關注社會:敘利亞的真正考驗
The proposition tested by the Arab uprisings was never really whether democracy's moment had come in the Middle East. It was whether Arab dictators could continue to oppress, torture and kill their citizens to keep power.
阿拉伯世界起義所考驗的命題，從來不是民主的時機是否已經來到中東，而是阿拉伯的獨裁者能否繼續爲了掌權而壓迫、折磨和殺戮本國公民。These used to be the standard tactics for the region's despots. But the case can be made that Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia, Muammer Gaddafi of Libya, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and now, perhaps, Bashar al-Assad in Syria all sealed their fate when they turned their forces against their own citizens.
壓迫、折磨和殺戮曾是該地區專制者的標準策略。但是，當突尼斯的扎因•阿比丁•本•阿里(Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali)、利比亞的穆阿邁爾•卡扎菲(Muammer Gaddafi)、埃及的胡斯尼•穆巴拉克(Hosni Mubarak)以及現在可能還有敘利亞的巴沙爾•阿薩德(Bashar al-Assad)讓軍隊把槍口對準國內人民時，他們全部決定了自己的命運。Of course, progress has hardly been uniform and may be reversible. But the upheavals have at least created the opportunity to advance a new regional principle: that a leader who threatens his own people risks losing the legitimacy to govern.
當然，進展並非一刀齊，甚至還可能發生逆轉。但這些劇變至少爲倡導一項新的區域原則創造了機會：領導者如果威脅本國人民，就有可能失去統治的合法性。
Nowhere in the region has this proposition been more tested than in Syria. For as long as Mr Assad's regime held on to power – using the same techniques his father employed – the lesson was that tyranny pays. Now that his hold appears finally to be slipping, the authority of that lesson is dealt a serious blow.
敘利亞對該命題的考驗程度超出了該地區其它國家，因爲只要阿薩德政權繼續掌權（採取其父當年使用的方法），結論就是實施暴政有好處。隨着他對局勢的掌控似乎終於開始減弱，這一結論的權威性受到沉重打擊。It may, however, not be a decisive one. If Syria disintegrates into sectarian war; if Sunnis take revenge on Alawites; if all that changes is the identity of the oppressor, not the nature of the oppression; the savage tools of the past will retain their appeal. Dictators and extremists may conclude that the only mistake Mr Mubarak or Mr Assad made was not to be brutal enough. While the moral and strategic case for Mr Assad's departure is compelling, it remains to be seen whether this would bring more or less security in the near term. The belief is that the regime's fall would be a serious setback for Iran and Hezbollah and a net gain for more moderate (or pragmatic) forces. But when it comes to realpolitik, this conclusion may be temporary.
不過，這種打擊可能還不夠決定性。如果敘利亞分裂，陷入教派戰爭；如果遜尼派(Sunnis)報復阿拉維派教徒(Alawites)；如果一切的變化只是換了壓迫者，而非壓迫的本質，那麼昔日的殘暴工具將保留其吸引力。獨裁者和極端分子可能得出結論：穆巴拉克或阿薩德犯下的唯一錯誤是不夠殘暴。儘管要求阿薩德下臺的道德和戰略理由是有說服力的，但這在近期內能夠增強還是削弱安全仍是未知數。人們的信念是，阿薩德政權倒臺將使伊朗和真主黨(Hezbollah)受到重挫，而對更加溫和（或者說務實）的勢力則在總體上是有利的。但放在現實政治中，這一結論可能只是暫時的。Sectarian warfare and chaos bring their own problems. The spectre of Mr Assad's non-conventional arsenal falling into extremist hands is a frightening one. Syria's fracture could produce the kind of volatility across Syria's borders that Israel has experienced across the Lebanese one. Iran could prove more adept at exerting its influence, and protecting its links with Hezbollah, in a Syria torn by sectarian strife, than many are yet willing to concede. And who can know what threat the forces that emerge in Damascus may pose to regional stability?
教派戰爭和混亂本身會產生問題。阿薩德的非常規武器庫落入極端分子之手的可怕前景令人不寒而慄。敘利亞分裂可能引發動盪，產生超出該國邊界的衝擊波，就像以色列感受到黎巴嫩境內的動盪一樣。在一個被教派衝突撕裂的敘利亞，伊朗在施加影響並保護其與真主黨的聯繫方面，可能比很多人所願意承認的更加拿手。再說，誰能知道在大馬士革脫穎而出的力量，將對地區穩定構成什麼樣的威脅？For all the importance of removing the brutal Assad regime, the risks associated with its demise are significant and must be mitigated. His removal, for example, should probably not include the wholesale dismissal of state officials or the dismantling of state institutions, allowing for the kind of chaos the de-Ba'athification of Iraq produced. Similarly, decisively weakening Iran will be important to limit its reach into a post-Assad Syria. Also crucial are efforts to build an inclusive constitutional and governing structure that might hold Syria together and prevent retaliation against Alawite communities or cross-border provocations.
儘管推翻殘暴的阿薩德政權很重要，但其政權滅亡所伴隨的風險也是顯著的，必須得到減緩。例如，阿薩德倒臺不應包括解僱所有政府官員或者廢除國家機關，引發類似伊拉克去復興黨化(de-Ba'athification)那樣的混亂。同樣，果斷地削弱伊朗，對於限制其把觸角伸向後阿薩德時代的敘利亞將是重要的。同樣關鍵的是，努力構建一套包容的機構和治理架構，維護敘利亞統一，防止針對阿拉維派社區的報復或者跨境挑釁。These measures and others are vital to ensure a smoother transition to a post-Assad Syria, but they are also important for the region. Proving the oppression of one's fellow citizens to be a bad idea would be a critical development by Middle Eastern standards. Good governance begins with a commitment to the inalienable rights and basic humanity of the governed. If the example of Mr Assad's fall, and of the Arab uprisings, can help strengthen this commitment among ruling elites, even out of self-interest, it will be a real advance. If those who oust a dictator know that only by good governance and respect for their citizens can they retain power and earn international legitimacy, the Middle East will be moving in a better direction. It may not yet be democracy, but it is an indispensable milestone on the path to it.
這些措施以及其他一些措施，對於保證敘利亞更加平穩地向後阿薩德時代過渡是至關重要的，它們對整個地區也很重要。證明壓迫國內人民是個餿主意，按中東標準將是一個關鍵進展。良好的治理始於對被統治者不可剝奪的權利和基本人道的承諾。如果阿薩德倒臺乃至阿拉伯起義的例子能夠加強統治精英的這一承諾（即便是出於私利），那就是一項重大進步。如果那些把獨裁者趕下臺的人明白，只有治理良好、尊重人民才能保住權力、在國際上獲得合法性，那麼中東將走上更加美好的道路。這或許還算不上民主，但這是走向民主道路上一塊不可或缺的里程碑。All revolutions against dictatorial regimes are, at some level, about the transfer of fear. Populations afraid of regimes shift to regimes afraid of populations. The true test of progress, however, is whether the revolution undermines the use of fear as a tool of governance. This is the real test in Syria. It does not end with the removal of the Assad regime – it begins there. The hope for a patient transition to greater democracy in the Middle East may well hinge on passing it.
一切反對獨裁政權的革命，其關鍵在某種程度上都是“恐懼的轉移”：由人民害怕政權轉移到政權害怕人民。不過，對進步的真正考驗是，革命能否遏制把恐懼用作一種治理工具的做法。這是敘利亞面臨的真實考驗。這種考驗不會隨着推翻阿薩德政權而結束，而是會隨着這件事的發生而開始。耐心等待中東地區實現更大民主的希望，很可能取決於經受住這場考驗。
