【新刊速递】《华盛顿季刊》(WQ), Vol. 47, No. 2, 2024 | 国政学人

题目：The Next Chapter in US Nuclear Policy

作者：Brad Roberts，劳伦斯利弗莫尔国家实验室全球安全研究中心主任，曾任美国国防部核与导弹防御政策副助理部长。

摘要：三十年前，国际体系的重大变化推动了美国核政策和核态势的重大变革。冷战结束和苏联解体结束了军备竞赛，开创了一个注重降低武器作用和数量的时代。如今，国际体系再次经历剧变，这很可能对美国的核政策和态势产生重大影响。美国核政策的一个篇章即将结束，而另一个篇章即将开始，这将带来新的挑战和政策选择。遗憾的是，20世纪90年代有充分的理由庆祝，而今天却没有。现在摆在我们面前的政策选择并不受欢迎，许多人对此表示抵制。但是，如果不能适应新的环境，后果可能会很严重。

Three decades ago, major changes in the international system drove major changes in US nuclear policy and posture. The end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union brought an end to the arms race and ushered in an era focused on reducing the role and number of weapons. Today, the international system is again passing through a period of dramatic change, one likely to have a significant impact on US nuclear policy and posture. One chapter in US nuclear policy is now ending as another begins, bringing new challenges and policy choices. Alas, whereas there was good cause for celebration in the 1990s, today there is not. The policy choices now in front of us are unwelcome and resisted by many. But the consequences of failing to adapt to the new context would likely be severe.

题目：Eyes Wide Open: Strategic Elite Views of South Korea’s Nuclear Options

作者：Victor D. Cha，乔治城大学政府和国际事务特聘教授，小布什政府白宫国家安全委员会（NSC）亚洲事务主任，负责日本、朝鲜、韩国、澳大利亚和新西兰事务。

摘要：2023年1月11日，韩国总统尹锡悦做出了这样的评价：“当然，如果问题变得更加严重，大韩民国（ROK）可以在这里部署战术核武器，或者我们也可以获得自己的核武器。如果出现这种情况，利用我们的科学技术，未来在短时间内（研制）一枚自己的核武器也不会花太长时间。”这些话是韩国国家元首首次公开谈论核武器化问题，打破了美韩同盟长期以来禁止讨论这一安全选项的禁忌。近半个世纪前，韩国曾推行秘密核计划，但被美国禁止。这一次，尹锡悦的讲话正值人们纷纷猜测历史可能面临重演。

On January 11, 2023, President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea offered this assessment: “Of course, if problems become more serious, the Republic of Korea (ROK) could deploy tactical nuclear weapons here, or we could acquire our own nuke as well. If that happens, it would not take long to [develop] one for ourselves in a short period of time using our science and technology in the future.” These words were the first ever public remarks by a South Korean head of state on nuclear weaponization, breaking longstanding taboos in the US-ROK alliance against discussing this security option. Nearly half a century ago, South Korea pursued a covert nuclear program, which the United States shut down. This time, Yoon’s remarks came amid rampant speculation that history might repeat itself.

题目：On Targeted Killing and Warfare

作者：Kenneth M. Pollack，美国企业研究所高级研究员，研究领域为中东政治军事事务、美国中东安全与外交政策；Daniel L. Byman，乔治城大学政府系教授和安全研究项目主任，研究领域为恐怖主义、国际安全、种族冲突及中东问题。

摘要：不久的某一天，你很可能会听说，美国在也门某地暗杀了胡塞武装领导人，或杀死了伊朗抵抗轴心的另一位主要人物。当然，美国官员不会称其为暗杀。这个词有过深的含义。过去，美国政府的律师们曾不厌其烦地声明，美国对外国恐怖分子和敌方指挥官的杀戮不符合这一定义。当这种情况发生时，华盛顿会将其称为“定点清除”，这是一种委婉的说法，听起来不那么邪恶。但实际上并非如此。不同的政府都发现，定点清除是对付棘手对手的一种非常有用的方法。911事件后，对那些未知其地址，也没有他们可能关心的任何其他目标的恐怖分子采取了这一策略。威慑恐怖分子似乎是不可能的，但可以选择简单地消灭他们，防止他们继续杀人。信息时代的新技术使暗杀方法变得更加巧妙——使用地狱火导弹和飞行银弹弹头，从更远的距离在更广泛的情况下进行暗杀。这使得定点清除似乎成为解决反恐战争棘手挑战的灵丹妙药。

Someday soon, you are likely to hear that the United States has assassinated a Houthi leader somewhere in Yemen or killed another leading figure in Iran’s Axis of Resistance. US officials won’t call it an assassination, of course. That’s too loaded a term. In the past, US government lawyers have gone to great pains to declare that US killings of foreign terrorists and enemy commanders did not fit that definition. When it happens, Washington will instead term it a “targeted killing,” the preferred euphemism, which sounds like something less sinister. In practice, it isn’t. Different administrations have found that targeted killings were a wonderfully useful way of going after difficult adversaries. After 9/11, this tack was taken with terrorists who had no known permanent address, nor anything else they might care about that could be targeted. Deterring terrorists seemed impossible, but we could simply eliminate them to keep them from further killing. The new technology of the information age enabled ever more ingenious methods of assassination-with Hellfire missiles and flying Ginsu warheads, from longer distances, in a wider range of circumstances. It made targeted killing a seeming panacea for the vexing challenges of the War on Terror.

题目：India, Russia and the Ukraine Crisis

作者：Sumit Ganguly，印第安纳大学政治学教授，研究领域为南亚比较政治。

摘要：作为一个后殖民地国家，印度长期以来一直竭力维护其在本地区和世界上的主权及影响力。事实上，在1971年第三次印巴战争期间，印度是经过一番内部辩论后才决定对东巴基斯坦进行干预的，因为这需要侵犯邻国巴基斯坦的主权。毫不奇怪，印度对于全心全意地接受联合国的“保护责任”（R2P）理论也相当谨慎，因为这可能会破坏印度对国家主权原则的承诺。这种反对的背后是一种难以言表的恐惧：由于印度在保护人权方面的诸多失误，特别是在处理国内叛乱时，“保护责任”在某些时候可能会适用于印度自身。

As a post-colonial state, India has long zealously guarded is sovereignty, both in the region and in the world. Indeed, it was only after much internal debate that it decided to intervene in East Pakistan during the 1971 crisis, as this required violating the sovereignty of its neighbor, Pakistan. Not surprisingly, it has also been quite circumspect about wholeheartedly embracing the UN’s doctrine of the “responsibility to protect” (R2P) on the grounds that that it could undermine India’s devotion to the principle of state sovereignty. Underlying this opposition is an unspoken fear: that the R2P could at some point be applied to India itself, thanks to its many lapses in protecting human rights, especially when dealing with domestic insurgencies.

题目：US Protectionism and Competition with China

作者：Dong Jung Kim，高丽大学国际研究系副教授，研究兴趣包括大国政治、制衡战略、联盟政治和美国大战略。

摘要：冷战结束后，华盛顿倡导经济开放、减少政府干预和私有化，从而加速了超级全球化，而现在白宫和国会则大肆宣扬公平贸易而非自由贸易。美国经济总体取向中“美国优先”的共识已转化为具体措施，不仅包括特朗普政府恢复《购买美国货法案》，还包括拜登政府的对内投资政策——即《美国救援计划法案》、《基础设施投资与就业法案》、《芯片与科学法案》和《通胀削减法案》，以及对包括电动汽车、电池、太阳能电池和医疗产品在内的一系列中国进口产品征收关税。如果保护主义可以被广义地定义为实施帮助国内产业对抗外国竞争对手的政策，那么今天的美国已经明显转向了保护主义。

A profound change is underway in US foreign economic policy. Whereas after the Cold War, Washington advocated economic openness, minimal governmental intervention, and privatization-thereby accelerating hyper-globalization-the White House and Congress now trumpet fair trade over free trade. The consensus on “America First” in overall US economic orientation has translated into tangible measures, not only the reinstatement of the Buy American Act during the Trump administration but also the Biden administration’s inward investment policies - namely the American Rescue Plan Act, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act-and tariffs against an array of Chinese imports including electric vehicles, batteries, solar cells, and medical products. If protectionism can be broadly defined as the implementation of policies to help domestic industries against foreign competitors, then the United States today has taken a decidedly protectionist turn.

题目：Climate Change Could Rupture Sino-Russian Relations

作者：Matthew F. Calabria，华盛顿大学埃利奥特国际事务学院安全政策研究项目兼职教授，美国能源部的网络安全顾问；William Morrissey，约翰·霍普金斯大学保罗·尼采高级国际研究学院（SAIS）博士。

摘要：1676年开始，沙俄沿着阿穆尔河（黑龙江）及其支流修建了一系列防御工事。中国清政府感受到了威胁，于是在河对岸的黑龙江省集结了一支一万人的军队，这为沙俄和中国在接下来的岁月里发生的第一次冲突埋下了伏笔，也预示着此后数百年的边境冲突和敌意。1683年，康熙帝要求俄国人放弃前哨站，但没有得到回应，于是下令军队将他们赶出阿穆尔河。清军将俄军偏远的阿尔巴津前哨夷为平地后，幸免的俄军士兵返回并重建了阿尔巴津，这反过来又激怒了康熙帝，清军对沙俄驻点发动了长达数月的残酷围攻战。阿尔巴津的守军饱受战争和坏血病的摧残，如果不是中俄两国通过巧妙的外交手段逐步解除围困，他们很可能已经被迫投降。

Beginning in 1676, sarist Russia constructed a series of fortifications along the Amur River and its tributaries in a backcountry stretch of what was then Manchuria. Sensing a dire threat, the Chinese Qing Dynasty’s Manchu government concentrated a 10,000-man army on the opposite bank of the river in what is now Heilongjiang Province, setting the stage for the first clash between Russia and dynastic China in the years to follow and presaging border conflicts and centuries of enmity thereafter. In 1683, the Chinese Emperor Kangxi, receiving no response to peace terms that requested the Russians abandon the outposts, ordered his forces to dislodge them from the Amur. After Kangxi’s soldiers razed the remote Russian outpost of Albazin to the ground, Russian soldiers fortunate enough to have been spared the Kangxi forces’ cannon fire returned and rebuilt Albazin, which in turn incited Kangxi to prosecute a brutal, months-long siege warfare on the garrison. Devastated by war and scurvy, the Albazin holdouts would most probably have been forced to surrender had wily Sino-Russian diplomacy not lifted the siege over time.

题目：Can Armed Statebuilding Succeed in Ukraine, Gaza or Taiwan?

作者：Adam Wunische，艾略特国际事务学院高级分析师和研究员，研究领域为军事事务、恐怖主义和政治暴力。

摘要：在过去20年里，世界陷入了一个高度不确定和混乱的时期。美国参与或考虑参与的冲突不胜枚举，其中包括海地、乌克兰、加沙和约旦河西岸、也门和曼德海峡、缅甸、台湾问题和与伊朗日益紧张的关系，以及与拉美缉毒人员的冲突等等。在这一时期，像美国这样的国家很想动用海外军事力量来塑造对自己有利的冲突结果。然而，随着这些行动的进行，各国往往意识到这只是暂时的、脆弱的权宜之计。例如，西方向乌克兰运送援助物资的时间只推迟了几个月，这使得俄罗斯越来越多地利用乌克兰的短缺，在前线取得进展。

Over at least the last 20 years, the world has plunged into a period of heightened uncertainty and chaos. The long list of conflicts in which the US has played—or has considered playing—a part includes Haiti, Ukraine, Gaza and the West Bank, Yemen and the Bab al-Mandab Strait, Myanmar, rising tensions over Taiwan and with Iran, as well as with narco-gangs in Latin America, to name only a few. During such periods, states like the US are tempted to apply military force abroad to shape the outcomes of these conflicts in their favor. As these operations go on, however, states often realize that these are temporary and fragile stopgaps. For example, delaying Western aid shipments to Ukraine by only a couple of months allowed Russia to increasingly take advantage of Ukrainian shortages and make advances along the frontline.

题目：How to End a Military Intervention

作者：David Kampf，塔夫茨大学弗莱彻学院博士生，研究重点是冲突、外国干预、移民、恐怖主义、非法网络和人道主义危机。

摘要：这是一场失败战争的失败结局。当美国争先恐后地将最后一批美国人撤离阿富汗时，现场一片混乱。退役军人、前官员、记者和非营利组织雇员疯狂地试图协调曾帮助过美国战争和建国努力的阿富汗同事、翻译、倡导者和朋友的安全撤离。正如1975年匆忙撤离西贡标志着失败的越南战争的结束一样，2021年在喀布尔的绝望结局也为美国在阿富汗的存在画上了灰暗的句号。尽管撤军过程一团糟，但计划和执行不力并不是美国未能在喀布尔建立稳定、民主和友好政府并阻止塔利班卷土重来的原因。早在美国决定撤军之前，战争就已经输了，即使经过多年的战斗，美国仍然不知道何时或如何结束外国干预。

It was a failed ending to a failed war. Chaos and confusion reigned as the United States scrambled to get the last Americans out of Afghanistan. Former troops, ex-officials, journalists and non-profit employees frantically tried to coordinate the safe evacuations of Afghan colleagues, translators, advocates and friends who had helped the US war and nation-building efforts. Just as the hasty exit from Saigon in 1975 marked the end of a failed war in Vietnam, the desperate 2021 endgame in Kabul served as a grim coda to America's presence in Afghanistan. But despite the messy withdrawal, the poorly planned and executed exit was not the reason the United States failed to install a stable, democratic and friendly government in Kabul and prevent the Taliban's return. The war was lost long before the United States decided to leave, and even after years of fighting, it still did not know when or how to end a foreign intervention.

题目：Backstopping Ukraine’s Long-Term Security: An Alternative to NATO Membership

作者：Lise Morjé Howard，乔治城大学终身教授，研究领域为国际关系、战争终止、俄乌战争、维和与美国外交政策；Michael O’Hanlon，布鲁金斯学会高级研究员兼外交政策研究主任，研究领域为美国国防战略、军事力量的使用和美国国家安全政策。

摘要：如今，乌克兰在战场上面临着严峻的挑战；5月中旬，普京宣布俄罗斯军队“每天都在按计划改善各条战线上的阵地”。俄罗斯的战时经济正在蓄势待发，而西方的决心仍不明朗。乌克兰人将继续进行激烈的战斗，但俄罗斯的战争机器正在付出代价。因此，乌克兰的首要任务是保卫自己及其领土和人民。

Ukraine faces serious immediate challenges on the battlefield today; in-mid May, Putin declared that Russian forces are "improving their positions each day, on all fronts, according to plan." The Russian wartime economy is gathering steam while Western resolve remains uncertain. Ukrainians will continue to fight fiercely, but Russia’s war machine is taking its toll. Thus, Ukraine's first order of business is to defend itself and its territory and people.