從中東教派衝突到歐洲恐襲

There was no linear connection between the events in Riyadh and Manchester — no obvious pathway between US president Donald Trump’s speech to Arab leaders in the Saudi Arabian capital and the wicked act of terrorism at a pop concert in the north of England.

發生在利雅得和曼徹斯特的事情之間沒有線性聯繫——美國總統唐納德?特朗普(Donald Trump)在沙特首都對阿拉伯領袖們發表的演講，與發生在英格蘭北部一場流行音樂會上的邪惡恐怖襲擊之間，沒有明顯的因果關係。

For all that, we should feel uncomfortable with the coincidence. The perpetrators alone bear responsibility for murderous bombings such as that in Manchester. There is no room for “ifs” or “buts” or for spurious moral equivalence in such matters. It would also be a mistake to pretend that Islamist extremism is indifferent to the policies of western governments.

雖然如此，我們還是會對這種巧合感到不舒服。恐怖襲擊的實施者們應對發生在曼徹斯特等地的兇殘爆炸襲擊承擔全部責任。在這類事件中，沒有“如果”或者“但是”或者虛假道德類比的餘地。但假裝伊斯蘭極端主義對西方政府的政策漠不關心，也是錯誤的。

At its most basic, the latest in the long line of indiscriminate attacks in European cities was a reminder that we cannot build walls against the world beyond. The murderer in this instance carried a British passport, but the inspiration for such acts is found in the raging fires of sectarian conflict in the Middle East. You cannot build borders so high as to stop the corruption of young minds by warped ideologies or halt the digital transfer of lethal know-how.

從最基本層面看，發生在歐洲城市的一系列濫殺無辜的襲擊事件中的最新一起提醒我們，我們無法通過修牆隔斷外部世界。本案兇手持有英國護照，但攻擊動機源於中東派系衝突引發的怒火。無論我們在邊境建造多麼高的圍牆，都不能防止年輕人的頭腦被扭曲的意識形態所腐蝕，也無法阻止專業的殺人手法以數字途徑傳播。

Mr Trump made something of this point in his address to the assembled Arab autocrats in Riyadh. Not so long ago the US president was declaring that “Islam hates us” and signing directives to bar travellers from several Muslim-majority countries. His message now is that Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states should step up the fight against terrorism closer to home.

特朗普在利雅得對聚集在一起的阿拉伯獨裁統治者們發表演說時，或多或少道出了這一點。不久之前，這位美國總統宣稱“伊斯蘭教憎恨我們”，並簽署了禁止幾個穆斯林占人口大多數的國家的遊客入境美國的命令。如今，他的態度是，沙特等海灣國家應當加大對更接近本土的恐怖主義的打擊力度。

Then come the familiar hypocrisies — though doubtless the president’s advisers would prefer to present them as foreign policy realism. Mr Trump, remember, was speaking in Saudi Arabia, the exporter of the extreme, Wahhabi brand of Sunni Islam that offers a theological underpinning for many of the jihadis. Most of the murderers behind the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington in 2001 were Saudi citizens.

接着出現了熟悉的僞善——儘管這位總統的顧問們無疑更喜歡把它描繪爲外交政策現實。記住，特朗普是在沙特發表演講，沙特是伊斯蘭教遜尼派中極端的瓦哈比派(Wahhabi)的輸出者。而瓦哈比派是許多聖戰分子的意識形態支柱。2001年在紐約和華盛頓發生的9.11襲擊事件的行兇者中，大多數是沙特公民。

The president’s speech carried no mention of such connections. Nor of the repression and human rights abuses practised by his hosts. Mr Trump was there to sell US weapons systems — $110bn worth of them — and to attract Saudi investment into the US. It was all about “jobs, jobs, jobs”, he said. This administration, he promised, would never seek to meddle in the domestic affairs of its allies.

這位總統的演講沒有提到這種關聯。也沒有提到東道主實施的壓迫和人權踐踏。特朗普去那裏爲的是推銷美國武器——價值達1100億美元——並吸引沙特投資進入美國。這都是爲了“就業、就業、就業”，他說。他承諾，這個政府絕不尋求干涉盟友的內政。

Instead Mr Trump put the US at the head of the Sunni Arab coalition against Iran. Unable to unravel the international nuclear deal with Tehran, as he had promised, the president is set on uniting the Arab world — and Israel — against the Ayatollahs. The jihadis of Isis may be Sunni, but to Mr Trump’s mind responsibility for the sectarianism that disfigures so much of the region rests with Iran.

相反，特朗普把美國置於阿拉伯遜尼派對抗伊朗聯盟的最前面。由於無法像之前承諾的那樣撤銷與伊朗達成的國際核協議，這位總統決定把阿拉伯世界——以及以色列——聯合起來，共同對抗阿亞圖拉。伊拉克和黎凡特伊斯蘭國(ISIS)的聖戰分子也許是遜尼派，但在特朗普看來，造成中東大部分地區形象受損的宗派主義的責任，要由伊朗來揹負。

We have been here before. The US backed Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in his 1980s war against Iran. A close relationship between Washington and the Gulf monarchies was long the default position of US policy towards the region.

這種情況以前發生過。1980年代的兩伊戰爭中，美國支持伊拉克的薩達姆?侯賽因(Saddam Hussein)。與海灣君主國建立密切關係，曾是美國對中東政策的長期默認立場。

Barack Obama, Mr Trump’s predecessor, made the intelligent judgment that peace in the region — and eventual victory over the extremists — demanded some sort of accommodation between Saudi Arabia and Iran as the principal Sunni and Shia powers. In securing the nuclear deal with Iran, Mr Obama adopted a balanced approach calculated to draw Tehran back into the international community. Mr Trump prefers to pour fuel on to the sectarian flames.

特朗普的前任巴拉克?奧巴馬(Barack Obama)做出了明智的判斷：該地區的和平（以及最終對極端分子的勝利）需要作爲遜尼派和什葉派主要大國的沙特與伊朗之間達成某種和解。通過與伊朗達成核協議，奧巴馬採取了均衡的策略，旨在把伊朗拉回到國際社會。特朗普更願意給宗派主義火上澆油。

Iran cannot be excused its role in propping up Bashar al-Assad in Syria or deploying its proxies to destabilise Sunni regimes elsewhere. Few would describe it as a paragon of freedom and the rule of law — unless, perhaps, they were drawing comparisons with Saudi Arabia or Egypt. It has, however, been moving, crab-like, towards something like democracy. As Mr Trump was being feted in feudal style, Iranians voted to defy their own theocracy by backing the reformist Hassan Rouhani for a second term as president.

伊朗無法推卸其在支持敘利亞巴沙爾?阿薩德(Bashar al-Assad)政權或部署代理人破壞其他地區遜尼派政權穩定方面的責任。幾乎無人把它描述爲自由和法治的典範——或許除非把它與沙特或埃及作比較。然而，伊朗已在朝着某種類似民主的目標緩慢前進了。在特朗普受到封建風格的款待之際，伊朗人投票反抗本國的神權政治，支持改革派的總統哈桑?魯哈尼(Hassan Rouhani)連任。

The US and its western allies should have learnt long ago that they cannot “fix” the Middle East. George W Bush and Tony Blair believed they could transplant western democracy at the point of a cruise missile. The present violence in Iraq and Syria attest to their error. But nor did backing the Arab autocrats work. Repressive regimes provided the incubators for violent Islamism. We should not expect things to be different in future.

很久以前，美國及其西方盟友就應吸取教訓：它們無法“修正”中東。小布什(George W Bush)和託尼?布萊爾(Tony Blair)認爲，他們能夠用巡航導彈把西方民主移植過來。如今伊拉克和敘利亞的暴力活動證明了他們的錯誤。但支持阿拉伯獨裁者也無濟於事。高壓政權爲暴力伊斯蘭主義提供了溫牀。我們不應指望未來情況會出現變化。

The west, though, should at least direct itself to the avoidance of harm. Of two things we can be certain. However much high-tech military hardware they buy from the US, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states cannot defeat Iran; and for as long as Riyadh and Tehran fight a Sunni-Shia war, there is no prospect of a regional settlement that would deny safe spaces for jihadis.

不過，西方至少應當引導自己避免作出傷害。我們可以確信的有兩件事。無論沙特和海灣國家從美國購買多少高技術軍事裝備，它們都無法擊敗伊朗；只要沙特和伊朗繼續打遜尼派對抗什葉派的戰爭，那麼就不會有達成地區和解、讓聖戰分子喪失安全據點的可能性。

So back to Manchester. None of us can imagine what was in the mind of Salman Abedi as he set off the bomb that killed and maimed young children and their parents in their innocent enjoyment of an evening out. What we know is that the only way to respond to such outrages is to remain resolute at once in the fight against the perpetrators and in safeguarding the liberal democratic values they seek to destroy. Sadly, we can also be sure that taking sides in a sectarian power struggle will only defer the eventual defeat of extremists.

那麼再回到曼徹斯特事件。我們誰也無法想象出，當薩勒曼?阿貝迪(Salman Abedi)引爆炸彈、炸死炸傷那些在享受夜晚的無辜的孩子及其父母時，他心裏想的是什麼。我們知道的是，對付這種暴行的唯一途徑是繼續堅決打擊兇手，並捍衛他們想要摧毀的自由民主價值觀。遺憾的是，我們可能也必須明白，在一場不同派系之間的權力爭奪中偏袒一方，只會延遲極端分子的最終失敗。