 |
| 图：2013年2月12日朝鲜进行了核试验后，韩国抗议者在集会上焚烧朝鲜金正恩的肖像。 |
德克萨斯奥斯汀。
自2月份以来，朝鲜政府接二连三地做出威胁举动。这一盘旋上升的危险状态始于一次地下核试验。后来，该国宣布朝鲜战争的停战协定无效。接着，年轻的独裁者金正恩(Kim Jong-un)又发出一系列威胁，声称要攻击位于韩国、日本和美国的平民目标。
本周早些时候，朝鲜关闭了开城工业园(Kaesong Industrial Complex)，这是朝鲜和韩国民众唯一共同工作的场所。现在，朝鲜公开发出威胁（并公开作出准备），称要从移动平台发射一枚舞水端导弹，其射程可覆盖许多金正恩曾在公开声明中威胁打击的地方。美国情报机构认为，朝鲜正在准备射程更远的发射系统，来搭载其武器库中的核弹头。
现在，朝鲜半岛危机已对美国核心国家利益构成战略威胁。最好的办法是，在朝鲜导弹发射之前，在地面上将其毁掉。美国应该发动精准的空袭，让朝鲜的导弹和移动发射装置陷入瘫痪。
奥巴马总统应清晰直率地表态：这属于一种自卫行为，是在获得了有关朝鲜处于战备状态下的武器的有力证据之后，对该国的明确威胁作出的回应。他应在采取行动前提前告知韩国、日本、中国和台湾的领导人。而且奥巴马也应该做出解释，这只是针对一个军事目标的有限防御性袭击——该军事行动不会对平民构成任何威胁——而且美国也不想引发政权变更。此举目的是为了消除当下的一个明显危险。仅此而已。
如果任由朝鲜继续其威胁性行为，它将危及该地区脆弱的经济现状，同时也会促使韩国和日本发展自己的核武器——两国的鹰派人物已在倡导这一政策。而最重要的是，朝鲜的威胁将促使世界上其他被孤立国家效仿其做法。伊朗人肯定在密切关注着事态发展。如果朝鲜能够用其小型核武器来敲诈整个地区，并不受惩罚，德黑兰的毛拉（伊斯兰教国家对大师、学者、神学家的尊称——编注）们为什么不能采取同样的行动？
美国及其东亚盟友有权进行自我防御，而且，防止如此级别的威胁在未来发生关乎它们的深层利益。
由于有精准的侦查卫星，对朝鲜导弹进行地面打击会比发射后对其再行打击容易许多。毕竟在发射前，美国不可能知道一枚导弹的运行轨迹，而金正恩也曾表示，他的目标是美国及其盟友，这让我们有理由相信，平民面临着严重危险。
由于地面上的导弹是个明显目标，并基本上没有设防，因此我们有理由确信，袭击可以摧毁这一目标，从而维持地区稳定和盟国的安全。美国的先发制人袭击也将重新为朝鲜和处于相似处境的其他国家划定必要的警戒线。
正如中国的习近平主席本月早些时候所说：“不能为一己之私把一个地区乃至世界搞乱。”如果消除掉近期的导弹威胁，美国将能够减少来自朝鲜的武力威胁。同时，美国也能向该地区的各个国家以及世界其他地方关注此事的国家重申：尽管它并没有在寻求政权变更，但没有人可以用发射导弹的威胁来要挟美国及其盟友。
朝鲜政府肯定会把美国的袭击看做挑衅，但金正恩不可能会像很多人担心的那样，通过攻击韩国来实施报复。首先，中国政府会竭尽全力阻止朝鲜这么做。即使他们反对美国发动攻击，但中国领导人明白，全面战争将糟糕得多。其次，美国的袭击将向金正恩展示其保卫韩国的持续决心。对首尔的任何攻击对金正恩来说都无异于自杀行为，而他清楚这一点。
美国发动袭击后，朝鲜半岛爆发战争的可能性不大，但战争也并非不可想象。朝鲜的挑衅可能将继续升级，而金正恩也许会觉得有必要发动战争以挽回颜面。如果这些不幸的情况发生，对美国及其盟友来说，现在和朝鲜开战将更为有利，因为冲突将在很大程度上局限于朝鲜半岛。正如朝鲜过去两个月的行为所展示的那样，金正恩政府愿意快速升级威胁，速度远超其父执掌下的政权。危机得不到解决，只会将战争延期，到时朝鲜造成的危害会更大。
如果朝鲜半岛爆发战争，中国在其中扮演的角色将难以预测。北京将继续担忧，美国会把势力范围延伸到中国边界。如果武力冲突爆发，奥巴马总统应做好和中国领导人开展直接、密切对话的准备，双方应在更大的多边框架下，协商拟订一份战后协议，该协议应尊重北京在朝鲜的合理安全利益。美国不想占领朝鲜，中国也不可能会这么做。
在朝鲜导弹发射之前将其摧毁，是应对朝鲜半岛危机的坏选择中的最佳选项。延长的危机将损害地区安全以及全球阻止核扩散的努力。如果未来发生战争，情况将会糟糕得多。最谨慎的举动是，通过自我防卫来消除最紧迫的军事威胁，为未来的好战行径设定明确合理的界限，并为地区稳定——而不是强迫的政权变更——维系统一阵线。这种先发制人的行动将使很多人免于死亡，甚至还可能维护朝鲜半岛不安定的和平状态。
杰里米・苏里(Jeremi Suri)是德州大学奥斯汀分校(University of Texas, Austin)的历史和公共事务学教授，并著有《自由最可靠的卫士：从开国先贤到奥巴马的美国国家建设》(Liberty’s Surest Guardian: American Nation-Building From the Founders to Obama)一书。
翻译：谷菁璐
——纽约时报
Bomb North Korea, Before It’s Too Late
By JEREMI SURI April 17, 2013
AUSTIN, Tex.
SINCE February, the North Korean government has followed one threatening move with another. The spiral began with an underground nuclear test. Then the North declared the armistice that ended the Korean War invalid. The young dictator Kim Jong-un followed with a flurry of threats to attack civilian targets in South Korea, Japan and the United States.
Earlier this week, North Korea closed the Kaesong Industrial Complex, the only facility where citizens from North and South Korea work together. And now the North is openly threatening (and visibly preparing) to fire a mobile-launcher-based Musudan missile with a range that could reach many of the places Mr. Kim has menaced in his public statements. American intelligence agencies believe that North Korea is working to prepare even longer-range delivery systems to carry the nuclear warheads already in its arsenal.
The Korean crisis has now become a strategic threat to America’s core national interests. The best option is to destroy the North Korean missile on the ground before it is launched. The United States should use a precise airstrike to render the missile and its mobile launcher inoperable.
President Obama should state clearly and forthrightly that this is an act of self-defense in response to explicit threats from North Korea and clear evidence of a prepared weapon. He should give the leaders of South Korea, Japan, China and Taiwan advance notice before acting. And he should explain that this is a limited defensive strike on a military target — an operation that poses no threat to civilians — and that America does not intend to bring about regime change. The purpose is to neutralize a clear and present danger. That is all.
If North Korea is left to continue its threatening behavior, it will jeopardize the fragile economies of the region and it will encourage South Korea and Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons — a policy already advocated by hawks in both countries. Most of all, North Korean threats will encourage isolated states across the world to follow suit. The Iranians are certainly watching. If North Korea can use its small nuclear arsenal to blackmail the region with impunity, why shouldn’t the mullahs in Tehran try to do the same?
The United States and its allies in East Asia have a legitimate right to self-defense and they have a deep interest in deterring future threats on this scale.
Thanks to precise satellite reconnaissance, striking the North Korean missile on the ground would be much easier than after it was launched. Since the United States cannot possibly know the missile’s trajectory before a launch, and Mr. Kim has said he is targeting America and its allies, we have reason to believe that civilians face serious danger.
Since a missile on the ground is an obvious and largely undefended target, we can be reasonably sure that a strike would destroy it and preserve regional stability and the safety of our allies. An American pre-emptive strike would also re-establish necessary red lines for North Korea and other countries in similar circumstances.
As President Xi Jinping of China stated earlier this month, “No one should be allowed to throw a region and even the whole world into chaos for selfish gains.” By eliminating the most recent North Korean missile threat, the United States will reduce the threat posed by the North’s arsenal. The United States would also reassure everyone in the region, and those watching from other parts of the world, that although it is not seeking regime change, America and its allies will not be blackmailed by threatened missile launches.
The North Korean government would certainly view the American strike as a provocation, but it is unlikely that Mr. Kim would retaliate by attacking South Korea, as many fear. First, the Chinese government would do everything it could to prevent such a reaction. Even if they oppose an American strike, China’s leaders understand that a full-scale war would be far worse. Second, Mr. Kim would see in the American strike a renewed commitment to the defense of South Korea. Any attack on Seoul would be an act of suicide for him, and he knows that.
A war on the Korean Peninsula is unlikely after an American strike, but it is not inconceivable. The North Koreans might continue to escalate, and Mr. Kim might feel obligated to start a war to save face. Under these unfortunate circumstances, the United States and its allies would still be better off fighting a war with North Korea today, when the conflict could still be confined largely to the Korean Peninsula. As North Korea’s actions over the last two months have shown, Mr. Kim’s government is willing to escalate its threats much more rapidly than his father’s regime did. An unending crisis would merely postpone war to a later date, when the damage caused by North Korea would be even greater.
China’s role in a potential war on the Korean Peninsula is hard to predict. Beijing will continue to worry about the United States extending its influence up to the Chinese border. If armed hostilities erupt, President Obama should be prepared for direct and close consultations with Chinese leaders to negotiate a postwar settlement, in a larger multinational framework, that respects Beijing’s legitimate security interests in North Korea. The United States has no interest in occupying North Korea. The Chinese are unlikely to pursue an occupation of their own.
Destroying the North Korean missile before it is launched is the best of bad options on the Korean Peninsula. A prolonged crisis would undermine regional security and global efforts to stop nuclear proliferation. And a future war would be much worse. The most prudent move is to eliminate the most imminent military threat in self-defense, establish clear and reasonable limits on future belligerence, and maintain allied unity for stability — not forced regime change — in the region. This is the kind of pre-emptive action that would save lives and maybe even preserve the uneasy peace on the Korean Peninsula.
Jeremi Suri, a professor of history and public affairs at the University of Texas, Austin, is the author of “Liberty’s Surest Guardian: American Nation-Building From the Founders to Obama.”
没有评论:
发表评论