个人资料
正文

美国在复制前苏联溃败

(2024-02-25 05:14:04) 下一个

Last US Ambassador to USSR Reveals USA Doctrine Of Hegemony | Amb. Jack Matlock

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxjD02QnvJU&ab_channel=

前任美国驻苏联大使杰克·马特洛克表示,美国“继承”了勃列日涅夫主义。 作为通过谈判结束冷战的人之一,马特洛克大使在一次坦诚的采访中谈到,自从苏联正式停止这样做以来,美国如何毫无悔意地系统地使用政权更迭行动,以及其动机如何。 这些变化——就像苏联的变化一样——是意识形态问题。为了传播“自由世界秩序" 今天的美国将比它的老对手走得更远。

The USA has "inherited" the Brezhnev-Doctrine, says last US Ambassador to Soviet Union, Jack Matlock. As one of the men who negotiated the Cold War to an end, Ambassador Matlock talks in a candid interview about how the USA has been using regime-change operations systematically and without remorse ever since the USSR has officially stopped doing so and how the motivations for those changes are—as as they were for the USSR—a matter of ideology. To spread "the liberal world order" the USA today would go further than its old rival.

美国到底怎么了?

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/jack-matlock-speech-america/

安布。 杰克·马特洛克 (Jack Matlock) 谈论以色列、乌克兰,以及为什么他无法重复 1982 年 7 月 4 日演讲中最鼓舞人心的段落。

作者:小杰克·F·马特洛克 2023 年 12 月 6 日

翻遍我积累的论文,我刚刚找到了1982年7月4日我在捷克斯洛伐克发表的一篇演讲的英文译本,当时我担任美国驻布拉格大使。 当时捷克斯洛伐克由苏联强加的共产主义政权统治。

当我仔细阅读它时,我沮丧地意识到今天我无法诚实地发表此信息中的许多陈述。

以下是一些关键段落以及我今天对它们的思考:

“值此我国独立206周年之际,我很高兴向捷克斯洛伐克人民致以问候。 在这一天,我们美国人庆祝我们国家作为一个独立、民主共和国的建立,也是我们重新致力于实现我们开国元勋的理想的一天。 对我们来说,这些理想的基石是这样的主张:国家和政府是由人民创建的,为人民服务,公民必须控制政府而不是被政府控制。 此外,我们认为,人类生活的某些领域,例如言论表达、宗教信仰的实践和传授,以及公民根据自己的意愿离开我国和返回祖国的权利,是任何政府都无权限制的。”

今天我们真的可以说我们的公民“控制政府”吗? 本世纪我们曾两次选出比对手少数百万选票的总统。 最高法院取消了我们绝大多数公民支持的权利。 美国参议院的选票在人口众多的州比在公民较少的州要少得多。 公司和个人在宣传或诽谤候选人以及游说国会以获得优惠的税收和监管待遇方面花费的金额实际上是无限的。 事实上,最高法院已经裁定公司也是公民! 在我看来,这听起来更像是寡头政治而不是民主政治。

“我们是一个由来自世界各地的人民组成的国家,我们受到了世界各国文化的熏陶。 将我们团结在一起的是创建自由和繁荣社会的理想。 在我们的历史中,我们面临着许多挑战,但我们能够通过公开讨论、协调相互竞争的利益,并最终通过维护我们公民选择领导人和决定影响他们生活的政策的绝对权利来克服这些挑战 ”。

我们什么时候在美国国会的工作中看到过公开讨论和协调相互竞争的利益了? 今年连续几天没有众议院议长,这在美国历史上还是第一次?

“我们的社会并不完美,我们深知有时我们无法实现我们的理想。 因为我们理解歌德雄辩地表达的真理:“Es irrt der Mensch, so long er strebt”(只要努力,人就会犯错。)因此,当我们坚守我们的理想作为目标和行动指南时, 我们深信,没有任何个人和团体能够垄断智慧,只有所有人都有权自由表达意见、提出建议和组织团体宣传自己的观点,我们的社会才能成功。”

除非你是一名公开捍卫巴勒斯坦人在其祖传土地上自由生活的基本权利的国会议员,或者是哥伦比亚大学的学生也希望这样做。

“当我们美国人庆祝我们国家的生日并重新致力于其理想时,我们并没有假设我们的政治和经济制度——无论它为我们服务得有多好——是可以强加于他人的。 事实上,正如我们在国内保护多样性一样,我们也希望在全世界范围内保护多样性。 正如每个人都是独一无二的,每种文化和每个社会也是独一无二的,所有人都应该有权以自己的方式控制自己的命运,而不受外界的强迫。 这是我们外交政策的主要目标之一:努力建设一个人类多样性不仅得到容忍而且受到保护的世界,一个以谈判和和解取代武力作为解决争端手段的世界。”

除非你住在阿富汗、伊拉克、叙利亚、巴勒斯坦……或者伊朗、古巴或委内瑞拉。

“我们距离我们所追求的世界还有很长的路要走,但我们绝不能绝望,因为我们相信世界各地的人们基本上都渴望与美国人一样的东西:和平、自由、安全以及影响自己生活的机会 。 虽然我们无意将自己的政治制度强加于人,但我们不能掩饰对其他国家勇敢的人民的深深敬佩。

他们只寻求美国人视为与生俱来的权利。”

除非他们住在加沙或巴勒斯坦西岸。

“虽然这是举国欢腾的一天,但我们心中没有什么问题比维护世界和平的问题更重要。 我们庆幸的是,我们与世界和平相处,没有一个美国士兵在世界任何地方参与战斗。 尽管如此,我们仍然对高水平的军备以及一些国家使用军备而不是和平解决争端的倾向感到关切。 我们与所有有思想的人一样,对核武器的破坏潜力感到担忧。”

当时苏联入侵阿富汗,美国要求其撤军。 随后,他们确实根据美国谈判达成的协议撤军。 但9/11之后,美国入侵并停留了20年,未能建立民主社会。 随后以虚假理由入侵伊拉克,推翻了伊拉克政府并助长了伊斯兰国的发展。 然后,美国在没有宣战的情况下入侵了叙利亚,并试图推翻其政府(我们承认这一点),并打击因美国入侵伊拉克而创建的伊斯兰国,但没有成功。

美国士兵目前驻扎在80多个国家。 我们在军火上的支出比所有其他可自由支配支出的预算都多,而现在拜登政府正在对俄罗斯这个同等核大国发动几乎正式的战争。

“正是出于这个原因,里根总统提议大幅削减核武器。 ......我们还提出了许多其他建议,我们认为这些建议将增强相互信任并减少冲突的危险。 所有这些都旨在双方可验证的平等和平衡。 这样一来,彼此面对的联盟体系就不用担心对方的攻击了。 ……”

是的,到 1991 年,我们在欧洲谈判了大规模削减核武器、禁止生物和化学武器以及限制常规武器。 冷战以协议结束,而不是一方战胜另一方。 但从布什第二届政府开始,美国单方面退出了每一项重要的军控条约,并开始耗资数万亿美元对美国核武库进行“现代化”。 与此同时,尽管1990年后华沙条约组织没有成立,但美国扩大了北约,并拒绝就确保俄罗斯安全的协议进行谈判。

“世界各国人民面临的建立和维护和平的任务不是一件容易的事,问题是复杂的,不能通过简单的口号来解决,而只能通过持续的努力来解决。”

然而,从 20 世纪 90 年代末开始,美国似乎受到了一种错误而简单化的信条的推动,即世界注定会变得像美国一样,而美国有理由利用其经济和军事力量来改造世界其他地区,以符合其形象。 它本身(新保守主义论文)。 实际上,它是对苏联所奉行的失败的“勃列日涅夫主义”的改编,直到被戈尔巴乔夫放弃。 与勃列日涅夫主义一样,这一尝试是彻底的惨败,但拜登政府似乎无视美国人民面临的危险,决心追求这一目标。

“尽管如此,我今天还是乐观地向你们讲话,因为我知道我国在进入独立第 207 周年之际,决心不仅要维护我们在国内拥有的自由,而且要投入我们的精力和资源来维护世界和平。 世界。”

但是,今天,在美国独立 248 周年之际:

美国将向加沙发射 100 枚“超级炸弹”。 据《华尔街日报》12 月 1 日报道,BLU-109“地堡破坏者”每架重 2,000 磅,可穿透人们躲藏的地下室混凝土避难所。

该报称,自10月7日以来,美国已向以色列运送了15,000枚炸弹和57,000枚炮弹。

此前尚未报道过所发送武器的尺寸和数量的详细信息。

《华尔街日报》称,名单上还包括超过 5,000 枚 Mk82 非制导或“哑”炸弹、超过 5,400 枚 Mk84 2,000 磅弹头炸弹、约 1,000 枚 GBU-39 小直径炸弹和约 3,000 枚 JDAM。

这一消息与外交大臣安东尼·布林肯关于避免平民伤亡是美国首要关切的声明相矛盾。

《华尔街日报》称,美国还提供了投在贾巴利亚难民营的炸弹,造成 100 人死亡,其中可能包括一名哈马斯领导人。

世界各国通过联合国一再呼吁停火,但没有得到美国及其追随国家的支持。

军费开支在美国可自由支配开支中占据主导地位,军人占政府人力的大部分。

这些武器正通过 C-17 军用运输机直接从美国空运到特拉维夫。

哦主啊,我们这是怎么了?

小阿克·F·马特洛克

小杰克·F·马特洛克 (Jack F. Matlock, Jr.) 是一位职业外交官,曾于 1987 年至 1991 年间担任美国驻苏联大使。 在此之前,他曾担任里根总统国家安全委员会工作人员欧洲和苏联事务高级主任,并于 1981 年至 1983 年担任美国驻捷克斯洛伐克大使。 他是高级研究所的凯南教授,撰写了大量关于结束冷战的谈判、苏联解体以及冷战结束后美国外交政策的文章和三本书。

作者对负责任的治国之道表达的观点并不一定反映昆西研究所或其联营机构的观点。

What has happened to America?

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/jack-matlock-speech-america/

Amb. Jack Matlock on Israel, Ukraine, and why he couldn't repeat the most inspired passages of his July, 4, 1982 speech.

By JACK F. MATLOCK JR.  DEC 06, 2023

Rummaging through my accumulated papers, I just came across the English translation of a speech I delivered in Czechoslovakia on July 4, 1982, when I was American ambassador in Prague. At that time Czechoslovakia was ruled by a Communist regime imposed by the Soviet Union.

As I perused it, I realized to my dismay that today I could not honestly make many of the statements in this message.

Here are some of the key paragraphs and my reflections on them today:

“I am pleased to send greetings to the people of Czechoslovakia on this 206th anniversary of my country’s independence. It is a day when we Americans celebrate the foundation of our nation as an independent, democratic republic, and a day on which we dedicate ourselves anew to implementing the ideals of our founding fathers. For us, the bedrock of these ideals is the proposition that states and governments are created by the people to serve the people and that citizens must control the government rather than being controlled by it. Furthermore, we believe that there are areas of human life such as expression of opinion, the practice and teaching of religious beliefs, and the right of citizens to leave our country and return as they wish, which no government has the right to restrict.”

Can we really say that our citizens “control the government” today? Twice in this century we have installed presidents who received millions of fewer votes than their opponents. The Supreme Court has nullified rights supported by a decisive majority of our citizens. Votes for the U.S. Senate count far less in a populous state than in a state with fewer citizens. Corporations and individuals are virtually unlimited in the amount they can spend to promote or vilify candidates and to lobby Congress for favorable tax and regulatory treatment. The Supreme Court has, in effect, ruled that corporations are citizens too! That sounds to me more like an oligarchy than a democracy.

“We are a nation formed of people from all corners of the world, and we have been nurtured by all the world’s cultures. What unites us is the ideal of creating a free and prosperous society. Through our history we have faced many challenges but we have been able to surmount them through a process of open discussion, accommodation of competing interests, and ultimately by preserving the absolute right of our citizens to select their leaders and determine the policies which affect their lives.”

Since when have we seen an open discussion and accommodation of competing interests in the work of the U.S. Congress? How is it that, for the first time in U.S. history, we had no Speaker of the House of Representatives for days this year?

“Our society is not a perfect one and we know very well that we have sometimes failed to live up to our ideals. For we understand the truth which Goethe expressed so eloquently when he wrote, “Es irrt der Mensch, so long er strebt”(Man errs as long as he strives.) Therefore, while we hold fast to our ideals as goals and guides of action, we are convinced that no individual and no group possesses a monopoly of wisdom and that our society can be successful only if all have the right freely to express opinions, make suggestions and organize groups to promote their views.”

Unless you are a Member of Congress who speaks out in defense of the fundamental rights of Palestinians to live in freedom in their ancestral lands, or students at Columbia University who wish to do the same.

“As we Americans celebrate our nation’s birthday and rededicate ourselves to its ideals, we do so without the presumption that our political and economic system– however well it has served us–is something to be imposed upon others. Indeed, just as we preserve diversity at home, we wish to preserve it in the world at large. Just as every human being is unique, so is every culture and every society, and all should have the right to control their destinies, in their own ways and without compulsion from the outside. This is one of the principal goals of our foreign policy: to work for a world in which human diversity is not only tolerated but protected, a world in which negotiation and accommodation replace force as the means of settling disputes.”

Unless you live in Afghanistan, or Iraq, or Syria, or Palestine…or, for that matter, in Iran, Cuba, or Venezuela.

“We are still a long way from that world we seek, but we must not despair, for we believe that people throughout the world yearn basically for the same things Americans do: peace, freedom, security, and the opportunity to influence their own lives. And while we do not seek to impose our political system on others, we cannot conceal our profound admiration for those brave people in other countries who are seeking only what Americans take as their birthright.”

Unless they live in Gaza or the Palestinian West Bank.

“While this is a day of national rejoicing, there is no issue on our minds more important than the question of preserving world peace. We are thankful that we are living at peace with the world and that not a single American soldier is engaged in fighting anywhere in the world. Still, we are concerned with the high levels of armaments and the tendency of some countries to use them instead of settling disputes peacefully. We share the concern of all thinking people with the destructive potential of nuclear weapons in particular.”

At that time the Soviet Union had invaded Afghanistan and the U.S. was demanding their withdrawal. Subsequently they did withdraw in accord with an agreement the U.S. negotiated. But then, after 9/11, the U.S. invaded and stayed for 20 years without being able to create a democratic society. A subsequent invasion of Iraq, on spurious grounds, removed the Iraqi government and gave impetus to ISIS. Then, the U.S., without a declaration of war, invaded Syria and tried unsuccessfully to overthrow its government (which we recognized) and also to combat ISIS, which had been created as a result of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

American soldiers are now stationed in more than 80 countries. We spend more on arms than all other budgets for discretionary spending, and now the Biden administration is making all but formal war against Russia, a peer nuclear power.

“It is for this reason that President Reagan has proposed large reductions of nuclear weapons. … We have also made numerous other proposals which we believe would increase mutual confidence and reduce the danger of conflict. All aim for verifiable equality and balance on both sides. That way, the alliance systems facing each other would need not fear an attack from the other. …”

Yes, and by 1991 we negotiated massive reductions in nuclear weapons, banned biological and chemical weapons and limited conventional weapons in Europe. The Cold War ended by agreement, not the victory of one side over the other. But, beginning with the second Bush administration, the U.S. unilaterally withdrew from every important arms control treaty and embarked on a trillion dollar “modernization” of the American nuclear arsenal. Meanwhile, although there was no Warsaw Pact after 1990, the U.S. expanded NATO and refused to negotiate an agreement that insured Russia’s security.

“The task ahead for all the peoples of the world to establish and preserve peace is not an easy one, The issues are complex and they cannot be solved by simplistic slogans, but only by sustained effort.”

Nevertheless, from the late 1990s the U.S. seemed motivated by a false and simplistic doctrine that the world was destined to become like the U.S. and the U.S. was justified in using its economic and military power to transform the rest of the world to conform with its image of itself (the Neocon thesis). It was, in effect, an adaptation of the failed “Brezhnev doctrine” pursued by the USSR until abandoned by Gorbachev. As with the Brezhnev doctrine, the attempt has been an utter fiasco, but the Biden administration seems, oblivious to the dangers to the American people, determined to pursue it.

“Nevertheless, I speak to you today with optimism, since I know that my country enters the 207th year of its independence with the determination not only to preserve the liberties we have one at home but to devote our energies and resources to maintaining peace in the world.”

But, today, during the 248th year of American independence :

The U.S. is sending 100 “super-bombs” for dropping on Gaza. The BLU-109 “bunker busters”, each weighing 2,000 pounds, penetrate basement concrete shelters where people are hiding, the Wall Street Journal reported Dec. 1.

America has sent 15,000 bombs and 57,000 artillery shells to Israel since October 7, the paper said.

Details of the size and number of weapons sent have not been previously reported.

Also on the list are more than 5,000 Mk82 unguided or “dumb” bombs, more than 5,400 Mk84 2,000-pound warhead bombs, around 1,000 GBU-39 small diameter bombs, and approximately 3,000 JDAMs, the Journal said.

The news dramatically contradicts statements of Foreign Secretary Antony Blinken that avoiding civilian casualties is a prime concern for the United States.

The U.S. also provided the bomb that was dropped on the Jabalia refugee camp, killing 100 people, possibly including a Hamas leader, the Journal said.

Repeated calls by the countries of the world, through the United Nations, for a ceasefire have not been supported by the U.S. and its follower nations.

Military spending makes up a dominant share of discretionary spending in the U.S., and military personnel make up the majority of government manpower.

The weapons are being airlifted on C-17 military cargo planes directly from the U.S. to Tel Aviv.

Oh lord, what has happened to us?

Jack F. Matlock Jr.

Jack F. Matlock, Jr. is a career diplomat who served as U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987-1991. Prior to that he was Senior Director for European and Soviet Affairs on President Reagan’s National Security Council staff and was U.S. Ambassador to Czechoslovakia from 1981-1983. He was Kennan Professor at the Institute for Advanced Study and has written numerous articles and three books about the negotiations that ended the Cold War, the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and U.S. foreign policy following the end of the Cold War.
The views expressed by authors on Responsible Statecraft do not necessarily reflect those of the Quincy Institute or its associates.
[ 打印 ]
阅读 ()评论 (0)
评论
目前还没有任何评论
登录后才可评论.