Isolationism is the wrong charge to level at Donald Trump

看一看过去一年严肃媒体用的一些标题。“为什么美国人应该反抗唐纳德•特朗普(Donald Trump)的孤立主义”。“特朗普的新孤立主义行不通”。“共和党如何拥抱世界，然后转身离开”。还有，“特朗普口中的民族主义更像孤立主义”——这至少在论证一个结论，而不是把结论直接当作前提。Consider some headlines from the serious press over the past year. “Why Americans should fight Donald Trump’s isolationism”. “Trump’s Neo-isolationism won’t work”. “How the GOP embraced the world — and then turned away”. Another, “What Trump calls nationalism looks more like isolationism”, at least argues the case, instead of supposing it as a premise.

美国在对世界关上大门这个结论得到了一位前总统的附议。小布什(George W Bush)曾警告“孤立的危险”。法国外交部长担心“后撤”。这些批评人士了解他们所影射的那段历史。孤立主义在美利坚合众国建立之前就存在了，它导致美国迟迟未参加第二次世界大战，并出现在2000年帕特•布坎南(Pat Buchanan)的总统竞选活动中。美国的寂静主义者怀疑，上帝如此费心地赐予了他们受海洋保护、不受世界变迁影响的广袤土地，不是为了让政府去海外探索的。This case — that the US is shunning the world — is seconded by a former president. George W Bush flags the “dangers of isolation”. The foreign minister of France worries about “retreat”. These critics know the history they are slyly evoking. Insularity predates the republic, held up its participation in the second world war and saw in the millennium with the presidential campaigns of Pat Buchanan. American quietists doubt that Providence went to all the trouble of gifting them bounteous land, shielded by oceans from the world’s vicissitudes, only for governments to quest abroad.

如果说特朗普曾经属于这一古保守主义谱系，如今他也早已与之决裂。当然，反复无常、咄咄逼人和技术上的无能削弱了他的外交政策。他还不断激怒盟友，给敌人送去弹药。特朗普已经换了三任国家安全顾问。他的团队如此分裂，某天一位鲁莽的欧洲官员会公开质疑如果他们想给美国递话该给谁打电话。If Mr Trump ever belonged in this paleoconservative lineage, he has long since broken from it. Of course, caprice, aggression and technical incompetence mar his foreign policy. He has goaded allies and succoured enemies. He is on his fourth national security adviser. Such is the fragmentation of his team, one of these days a cheeky European will wonder aloud who to call if they wish to speak to America.

然而，孤立主义是对一个过度活跃的政府的一种奇怪诋毁。孤立没有衡量标准，但目前尚不清楚，整体而言，美国是不是自巴拉克•奥巴马(Barack Obama)总统时期已经开始从世界舞台上后撤了。毫无疑问，美国退出了多个条约和机构，但同时它也投身于其他的外交政策模式。Isolationism, however, is a strange slur against a government that is active to a fault. These things evade measurement, but it is unclear whether the American presence in the world, taken in the round, has retracted since the presidency of Barack Obama. The US has flinched from treaties and institutions, no doubt, while throwing itself into other modes of foreign policy.

将关于孤立的标题与实际发生的事件进行交叉对照。8月初，特朗普恢复了美国对伊朗的制裁。他对伊朗的不信任催生了一个更广泛的中东计划，包括对沙特阿拉伯的扶持。他是唯一一位会见过朝鲜国家元首的美国总统。他动用空中力量打击叙利亚，以执行其前任划定的“红线”。他威胁要对其他敌人使用武力。他希望扩大美国的军事力量并建立一支“太空部队”作为美军第六分支。他推翻了自己的第一直觉，向阿富汗增派了部队。Cross-reference the headlines about isolation with actual events. This week, Mr Trump restored US sanctions against Iran. His mistrust of the Islamic Republic informs a wider Middle East plan that takes in the cultivation of Saudi Arabia. He is the only US president to have met a North Korean head of state. He has struck Syria with air power to enforce his predecessor’s red line. He has threatened violence against other enemies. He wants a larger military and a “ space force” as its sixth branch. He has sent more troops to Afghanistan, against his first instinct.

这是一种怪异的孤立。他所在的共和党也不会允许货真价实的孤立主义。特朗普之所以能牢牢把控重量级的共和党人，是因为后者的懦弱和他的冷酷无情。但还有一个原因是，双方达成了一种默契的交易：每一个意识形态派别都能得到自己的好处。给宗教保守派：法官提名人。给商界：减税。给安全鹰派人士，如国务卿迈克•蓬佩奥(Mike Pompeo)：一个活跃于世界各地的美国。即便在贸易方面——一个真正的孤立主义者追求的是自给自足——特朗普也从未考虑过搞孤立主义。他坚持双边强硬手段，于是带来了令自由贸易主义者如此沮丧的一幕：各国“承诺”购买数十亿美元的美国制造的产品，就像在演一部冗长的地缘经济连续剧。This is an odd kind of isolation. Nor would his party have worn the real thing. Mr Trump owes his grip on eminent Republicans to cravenness on their part and ruthlessness on his. But there is an unspoken bargain at work, too. The deal is that each ideological faction gets to wet its beak. For religious conservatives: judicial nominees. For business: tax cuts. And for security hawks, such as secretary of state Mike Pompeo: a US that is active in the world. Even on trade, where a true isolationist would aspire to autarky, Mr Trump never entertains the idea. He sticks to bilateral strong-arming, which throws up the spectacle — so grim to a free trader — of countries “pledging” to buy billions of dollars in American manufactures as if in some geo-economic telethon.

关键不在于，这些举措是好的外交政策。关键是，这些举措是外交政策。当批评人士敦促特朗普参与国际事务时，他们指的是他们（以及我）青睐的那种参与。但参与可以采取其他形式。美国仍在参与世界事务：在某些方面比以前少了（参见在北约的斤斤计较），但在其他方面（如阿富汗）介入更多了。总体情况太复杂，不能统称为“孤立”。“沙文主义”(Chauvinism)是个更合适的词。外交关系委员会(Council on Foreign Relations)的理查德•哈斯(Richard Haass)建议用“让位”(abdication)一词，但这个词也有从特朗普接手的基线全面回撤的意味。The point is not that these are good foreign policies. The point is that these are foreign policies. When critics press international engagement on Mr Trump, they mean engagement of the kind that they — and I — favour. But it can take other forms. The US still participates in the world: less so than before in some respects (see the bean-counting pettiness about Nato), but more so in others (such as Afghanistan). The aggregate picture is too mixed to bear the name “isolation”. “Chauvinism” is more like it. Richard Haass of the Council on Foreign Relations suggests “abdication”, but even this implies across-the-board retreat from the baseline that Mr Trump inherited.

这样就得回顾一下特朗普前任的情况了。总体上看，特朗普比上一任总统更少介入世界吗？奥巴马尊重战后西方的制度框架。奥巴马在敌对阵营中的人脉应该会让特朗普羞愧。奥巴马从来不是和平主义者。不过，奥巴马仍然给外交政策带来了一种不计后果的谨慎。相比不采取行动的代价，奥巴马有时更在意采取行动的代价。叙利亚就是触目惊心的一例。奥巴马对这种谨慎态度也很坦率，号称是从阿富汗撤军以支持“国内建设”。奥巴马的顾问本•罗兹(Ben Rhodes)所著的《世界原本的样子》(The World As It Is)就是一个心怀高尚理想的人慢慢向现实屈服的故事——从这个V•S•奈保尔(VS Naipaul)式冷峻的书名就能看出来。Which takes us back to his predecessor. All told, is this president less engaged than the last one? Mr Obama honoured the institutional architecture of the postwar west. He knew friends from enemies in a way that should embarrass Mr Trump. He was never a pacifist. Still, he brought to foreign policy a kind of reckless caution. He sometimes heeded the costs of action over the costs of passivity. Syria is a gruesome case in point. He was candid about this prudence, too, drawing down in Afghanistan to favour “nation-building at home”. The World As It Is, by his adviser Ben Rhodes, is a tale of high-minded people slowly caving to realism, right down to its clinical, VS Naipaul-ish title.

回想起来，奥巴马的格言“不要做蠢事”，不就是用千禧时代的口语来表述的寂静主义吗？两年前的美国在坚持全球主义方面也不是那么勇敢。现在的它也不是那么“遁世”。Thinking back, what was Mr Obama’s dictum “Don’t do stupid stuff” if not quietism in millennial demotic? The US was not so intrepid in its globalism two years ago. It is not such a recluse now.