Ten years after the invasion of Iraq, the world looks on as another tyrant kills his own people. History’s first take has it that the toppling of Saddam Hussein was a disaster born of American hubris. Much contemporary opinion believes that leaving Bashar al-Assad in power in Syria marks a failure of western conscience. Those who condemned the use of American military might now seem to lament its absence. 入侵伊拉克10年以后，全世界坐视另一位暴君屠杀其国民。历史最初的观点是，推翻萨达姆•侯赛因(Saddam Hussein)是美国人傲慢自大所导致的灾难。更近的观点则认为，让巴沙尔•阿萨德(Bashar al-Assad)继续统治叙利亚标志着西方良知的失灵。以前谴责美国挥舞军力的人，现在可能哀叹美国不肯动兵。

There is little purpose in debating the invasion of Iraq. Minds were made up long ago. The dominant narrative declares that George W. Bush and Tony Blair were guilty of deceit at best, war crimes more likely. For my part, I have always been reluctant to mourn the passing of a regime drenched in blood. The charge that stacks up is that the invaders failed to think about what would follow when they collapsed the Iraqi state. The likes of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld did not much care. Mr Blair thought it enough to stand on the right side of a Manichean struggle. 争论入侵伊拉克是对是错毫无意义。此事很久以前已经尘埃落定。主流观点是，乔治•W•布什(George W. Bush)和托尼•布莱尔(Tony Blair)说好听点是犯了欺诈罪，坦白讲就是犯了战争罪。就我个人而言，我从来不愿为浸满鲜血的政权倒台而哀悼。总的来说，人们的指控是，入侵者没有考虑如何处理推翻伊拉克当权者之后的事情。迪克•切尼(Dick Cheney)与唐纳德•拉姆斯菲尔德(Donald Rumsfeld)之辈对此是不关心的。布莱尔则认为，在一场摩尼教的斗争中，只要站在正义的一方就足够了。

Syria is not Iraq. Yet what is happening – or rather not happening – in Syria is in part a reflection of what happened in Iraq. Once bitten, the US is twice shy. The pendulum has swung from interventionism to hard-headed realism. A US that not so long ago thought it could remake the Middle East in the image of democracy now takes a narrow view of its national interest. In 2003, the White House had an exaggerated sense of American power; now it overestimates the limits on its capacity to mould events. 叙利亚不是伊拉克。但叙利亚正在发生的事——或者说没有发生的事——在一定程度上映射了伊拉克的经历。美国可谓是一朝被蛇咬，十年怕井绳。其立场的钟摆已经从干预主义摆到了另一端——冷静的现实主义。不久以前还自认为能够按照民主的形象来重塑中东的美国，如今只狭隘地关注自己的国家利益。美国政府在2003年高估了美国实力，如今却又低估了自身左右局势的能力。

Whatever the evidence for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – and, based on the material then available, the threat was overstated rather than invented – Washington gave scarcely a thought to the forces that might be unleashed by the fall of Saddam. No one could accuse Barack Obama of failing to weigh the risks of entanglement in Syria. 不管关于伊拉克拥有大规模杀伤性武器的说法有什么证据（根据当时获取的材料，这一威胁只是言过其实，而并非无中生有），美国政府几乎没有考虑到萨达姆倒台会释放出什么样的力量。谁也不能指责巴拉克•奥巴马(Barack Obama)没有权衡卷入叙利亚局势的风险。

The sectarian and confessional tensions across the Middle East are there for all to see. Beyond its northern Kurdish province, Iraq is ruled by the Shia majority once suppressed by Saddam. Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister, has his own authoritarian reflexes. The minority Sunnis now claim the role of the repressed. Syria offers a mirror image of such fragmentation. Mr Assad’s exit would hand power to the majority Sunnis, leaving the Alawites, with their roots in Shia Islam, as the dispossessed minority. 在中东各地，围绕宗教派系的紧张态势是有目共睹的。伊拉克除了北部的库尔德省以外，都被一度受到萨达姆压迫的多数派什叶派统治着。伊拉克总理努里•马利基(Nouri al-Maliki)有他自己的威权主义意识。如今少数派逊尼派成了被压迫者。叙利亚则提供了这种分裂局面的镜像。如果阿萨德下台，叙利亚多数派逊尼派将获得权力，起源于伊斯兰什叶派的阿拉维派则将成为一无所有的少数派。

Iraq and Syria are two pieces in the regional sectarian war. Mr Assad relies on his Shia ally, Iran; the rebels are backed by Sunni-dominated Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states and Sunni-led Turkey. Iran sees in Shia-led Iraq an alternative source of strategic depth should it lose its Syrian ally. Saudi Arabia exports the Wahhabi brand of Islam propagated by Sunni supremacists. Qatar is unfussed about who gets its weapons as long as they are used against the Damascus regime. Western officials say they are finding their way to al-Qaeda-linked jihadis. 伊拉克和叙利亚是地区派系战争的两个例子。阿萨德依靠其什叶派盟友伊朗，叛军则得到逊尼派占多数的沙特阿拉伯、海湾国家以及逊尼派领导的土耳其的支持。伊朗认为，如果失去叙利亚这个盟友，那么什叶派领导下的伊拉克将构成其战略纵深的另一来源。沙特阿拉伯输出逊尼至上主义者所宣传的伊斯兰教瓦哈比主义。卡塔尔不在意武器落到谁的手里，只要武器被用来对抗叙利亚政权。西方官员则称，他们正在追查与基地组织有关联的圣战分子。

Some say it was the Iraq war that let the genie out of the bottle. It uprooted the power structures that kept in check Shia-Sunni rivalries. Follow this reasoning and the awkward conclusion is that Arabs should have been kept forever under the yoke. Were things really better when the balance of power was guaranteed by a murderous conflict between competing despots in Baghdad and Tehran? 有人说，伊拉克战争释放出了瓶中的魔鬼。伊战颠覆了约束着什叶派与逊尼派对抗状态的权力架构。按照这种推理得出的尴尬结论是，阿拉伯人应该永远遭奴役。如果巴格达与德黑兰的暴君对峙，残暴冲突保障了力量平衡，结果真的会更好吗？

In any event, the Arab uprisings have dispelled all the old cold war assumptions. The west can no longer rely on secular dictators, and regimes led by minorities can no longer hold permanent sway over subservient majorities. The shift towards pluralism is welcome and, Iraq or not, was probably inevitable. This does not make it easy for outsiders. For the west, yesterday’s friends are today’s toppled autocrats; today’s freedom fighters may be tomorrow’s jihadis. So far, the main beneficiaries of the upheaval have been Islamists with a distinctly ambiguous allegiance to democracy. 不管怎样，阿拉伯起义已经驱散了所有传统的冷战设想。西方不能继续依赖世俗独裁者，少数派领导的政权不再能够永久地支配温顺的多数派。朝着多元化发展的趋势受到欢迎，不管是在伊拉克亦或其他任何地方，这种变化或许都是不可避免的。这不会让外界人士感到轻松。对于西方而言，昨日的朋友是今天被推倒的独裁统治者；今日的自由斗士或许是明日的圣战分子。到目前为止，剧变的主要受益者是伊斯兰主义者，而他们显然对是否拥护民主含糊其辞。

The west cannot deploy its own forces in Syria. That would disinter all the demons of Iraq and invite Mr Assad’s Russian sponsor to step up its armed assistance to the regime. Slim though the chances now look, the focus of international action should first and foremost be on the search for a political settlement – not least to try to avoid a continuation of the civil war beyond Mr Assad’s eventual departure. 西方无法在叙利亚部署兵力。这将释放出伊拉克的所有恶魔，促使阿萨德在俄罗斯的支持者加强对该政权的武力援助。尽管机会渺茫，但国际行动的重点首先应该是寻求政治解决之道——特别是要在阿萨德最终下台以后避免内战持续。

The Syrian leader’s slaughter of his own people carries dangerous messages for the region and imperils a civilised international order. There comes a point where humanitarian imperatives must trump hard-headed calculations of narrow interests. 叙利亚领导人屠杀本国民众向中东地区传达了危险的信息，危及文明的国际秩序。有时候，人道主义责任必须战胜对狭隘利益的现实考量。

The US and Britain are already providing military training for the Syrian National Coalition. Turkey is supplying intelligence and logistics. The Central Intelligence Agency may be giving direct help within Syria. And the EU looks set not to renew its arms embargo on the rebels when it expires in the summer. 美国和英国已经在协助叙利亚反对派和革命力量全国联盟(Syrian National Coalition)开展军事训练。土耳其则提供情报和后勤支持。美国中央情报局(CIA)或许正在叙利亚国内提供直接帮助。而欧盟看来也不会延长对叛军的武器禁运，相关措施将在今年夏季到期。

What is required now, however, is a display of the energetic US diplomacy that has been woefully absent during most of the fighting. Where was Hillary Clinton? Where is John Kerry? Or, indeed, where is Mr Obama? Where is the high-level demarche that tests to destruction Moscow’s declared desire to halt the bloodshed by backing a settlement? What about gathering support at the UN for humanitarian corridors? If Vladimir Putin needs to be flattered and bribed, so be it. And, yes, Mr Assad should be offered dirty guarantees of safe passage. 然而，现在需要美国拿出积极的外交行动，可惜在战争的大部分时候都没有看到美国外交的踪迹。希拉里•克林顿(Hillary Clinton)在哪儿？约翰•克里(John Kerry)在哪儿？或者说，奥巴马在哪里？高层行动方针又在哪里？俄罗斯宣称支持和解来中止杀戮的愿望就要在考验中毁灭了。在联合国(UN)为人道主义走廊争取支持进展如何呢？如果需要奉承贿赂弗拉基米尔•普京(Vladimir Putin)，那就去做吧。而且，是的，阿萨德应该得到安全离开的肮脏保障。

A big diplomatic push might fail. If it does, the US and Europe will have to think hard about providing arms to the rebels. But Mr Obama could at least make the effort. Iraq was a painful demonstration of American hubris. Syria should not pay the price of US timidity. 大规模外交努力或许会失败。如果确实失败了，美国和欧盟将不得不认真考虑为叛军提供武器。但奥巴马至少还是可以努力一下的。伊拉克例子沉痛地展示了美国的傲慢自大。叙利亚不应成为美国胆怯的牺牲品。