Should the west arm the Syrian rebels? That is the issue of the day in Washington, London and at the Group of Eight summit. But behind this debate lies a bigger question. Can western powers continue to shape the future of the Middle East as they have for the past century?

西方应该武装叙利亚反政府武装吗？这是华盛顿、伦敦乃至八国集团(G8)峰会关注的首要问题。不过，在这场辩论背后有个更大的问题：西方大国能够像过去一个世纪那样，继续左右中东未来吗？

The current, increasingly fragile borders of the Middle East are, to a large extent, the product of some lines on the map drawn by Britain and France in the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916. The era when Britain and France were the dominant outside powers ended definitively with the Suez crisis of 1956 – when the US pulled the plug on the two nations’ intervention in Egypt. During the cold war, the US and the USSR were the big players. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, America stood alone as the great power in the Middle East: organising the coalition to defeat Saddam Hussein in 1991, protecting the flow of oil from the Gulf, containing Iran and attempting to broker a peace settlement between Israel and the Arab states.

当前中东越来越脆弱的国境线，在很大程度上是按照1916年签订的《赛克斯-皮科协定》(Sykes-Picot Agreement)，在英国和法国绘制的地图上划定的几条线。英法作为外来强权主导这一地区的时代，在1956年苏伊士危机(Suez crisis)期间彻底告终，当时美国阻止了英法两国对埃及的干涉。冷战期间，美国和苏联是这里最大的操盘手。1991年苏联解体后，美国成为在中东发挥影响力的唯一超级大国：在1991年组织联军打败萨达姆•侯赛因(Saddam Hussein)，保护海湾地区的石油出口，遏制伊朗，并试图在以色列和阿拉伯国家之间斡旋，推动达成和平的和解方案。

Those who are urging the US to get more deeply involved in the Syrian conflict now are living in the past. They assume that America can and should continue to dominate the politics of the Middle East. But four fundamental changes make it no longer realistic, or even desirable, for the US to dominate the region in the old way.

那些敦促美国进一步介入叙利亚冲突的人，还生活在过去。他们以为美国能够（而且应该）继续主导中东政局。然而四大根本变化使得美国以老方式主导这一地区变得不再现实，甚至不再可取。

These changes are the failures of the Afghan and Iraq wars; the Great Recession, the Arab spring and the prospect of US energy independence.

这四大变化是阿富汗和伊拉克战争的败笔、大衰退(Great Recession)、阿拉伯之春以及美国能源独立的前景。

Over the past decade, the US has learnt that while its military might can topple regimes in the greater Middle East very quickly, America and its allies are very bad at nation-building. A decade of involvement has left both Afghanistan and Iraq deeply unstable and wracked by conflict. Neither country is securely in the “western camp”.

过去10年里，美国已经认识到，尽管其强大军队能够在大中东地区迅速推翻政权，但美国及其盟国非常不善于建设一个国家。美国介入10年后，阿富汗和伊拉克都处于深层次的不稳定状态，饱受冲突蹂躏。这两个国家都不是“西方阵营”的可靠成员。

The result is that even the advocates of western intervention in Syria, such as Senator John McCain, proclaim that they are opposed to “boots on the ground”. Instead, they are pushing to supply weapons to the Syrian rebels – arguing that this is necessary to secure a more desirable political outcome.

结果，就连那些提倡西方干预叙利亚的人——比如参议员约翰•麦凯恩(John McCain)——也声明他们反对“地面部队介入”。相反，他们提倡向叙利亚反政府武装提供武器，称这对确保更加可取的政治结局是必要的。

President Barack Obama has given some ground to the “arm the rebels” camp. But his reluctance and scepticism are evident – and amply justified. If a full-scale western occupation of both Iraq and Afghanistan was unable to secure a decent outcome, why does anybody believe that supplying a few light weapons to the Syrian rebels will be more effective?

巴拉克•奥巴马(Barack Obama)总统对提倡“武装叛军”的一派作出了一些让步。但是他的不情愿和怀疑是明显的，也是很有道理的。如果西方全面占领伊拉克和阿富汗仍无法确保良好结局，为什么有人相信向叙利亚反政府武装提供少量轻武器会更有效呢？

The Great Recession also means that the west’s capacity to “bear any burden” can no longer be taken for granted. European military spending is falling fast – and cuts in the Pentagon budget have begun. With the direct and indirect cost of the Iraq war estimated at $3tn and the US government borrowing 40 cents of every dollar that it spends, it is hardly surprising that Mr Obama is wary of taking on new commitments in the Middle East.

大衰退也意味着，人们不再可以想当然地认为，西方拥有“承受任何负担”的实力。欧洲军事开支正在迅速减少，美国也已开始削减五角大楼(Pentagon)预算。鉴于伊拉克战争的直接和间接成本估计高达3万亿美元，而美国政府每一美元开销就有40美分是借来的，奥巴马对于在中东背上新的负担戒心重重是很自然的。

The third new factor is the Arab spring. President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt was a long-time ally and client of the US. Nonetheless, Washington decided to let him fall in early 2011 – much to the disgust and alarm of other long-term American allies in the region, notably Saudi Arabia and Israel. But the Obama administration was right to drop Mr Mubarak. He could not have been propped up without risking a Syria-style bloodbath.

第三个新的因素是阿拉伯之春。埃及总统胡斯尼•穆巴拉克(Hosni Mubarak)是美国的长期盟友和附庸。然而2011年初，华盛顿决定听任他被推翻，这引起了该地区美国其他长期盟友（特别是沙特阿拉伯和以色列）的反感和震惊。不过奥巴马政府放弃穆巴拉克是正确的。他要继续掌权，就可能出现叙利亚那样的血腥局面。

More fundamentally, the US has recognised that, ultimately, the people of the Middle East are going to have to shape their own destinies. Many of the forces at work in the region – such as Islamism and Sunni-Shia sectarianism – are alarming to the west but they cannot be forever channelled or suppressed.

更为根本的是，美国已认识到，最终而言，中东人民将不得不决定自己的命运。西方对在这一地区活动的许多势力感到担忧，这些势力包括伊斯兰主义以及逊尼派和什叶派的宗派主义，但这些势力不可能永远被美国招安或压制。

Finally, the ability of the US to take a more hands-off attitude is greatly enhanced by the shale revolution in the US, which lessens American dependence on Middle Eastern oil.

最后，美国的页岩气革命降低了美国对中东石油的依赖，大大夯实了美国采取超然态度的底气。

Accepting that western domination of the Middle East is coming to an end, however, should not be confused with saying that western nations will not defend their interests.

然而，接受西方主导中东的时代即将终结，并不意味着西方国家不会捍卫自己的利益。

The US has large military bases in the Gulf and, together with its allies, will still try to prevent the Middle East becoming dominated by a hostile power. Despite its role in Syria, Russia is not a plausible regional hegemon. But Iran worries the US; an attack on its nuclear programme remains an option, despite the encouraging result of this weekend’s presidential elections. Jihadist forces, linked to al-Qaeda, will also encounter western resistance – one reason why the Syrian opposition continues to be treated very warily. And the US and its European allies will remain deeply involved in regional diplomacy over Syria.

美国在海湾地区有大型军事基地，并仍在与盟友一道，力阻中东地区被某个敌对强国主导。尽管俄罗斯在叙利亚扮演了重要角色，但俄罗斯算不上一个让人信服的地区霸主。但伊朗确实让美国担心，尽管上周末的总统选举结果令人鼓舞，但对伊朗核设施进行军事打击仍是一个选择。与基地组织(al-Qaeda)有关系的伊斯兰圣战势力也将遭遇西方抵制，这也是叙利亚反对派将继续得到戒心重重的对待的原因之一。同时，美国及其欧洲盟友仍将深度介入有关叙利亚的区域外交。

Western humanitarian instincts will play a role too – as they did in the decision to support the Libyan rebellion. But, as Syria is demonstrating, there is a limit to what the west will take on. Even former Australian foreign minister Gareth Evans, the intellectual godfather of the doctrine of the “responsibility to protect” civilians, is warning against military intervention in Syria.

西方的人道主义本能也会发挥一定作用，正如他们做出支持利比亚起义的决定那样。然而，叙利亚局势表明，西方决定背上什么负担是有限度的。即便是“保护平民的责任”这一信条的理论教父、澳大利亚前外长加雷思•埃文斯(Gareth Evans)也对军事干预叙利亚发出警告。

Despite the US decision to begin to supply military assistance to the rebels, Mr Obama is obviously still wary of deep involvement in the Syrian conflict. More than some of his advisers and allies, he seems to appreciate the limited ability of outside powers to control the new order that it is emerging in the region. The era of direct colonialism in the Middle East ended decades ago. The era of informal empire is now also coming to a close.

尽管美国决定开始向反政府武装提供军事援助，但奥巴马显然仍对深度介入叙利亚冲突戒心重重。比起他的某些顾问和盟友，他似乎更清醒地意识到，外部强国控制中东新秩序的能力是有限的。直接殖民中东的时代几十年前就结束了。非正式帝国的时代如今也进入尾声。