other western nightmares – the fragmentation of the country and the ethnic cleansing of the Christian and Alawite communities – are becoming ever more likely, the longer the conflict drags on.
【西方干预能挽救叙利亚吗?】相关文章:
★ 西方报业危机蔓延
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15