k********k
发帖数: 5617 | 1 西方在烏克蘭再現“皮洛士的勝利”
2014-03-01 00:41:20
英國免費商業日報CityA.M.網站2014年2月27日發表美國智庫“外交關系理事會”終身
理事、全球政治風險咨詢機構“豪斯曼企業”創辦人及總裁豪斯曼博士（John C.
Hulsman）的文章說，如何看待西方在烏克蘭的“勝利”？西諺早有歷史故事警醒世人。
公元前279年，伊庇魯斯國王皮洛士付出慘重代價後，在阿斯庫魯姆戰役（the Battle
of Asculum）擊敗羅馬人。悲痛的皮洛士明智地評價自己的“勝利”說︰“再有一場這
樣的勝利，我們就毀滅了。”這就是流傳千古，警醒後人“慘勝”不足道的“皮洛士的
勝利”。
西方在烏克蘭革命後，得到的也是“皮洛士的勝利”。歐盟和北約現在面臨兩個可怕的
選擇︰
一是兌現承諾，向烏克蘭提供大量金援。但西方既無力承擔，還很可能因此陷入烏克蘭
危險的經濟泥淖。
二是口惠而實不至，任由烏克蘭所有企業破產，讓世人不再相信西方有找鈨冬F承諾，
掏出銀子。
而普京私下必定竊喜。他如果能夠控制情緒和部隊，最後的勝利很可能屬于他。對普京
來說，入侵烏克蘭是愚不可及的自殺性行動。他如果想讓西方的勝利變成戰略失敗，會
使世界聯合起來對付他，而且很可能還要承諾對烏克蘭提供其他國家都不會拿出的大把
銀子。這種買賣在政治上完全不可行。因為俄國不再是一個強國，不僅人口萎縮，貪污
盛行，而且經濟完全依賴石油和天然氣的現貨價格。
因此站在普京的立場，一動遠不如一靜。讓西方拍胸脯開支票，烏克蘭苦苦掙扎，才能
凸顯急需俄國援助支持的慘狀。一個統一而虛弱的烏克蘭，不僅永遠映襯托出西方的虛
偽，而且照樣要向俄國償付賬單，繼續允許天然氣穿過其領土輸往歐洲。
普京有許多手段應對烏克蘭危機。
第一，鼓勵烏克蘭東部尤其南部克里米亞的分離主義分子，要求更大程度的自治，使基
輔中央政府形同虛設。
第二，現在已流產的俄-烏貿易協定，以低于市場價三成的折扣價，向烏克蘭提供俄國
天然氣。莫斯科如要求按照市場價支付，必定會使衰弱不堪的烏克蘭經濟大亂，走向毀
滅。過度政府新總理表示，過去3年流出烏克蘭的資金達700億美元。其中大半是貪污的
賄款。百孔千瘡的烏克蘭今後兩年需要350億美元巨額資金，才能避免破產。
第三，普京將看到，西方的緊急援助很可能在5月大選後才兌現，而且承諾的數額縮水
。那麼烏克蘭今後幾個月日子怎麼過？歐洲的希臘、意大利、西班牙、葡萄牙、塞浦路
斯，甚至可能還有法國，肯定不會忘記仍然必須拯救自己的經濟。現在要歐洲去拯救從
未能證明可以養活自己的烏克蘭，是恰當的時機嗎？
第四，巨額援助談判由國際貨幣基金主導。烏克蘭的法治記錄聲名狼藉，任何援助協定
都必定要求厲行緊縮政策作為前提條件。這將使接受國際貨幣基金援助的烏克蘭新政府
失盡人心，和西方一起名譽掃地。屆時普京必定有機可乘，那無異于一場悲劇。 | k********k
发帖数: 5617 | 2 http://www.cityam.com/article/1393526432/forget-invasion-putin-
Forget invasion: Putin is just four steps from victory in Ukraine
byJohn Hulsman
February 27, 2014, 8:28pm
AS ITS currency collapses, protests flare up in Crimea, and Russia flexes
its muscles on the doorstep, those in the West claiming triumph in Ukraine
should remember the story of King Pyrrhus of Epirus. In 279 BC, this scourge
of the Romans managed to best them at the Battle of Asculum, but at
tremendous cost. Pyrrhus, aware that means and ends must always be kept in
balance in running a successful foreign policy, sadly and sagely responded
to his “triumph” by noting, “One more such victory, and we shall be
undone.”
So it is for the West following the latest Ukrainian revolution. Having
rhetorically lost their heads, EU and Nato countries are presented with two
dire choices. Either they must back up their rhetoric with a tremendous
outpouring of wherewithal – a vast sum of money the hard-pressed West can
ill afford, and likely to go straight down the sinkhole of Ukraine’s crisis
economy. Or, more likely, they will do far less, watch the whole enterprise
fail, and be confronted by a world that no longer believes the West is
willing or able to put its money where its mouth is. Some triumph.
Somewhere deep in the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin must be privately allowing
himself the ghost of a smile. For if he can keep control of both his
emotions and his troops, ultimate victory can soon be his. It would be
suicidally stupid of the Russian President to invade Ukraine, as some fear.
It is the one thing he could do that would snatch strategic defeat from the
jaws of victory. It would unite the world against him, thereby making
available the very funds and commitment to Ukraine that otherwise will not
be provided. Such an outcome would not be politically tolerable for Putin,
and would at a minimum confirm for everyone what is becoming glaringly
apparent; Russia is simply not a great power anymore, given its demography,
endemic corruption, and an economy wholly dependent on the spot price of oil
and natural gas.
No, from Putin’s point of view, far better to do far less, let Western over
-promising run its course, have Ukraine limp along, underlining how badly it
needs Russian help and support. A weak, but united Ukraine – one that is a
constant reminder of Western vainglory but still pays its bills to Russian
investors and allows gas to move across its borders – suits Putin to the
ground.
He has a panoply of tools to get there. First, encourage (but not too much)
separatists in eastern and especially southern Ukraine (the pro-
secessionists who ran the Russian flag up the Crimean regional parliament
are an excellent prototype) to demand such a degree of autonomy that the
central government in Kiev barely functions.
Second, merely make Ukraine pay the market price for gas, thereby dooming
the enfeebled country to economic ruin. The now aborted Russian-Ukrainian
deal gifted Kiev with a 30 per cent discount on the price of Russian gas. By
blandly doing away with this present, Russia can remind Kiev and the rest
of the world who the local economic power actually is. Ukraine’s economic
position is positively shambolic, with the new prime minister alleging that
up to $70bn has been withdrawn from the Ukrainian financial system over the
last three years. Much of this is out-and-out corruption, leaving the tapped
country needing a staggering $35bn over the next two years just to avoid
bankruptcy.
Third, Putin can count on Western aid arriving a day late and a dollar short
. It is quite possible that substantial relief will not come about until
after the May 2014 elections; how can the country get through the next few
months? Also, at some point along the way, someone in Europe will surely
remember that they have yet to solve their own existential crisis, and that
Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Cyprus (and perhaps even France) are not
out of the market’s cross-hairs. Is now a good time to take a huge risk on
a country that has never been able to prove itself economically viable?
Fourth, even if whopping amounts of aid are earmarked (a huge “if” indeed)
, much of the ultimate negotiations over the funds will be led by the IMF.
Given Ukraine’s notorious record on rule of law issues, it will demand
austerity as a precondition to any agreement.
In turn, such austerity will confer huge unpopularity on the government that
accepts the IMF’s poisoned chalice (as we have seen in Europe’s case,
stressing significant and decisive structural reforms over austerity would
work better), discrediting both the fragile new regime as well as the West
in general. Surely that ghoul Putin, unlike excitable members of the Western
press, must see that the odds remain on his side. And that is a tragedy.
Dr John C Hulsman is president and co-founder of John C Hulsman Enterprises
(www.john-hulsman.com), a global political risk consultancy. He is a life
member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and author of Ethical Realism,
The Godfather Doctrine, and most recently Lawrence of Arabia, To Begin the
World Over Again. |
|
