如何結束敘利亞內戰 We must compromise with evil in Syria
A while back, I had a discussion with a prominent member of the Syrian opposition. Perhaps, I suggested tentatively, the rise of Islamist extremism in Syria meant that the Assad regime now represented the lesser evil. The reply I received was absolutely firm: “There is nothing worse than Assad. He is absolute evil.”
不久前，我與敘利亞反對派的一名重要成員進行了一番討論。我試探地說，伊斯蘭極端主義在敘利亞崛起，或許意味着，阿薩德政權如今是爲害相對較輕的那個惡魔了。對方非常堅定地回答說：“沒有什麼比阿薩德更壞。他是絕對的惡魔。”
It is easy to understand that point of view. Most of the more than 220,000 people estimated to have died in the Syrian war have been killed by the Assad regime. The millions of refugees outside the country have, in large part, fled the regime. The Syrian government has shown no compunction in killing civilians and has used barrel bombs and chemical weapons, disappearances and torture. The Assad regime has also been noticeably more eager to attack the Syrian moderates than the jihadis.
他的這種態度很容易理解。估計已有超過22萬人死於敘利亞內戰，其中大多數是被阿薩德政權殺害的。逃亡國外的數百萬難民相當大程度上都是爲了逃離阿薩德政權。敘利亞政府在殺害平民時沒有一點良心不安，他們還使用過桶裝炸彈(barrel bomb)和化學武器，讓人莫名失蹤，施行酷刑。阿薩德政權也明顯比聖戰分子更迫切想要攻擊敘利亞溫和派。
For these reasons, I have always shrunk back from the idea that the Assad regime could be any part of the solution in Syria. But I have now changed my mind.
出於這些原因，我一直不敢設想這樣一種方案，即讓阿薩德政權成爲敘利亞問題解決方案的一部分。但現在我的想法變了。
There are many evil forces on the loose in Syria — including the Assad government, the jihadis of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis) and groups linked to al-Qaeda. But the biggest evil of the lot is the civil war that continues to leave death and destruction in its wake. The overriding goal must be to end the war and to persuade outside forces to back a peace settlement, rather than fuelling the conflict. A diplomatic solution clearly has to involve the regime and, almost certainly, President Bashar al-Assad .
敘利亞境內散佈着許多邪惡勢力——包括阿薩德政府、“伊拉克與黎凡特伊斯蘭國”(Isis)聖戰分子以及與基地組織(al-Qaeda)有關聯的各種組織。但其中最壞的惡魔是不斷帶來死亡和破壞的敘利亞內戰。壓倒其他一切目標的那個目標必須是結束內戰、並說服外部力量支持一個實現和平的方案，而非加劇衝突。任何外交解決方案顯然必須包括阿薩德政權，並幾乎必然地也要包括總統巴沙爾阿薩德(Bashar al-Assad)。
For many years, the west’s preferred outcome in Syria has been a victory by the moderate Syrian opposition. But the idea that the moderates can win a three-cornered military fight with the Assad regime and the jihadis and then hold on to power in Syria is a fantasy.
多年來，西方希望在敘利亞看到的結果是溫和的敘利亞反對派獲得勝利。但認爲溫和派能在與阿薩德政權及聖戰分子三者之間的軍事鬥爭中獲得勝利、進而在敘利亞牢牢掌權的想法是癡人說夢。
There are liberal and democratic forces in Syria. But they are not going to win on the battlefield. Their only chance of getting somewhere is if a political process can be started. That means establishing a ceasefire and working towards UN-sponsored elections.
敘利亞也有自由和民主的力量。但他們不會在戰場上獲勝。只有啓動政治進程纔是他們有所成就的唯一機會。這意味着實現停火，並向聯合國支持下的大選推進。
Some in the west will object that this means getting around the negotiating table with people who have committed horrible acts of evil. True enough. But we have done it before in the interests of peace. The conflict in Cambodia was ended by a UN-sponsored peace process in 1991 in which the Khmer Rouge — responsible for the Cambodian genocide — took part.
西方一些人肯定會反對這樣做，認爲這意味着與那些曾犯下可怕惡行的人一起坐到談判桌前。的確如此。但我們有過爲了實現和平而這樣做的先例。1991年聯合國支持下的和平進程結束了柬埔寨內戰，而應該對柬埔寨種族滅絕罪行負責的紅色高棉(Khmer Rouge)也參與了這一進程。
As with Syria today, the various sides in the Cambodian conflict had powerful external backers — including China, Russia, the US, Vietnam and Thailand. Ultimately, however, these foreign powers, for all their rivalries, were prepared to work together to end the war.
像今天的敘利亞一樣，柬埔寨內戰各方都有強大的外部支持者——包括中國、俄羅斯、美國、越南和泰國。然而，最終這些外國勢力都摒棄前嫌、願意爲結束這場戰爭而合作。
Ending the war in Syria will have to involve a similar willingness to make “immoral” compromises in the pursuit of a moral end. These compromises will have to be made by both external and internal forces. There can be no total victory for the Assad regime or the opposition, or for their external supporters in Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the US.
結束敘利亞內戰將不得不需要類似的決心——爲了追求道德的目標而做出“不道德”的妥協。敘利亞境內和境外的勢力都必須做出妥協。沒有任何一方可獲得完全的勝利，不論是阿薩德政權還是反對派，還是他們的外部支持者（伊朗、俄羅斯、沙特阿拉伯和美國）。
The strongest objection to a “peace process” is not that it is immoral, but that it is unrealistic. Isis’s total rejection of the international system and dreams of a worldwide caliphate makes the group an unlikely negotiating partner. For that reason, foreign powers — including the Russians, the US and the UK — currently seem more inclined to step up their military intervention in Syria than to scale it back.
“和平進程”的最大障礙不在於它不道德，而在於它不切實際。Isis完全拒絕國際體制，並幻想着要在全世界建立統一的哈里發國，因而不大可能願意坐下來談判。出於這個原因，其他大國——包括俄羅斯、美國和英國——目前似乎更傾向於加大、而非減少對敘利亞的軍事幹預。
Yet a temporary intensification of the war against Isis is not incompatible with an international effort to reach a peace settlement. If all parties, other than the jihadis, sign up to a peace process it would then be easier either to split, isolate or defeat Isis.
然而，暫時加強對Isis的軍事行動與國際社會促成和平解決方案的努力並不衝突。如果除了聖戰分子以外，其他所有各方都同意加入和平進程，那麼屆時我們分化、孤立或打敗Isis的難度會小一些。
Later this week, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, is likely to propose a common international front against Isis in a major speech at the UN. Given the parlous state of US-Russia relations, Mr Putin’s proposal is likely to be treated with great suspicion in the west. Yet, in some ways, the Russians and the US are already in a tacit alliance. The US Air Force has been bombing Isis for more than a year. And the Russians are not feigning their hostility to Islamist terror, which is clearly also a long-term threat to Russia itself.
俄羅斯總統弗拉基米爾渠京(Vladimir Putin)在聯合國大會上發表主旨演講時建議成立一條打擊Isis的國際統一陣線。考慮到美俄關係的脆弱狀態，普京的提議很可能會遭到西方國家的嚴重懷疑。然而，在某些方面，俄羅斯和美國早已是心照不宣的同盟。美國空軍對Isis進行轟炸已有一年多。而俄羅斯對伊斯蘭恐怖主義的敵視也不是裝出來的，後者顯然也是俄羅斯自身的長期威脅。
The sticking point remains the role of Mr Assad. The Americans and Saudis have long insisted that he has to go. The Russians and Iranians insist that he has to stay. The answer must surely be to concentrate on the process, not the man. The main outside forces should work for a ceasefire between the Syrian regime and the moderate rebels followed by an interim government and UN-sponsored elections, which would decide the fate of the current regime.
癥結仍在於阿薩德的角色。美國與沙特阿拉伯一直堅持阿薩德必須下臺。而俄羅斯與伊朗則堅持他必須留下。解決方案當然必須是專注於和平進程，而非阿薩德這個人。主要外部力量應該設法促使敘利亞政權與溫和的反對派達成停火協議，然後再成立臨時政府並舉行聯合國支持下的大選，最後由大選決定當前政權的命運。
Establishing such a process is obviously fiendishly difficult. But there are some promising signs. The Americans have stopped insisting on the immediate removal of Mr Assad. And despite their military build-up in Syria, the Russians must surely understand the long-term risks of “boots on the ground” in Syria. They too need a diplomatic option.
建立這樣一種進程顯然極其困難。但也有一些樂觀的跡象。美國已不再堅持阿薩德必須立即下臺。儘管俄羅斯軍隊已介入到敘利亞的軍事行動中，但在敘利亞駐兵的長期風險俄羅斯當然也心知肚明。他們也需要一個外交選項。
It would clearly be best if Mr Assad stepped aside early on, as part of a Syrian peace process. But diplomacy cannot be held hostage by the question of Mr Assad’s future. Too many people have already died in Syria to make the search for peace dependent on the fate of one man, however evil.
如果阿薩德能早點下臺——作爲敘利亞和平進程的一部分——那顯然是最好的。但外交方案不能被阿薩德未來的去留問題所綁架。敘利亞已經死了太多的人，不能繼續讓一個人的命運決定我們是否尋求和平解決方案了——無論這個人有多罪大惡極。
