Breaking News 突发新闻 | | Forum 论坛 | | UK News 英国新闻 | | USA News 美国新闻 | | World News 世界新闻 | | Political News 政治新闻 | | Sci-Tech News 科技新闻 | | War & Terrorism News 战争和恐怖主义新闻 | | Sports News 体育新闻 | | Multimedia 多媒体 | | Set Homepage 设为首页

BREAKING NEWS 突发新闻

Saturday, May 24th, 2008 周六， 2008年5月24日

By 通过 Sam Smith 山姆史密斯 | As it tries to recover from the most expensive failure in American military history, the Pentagon has its eyes on an easier target. |因为它试图收回从最昂贵的失败，在美国的军事历史，五角大楼已着眼于更容易的目标。 The beauty of this adversary is that it is not from an indecipherable culture, it doesn’t speak a strange language and it doesn’t scatter IEDs in the path of Hummers. 美丽的对手，这是它是不是从一indecipherable文化，它不发言，一个奇怪的语言，并没有散射简易爆炸装置在道路hummers 。 In fact, it’s not even armed and its headquarters, far from concealed in the mountains of Pakistan, are easily found in the high rises of Washington, DC. 事实上，它的不是，甚至武装和其总部，到目前为止，从隐藏在山区的巴基斯坦，很容易发现，在高楼的华盛顿哥伦比亚特区。 The new foe: The State Department, USAID and other civilian diplomatic and development operations - proving once again that our military leaders’ real skill set is not fighting mile by mile on some foreign battlefield but line by line in the domestic budget. 新的敌人：美国国务院，美国国际开发署和其他文职人员的外交和发展业务-再次证明了我们的军事领导人的实际技能的人才是没有战斗力英里英里就由一些外国战场，但逐行在国内的财政预算案。

There is no doubt that the domestic surge is working. 这是毫无疑问的国内风是工作。 Between 2002 and 2005, the share of government development assistance flowing through the Pentagon rose from 6% to 22%. 2002年至2005年，中所占的份额，政府发展援助流经五角大楼上升6 ％至22 ％ 。

Stewart Patrick and Kaysie Brown, in a paper last fall for the Center on Global Development, outlined the problem: 斯图尔特帕特里克和kaysie布朗，在一份文件，去年秋天，该中心就全球发展，概述了问题：

These trends have stimulated concerns that US foreign and development policies may become subordinated to a narrow, short term security agenda — at the expense of broader, longer-term diplomatic goals and institution building in the developing world — and that US soldiers may increasingly assume responsibility for activities more appropriately conducted by civilians skilled in development challenges. 这些趋势的关注，刺激，美国外交政策和发展政策有可能成为服从于一个狭窄的，短期的安全议程-牺牲了更广泛，更长远的外交目标和制度建设，在发展中世界-和美国士兵可能会越来越多承担责任为更恰当的活动所进行的平民在技术发展方面的挑战。 . 。 . 。

We attribute growing US reliance on the US military to carry out reconstruction, development, and capacity-building activities to three factors: an overwhelming focus within the Bush administration on programs that can help in the global war on terror, particularly in unstable, conflict-prone, and post-conflict countries; the vacuum left by civilian agencies, which struggle to deploy adequate numbers of personnel and to deliver assistance in highly insecure environments; and a general failure on the part of the US government to invest adequately in non-military instruments of global engagement, including by creating deployable US civilian post-conflict capabilities. 我们的属性越来越多，美国的依赖，对美国的军事进行重建，发展和能力建设活动，以下三个因素：一压倒性的重点，布什政府内部对程序，可以帮助在全球反恐战争，尤其是在不稳定，冲突易，中和冲突后国家;留下的真空由文职机构，其中的斗争，部署足够数量的人员和提供援助，在高度不安全的环境;和一个一般的失败，部分美国政府充分的投资在非军用文书的全球参与，包括通过创造部署美国平民在冲突后的能力。 . 。 . 。

A less polite way of looking at it is that the military is aggressively and greedily invading territory that traditionally has been left to civilians. 那么礼貌的方式看，那就是军队是积极和贪婪入侵领土传统上一直留给平民。 Of course, anyone familiar with the militarization of law enforcement will not be surprised, but the new stakes should not be underestimated. 当然，任何人都熟悉的军事化执法将不会感到惊奇，但新的利害关系不应被低估。 Do we really want to turn civilian development activities that have lent our country honor over to a crowd that is in no small part to blame for America’s current pitiful world reputation? 我们是否真的希望把平民的开发活动已借给我们国家的荣誉给一个人群，就是在不小的一部分要归咎于美国目前的可怜世界的声誉呢？

o o At the end of the Cold War, a top Soviet official promised America one last horrible surprise: the loss of an enemy. 在冷战结束，苏联官方顶端承诺，美国最后一个可怕的惊喜：失去了一位敌人。 It was as the Greek poet Constantine Cavafy had written early in the century: 这是由于希腊诗人康斯坦丁cavafy曾致函早在本世纪：

Night is here but the barbarians have not come. 晚上是在这里，但野蛮人没有来。
And some people arrived from the borders, 和一些人从抵达边界，
and said that there are no longer any barbarians. 并表示不再存在任何的野蛮人。
And now what shall become of us without any barbarians? 现在是什么，应成为我们没有任何的野蛮人呢？
Those people were some kind of solution. 这些人是一些种解决办法。

A decade later, a Pentagon office still sported a sign that read, WANTED: A GOOD ENEMY. 十年之后，五角大楼的办公室仍然sported的标志，读，想：一个很好的敌人。 It was not long after the Cold War, in fact, that the military went out shopping for new enemies to buck up the welfare fathers of the defense industry. 这是不长，冷战结束后，在事实上，军事走出去商场为新的敌人，以推卸责任了福利的父亲国防工业。 It had not yet received the budgetary blessing - heralded by a handful of young men with box cutters - of Iraq and Afghanistan. 它尚未收到预算的祝福-预示着由少数的青年男子与框剪子-伊拉克和阿富汗。 Who could have imagined that so few could cause so much fear among so many? 谁能够想到这么少可能导致了这么多的恐惧之间有这么多？ Who would have thought that, instead of pursuing the perps, you could turn the whole affair into the most expensive war in history and the first to be waged against a perpetual abstraction - terror - rather than an actual country? 谁会想到，而不是追求perps ，您可以把整件事情到最昂贵的战争中的历史和首先要发动对一个永恒的抽象-恐怖-而不是一个实际的国家呢？ Who would have dreamed that the public could be sold the notion that the way to deal with guerillas was to engage in warfare that would increase the number of their allies? 谁将会有梦想，市民可以出售概念，即如何处理与游击队是在从事战争将增加的人数及其盟友？

Instead, mostly unreported, America’s political and military planners worked hard developing an external threat to compensate for the disappearance of the USSR. 相反，大多未下，美国的政治和军事规划人员努力工作，发展的外部威胁，以补偿失踪的苏联。 Although in the short run, the Pentagon had been remarkably successful in exempting itself from the deficit-cutting hysteria, there was always the danger that the public and politicians might start asking too many questions. 虽然在短期来说，五角大楼已成功地在免除自己从赤字削减歇斯底里，总有危险，公众和政界人士可能会开始问太多的问题。

So uncertain was the trumpet, in fact, that planners were forced to resort to abstractions that were not only uninformative, they were truly absurd. 因此，不确定的是小号，事实上，这规划者被迫诉诸抽象的说，不仅是uninformative ，他们真正是荒谬的。 Thus, we were told to spend hundreds of billions to protect ourselves against a generic composite peer competitor, myriad formless threats, and even, god forbid, an asymmetrical niche opponent. 因此，我们被告知要花费数千亿，以保护自己免受一个通用的复合同行的竞争对手，无数无形的威胁，甚至，但愿上帝阻止，是不对称的利基对手。 (What did you do in the last war, Daddy? Well, son, I killed 14 generic composite peer competitors and would have wasted more if a frigging asymmetrical niche opponent hadn’t got me in the chest.) （什么你在过去的战争中，爸爸呢？好，儿子，我杀死14通用复合同行的竞争对手，并会浪费更多，如果frigging不对称利基的对手并没有让我在胸部） 。

As Clinton’s budget director Franklin Raines told a meeting of high level Pentagon officials, “We will protect your purchasing power.” 作为克林顿的预算主任富兰克林雷恩斯会议上说，高层次的五角大楼官员， “我们将保护您的购买力” 。

o o Thus is was not surprising to see a new enemy starting to turn up in the military planners’ mind: the US citizen. 因此，是并不令人感到意外看到一个新的敌人开始出现，在军事规划人员心态：美国公民。 For the first time since the Civil War, American government officials began seriously considering the possibility of armed conflict in, and occupation of, their own country. 对于第一次自内战以来，美国政府官员开始认真考虑的可能性，在武装冲突中，和占领，他们自己的国家。 There was a growing assumption that the interests of those with power and those without might diverge to the point of insurrection. 有一个日益增长的假设，即利益的那些与权力和那些没有可能发散，以点暴动。

The major media steadfastly ignored the trend despite ample evidence lying about. 各大媒体，坚定不移地忽视的趋势，尽管有充分的证据撒谎。 For example, Defense Week reported that “Army Chief of Staff Gen. Dennis Reimer said the Army needs to focus more on homeland defense and welcomes a ‘mission creep’ into that area.” A 1996 article by military historian and strategist Martin van Creveld in the Los Angeles Times argued that 举例来说，防御周报道说， “陆军参谋长上将丹尼斯拉瑞蒙说，军队需要更多地集中于国土防卫，并欢迎'的使命蠕变'进入该地区。 ” 1996年的文章，军事历史学家和战略家马丁范creveld在洛杉矶时报认为，

As the 20th century draws to an end, it is time that military commanders and the policy makers to whom they report wake up to the new realities. 作为20世纪即将结束，现在是时候说，军事指挥官和决策者向他们报告醒觉起来，新的现实。 In today’s world the main threat to many states, including specifically the US, no longer comes from other countries. 在今天的世界上的主要威胁，许多国家，包括特别是美国，不再是来自其他国家。 Either we make the necessary changes, or what is commonly known as the modern world will lose all sense of security and dwell in perpetual fear. 要么我们作出必要的改变，或什么是普遍被称为现代世界将失去所有的安全感，和住在永恒的恐惧。

Perhaps most startling was an article in the Winter 1992 issue of Parameters, a quarterly published by the US Army College. 也许最惊人的是一篇文章，在1992年冬季的问题参数，每季出版的由美国陆军学院。 The author was Lt. Col. Charles J. Dunlap Jr., a graduate of Villanova School of Law, the Armed Forces Staff College, and a distinguished graduate of the National War College. 作者中校查尔斯j.邓拉普小，毕业于维拉诺瓦法律学院，武装部队参谋学院，和一位杰出的毕业生，国家战争学院。 He had been named by the Judge Advocates Association as the USAF’s outstanding career armed services attorney. 他已被任命为法官所主张协会作为美国空军的优秀职业军种律政司。 In short, not your average paranoid conspiracy theorist. 在短期内，而不是您的平均偏执的阴谋理论家。 Dunlap’s article was called “The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012.” 邓拉普的文章被称为“起源的美国军事政变， 2012年” 。

In it, Dunlap quoted one of Washington’s journalistic cherubs, James Fallows, who wrote in a 1991 article 在资讯科技，邓拉普引述之一，华盛顿的新闻小天使，詹姆斯休闲，谁写在1991年的文章

“I am beginning to think that the only way the national government can do anything worthwhile is to invent a security threat and turn the job over to the military . “我开始认为，只有这样，国家，政府可以做任何事情值得是发明一种安全威胁，把工作移交给军事。 . 。 . 。 The military, strangely, is the one government institution that has been assigned legitimacy to act on its notion of the collective good. 军事，说来奇怪，是一个国家的政府机构已指派的合法性，其行事的概念，集体的利益。

Fallows was not alone within the Washington establishment. 休闲是并不孤单，与华盛顿建立。 Stephen Rosenfeld of the Washington Post wrote a column praising an Army advocate of Dunlap’s nightmare. 斯蒂芬罗森菲尔德的华盛顿邮报写了一栏赞扬军队的主张，邓拉普的梦魇。 Rosenfeld described US Army Major Ralph Peters this way: 罗森菲尔德所描述的美陆军的主要拉尔夫彼得斯这样说：

“At home, use of the military appears inevitable to him — though not yet to an American consensus — “at least on our borders and in some urban environments” . “在家里，使用军队，似乎无可避免的向他-虽然尚未到美国的共识- ”至少在我们的边界和在一些城市的环境“。 . 。 . 。 He would dutifully prepare for the traditionally ‘military’ missions, plus the new one of missile defense. 他将尽职尽责地作好准备，传统的军事任务，再加上新的一个导弹防御系统。 But he would be ready to engage with drugs and crime, terrorism, peacekeeping, illegal immigration, disease control, resource protection, evacuation of endangered citizens . 但他愿意从事与毒品和犯罪，恐怖主义，维持和平，非法移民，疾病控制，资源保护，疏散濒危的公民。 . 。 .” “ 。

What Dunlap described and Peters advocated was not a bold military stroke against the civilian society, but simply a coup by attrition. 什么邓拉普描述和彼得斯主张是不是一个大胆的军事中风对平民社会，而只是政变减员。 Something similar seems to be going on now, only the target is not our domestic, but our foreign, affairs. 类似的似乎是目前正在进行的，只有目标，是不是我们国内，但我们的外交，内政。 The goal: all war all the time, with the Pentagon in charge of as much as possible. 目标：所有战争的所有时间，与五角大楼在负责，尽可能多地。

o o Before raising philosophical questions about whether the military should be supplanting the civilian in matters of diplomacy and development, some sense of scale is useful. 前提高哲学问题是否军事应supplanting平民在事项的外交和发展，从一定意义上的规模是有益的。 Based on figures from a few years ago, for example, the amount of money the military spent annually on useless - in fact heavily counterproductive - drug interdiction and anti-drug activities was nearly a half billon dollars. 的基础上的数字从几年前，举例来说，这笔钱军事每年花费在无用的-事实上，大量反作用-缉毒和扫毒活动是近一个半亿美元。 This was approximately the same sum being spent by USAID on agriculture, or the environment, or child survival and maternal health or family planning. 这是大约相同的总和用于由美国国际开发署对农业，或环境，或儿童生存和产妇的健康或计划生育。 And it was vastly more than was spent on higher education or diseases other than AIDs. 这是很大的多是用于高等教育或其他疾病，比艾滋病。

One example of how the military has infiltrated civilian diplomacy has been the new African Command. 其中一个例子是如何的军事已经渗透到平民的外交一直是新的非洲司令部。 You may not have noticed too many wars against the US in that part of the world, but the Pentagon has managed to con Congress into a grand operation that includes, according to its website, achievements such as the following: 您可能没有注意到，太多的战争，反对美国在这世界的一部分，但五角大楼已设法结论国会成为一个大的运作，其中包括，根据其网站上，取得的成就，如下列：

- US service members from the Combined Task Force-Horn of Africa gathered with residents of Mikocheni on May 15 to celebrate the completion of a newly built health clinic. -美国服务的成员来自联合专责小组-非洲之角的聚集与居民m ikocheni5月1 5日，以庆祝完成了新建的卫生所。 The Jaypal Singh Babhra Memorial Clinic was completed by US service members of the CJTF-HOA. 该jaypal辛格babhra纪念诊所完成了由美国服务成员对cjtf -清化。 . 。 . 。

– A group of 20 sailors from the US Navy’s USS Momsen visited a school in the port city of Mombasa on May 7, as part of a community relations program called Project Handclasp. -一个2 0国集团的船员由美国海军的号m omsen参观了学校在港口城市蒙巴萨，于五月七日，作为一个组成部分，社区关系计划，所谓的项目h andclasp。 Project Handclasp is a US Navy program that provides donated items such as books, clothes, toys, and medical. 项目handclasp是美海军计划提供捐赠物品如书籍，衣服，玩具，和医疗等。 . 。 . 。

– The Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa funded the renovation of the Mokowe Primary School in Mokowe, Kenya,and helped construct a fence to secure the facility. -合并的联合工作队-非洲之角的资助翻新的m okowe小学在m okowe，肯尼亚，并帮助建造一个栅栏，以确保该设施。

Patrick and Brown cautiously describes the Pentagon’s African mission this way 帕特里克和布朗谨慎地描述了五角大楼的非洲特派团这种方式

According to DoD, the new command’s primary mission will be “shaping” activities, designed to ameliorate troubling trends in the region by helping to eliminate the roots of extremism, terrorism and violent conflict before they reach a crisis, rather than traditional operations involving the use of force. 根据国防部，新的命令的首要任务将是“塑造 ” 活动，旨在纾缓令人不安的趋势在该地区的帮助，以消除根源，极端主义，恐怖主义和暴力冲突之前，他们达成一项危机，而非传统的业务涉及使用武力。 . 。 . 。

“The Pentagon’s new focus on conflict prevention and its commitment to US-government-wide policy planning and implementation are to be welcomed. “五角大楼的新的重点放在预防冲突和其承诺，我们政府全政策的规划和实施是值得欢迎的。 What has not yet been satisfactorily explained is how AFRICOM’s interagency process will interact with other US programs and activities - and how DoD will ensure that its military activities do not compete with, undermine, or overshadow US development and diplomatic objectives throughout the continent.什么至今仍未得到令人满意的解释，是如何africom的机构间的互动过程中会与其他美国的计划和活动-以及如何国防部将确保其军事活动，不竞争，破坏，或掩盖了美国发展和外交目标，在整个非洲大陆。 The risks, which are both symbolic and practical, will need to be carefully managed.风险，这都是象征性和实际，将需要认真加以管理。 From a public diplomacy perspective, the elevation of AFRICOM to a position of apparent leadership in integrating US policy toward Africa may create the damaging impression (or allow US adversaries to argue) that the United States has a militarized approach to the continent.46 More substantively, the enormous asymmetry between the resources available to the Pentagon, on the one hand, and the State Department, USAID and other civilian agencies, on the other, raises the danger that any “shaping” activities that emerge from AFRICOM will be dominated by US defense priorities while giving short shrift to broader political and developmental considerations, (including the democratic accountability of those same security forces).从公共外交的角度来看，海拔africom一个立场明显的领导，在整合，美国对非洲政策可能造成的破坏性的印象（或允许美国对手的争论）表示，美国有一个军事化的方法来continent.46更实质性的，巨大的不对称性之间的现有资源，向五角大楼，一方面，和美国国务院，美国国际开发署和其他文职机构，另一方面，提高了危险，即任何“塑造”活动中出现的从africom将主导美国国防优先，兼顾短期shrift ，以更广泛的政治和发展的考虑， （包括民主问责制的同时，这些安全部队） 。 . 。 . 。

“In a recent briefing, the head of the AFRICOM Transition Team, Rear Admiral Robert Moeller, declared that “Strategic Success” for the new command would include the achievement of the following goals: “在最近的发布会上，头部的africom过渡时期工作队，海军少将罗伯特默勒 ， 宣称”战略的成功“为新的命令将包括实现以下目标：

- An African continent that knows liberty, peace, stability, and increasing prosperity -一个非洲大陆的知的自由，和平，稳定与日益繁荣

- Fragile states strengthened; decreased likelihood of failed states; all territory under the control of effective democracies -脆弱的国家加强;下跌的可能性失败的国家;所有控制下的领土有效的民主政体

-Economic development and democratic governance allow African states to take the lead in addressing African challenges. -经济发展和民主治理，使非洲国家率先采取措施解决非洲问题的挑战。 . 。 . 。

What is impressive about these strategic objectives - beyond their breadth — is how few lend themselves to DoD leadership. 什么是令人印象深刻的关于这些战略目标-超越其广度-是如何数借给自己的国防部的领导。 Generally speaking, the US military is not well-equipped, by its mandate and personnel, to expertly address the structural sources of underdevelopment, alienation and instability in target countries. 一般来说，美国军方是不是装备良好，其任务和人员， expertly解决结构性来源不发达，异化和不稳定的目标国家。 Although requisite skills can sometimes be found within the civil affairs component of the US Army, few soldiers possess deep expertise on matters of governance, development, and the rule of law. 虽然所需的技能，有时可以找到民政组成部分，美国军队，只有少数士兵具备深厚的专业知识，对问题的治理，发展和法治。 . 。 . 。

Finally, a number of European officials have expressed misgivings about the integration of US counter-terrorism and development agendas, suggesting that the new command could complicate common approaches to Africa within the donor community. 最后，一些欧洲官员已表示疑虑一体化的美国反恐怖主义和发展议程，这表明新的命令复杂的共同做法非洲国家捐助社会。 . 。 . 。

To be sure, there is far from total agreement on the nature and distance of this shift in the military, even within the Pentagon. 可以肯定的是，有远从总的协议的性质和距离，这种转变在军事上，甚至在五角大楼。 There are, for example, plenty of Army and Marine officers who would just as soon not be running day care centers in Tanzania. 有，例如，大量的军队和水警人员谁只想尽快不能运行日托中心在坦桑尼亚。

Even Defense Secretary Gates seemed to side with traditional diplomatic and development approaches in a recent speech in which he praised the role of civilian agencies. 甚至国防部长盖茨似乎方面与传统的外交和发展的办法，在最近一次讲话中，他赞扬的作用文职机构。 According to the Pentagon release: 据五角大楼发布日期：

Speaking at the Academy of American Diplomats in Washington, the secretary said there is bipartisan support on Capitol Hill to devote more resources to the State Department and other civilian agencies. 会上科学院美国外交官在华盛顿，局长说是两党的支持在国会山，以投入更多资源，以美国国务院和其他文职机构。

Since the war on terror began, President Bush, defense officials and military officers have stressed that all parts of the federal government must work together to combat extremists — that the military can put in place conditions for security, but civilian agencies are the repositories of expertise on governance, economics, agriculture and so on. 自反恐战争开始，布什总统，国防部官员和军事人员都强调，各部分联邦政府必须携手合作，以打击极端主义分子-即军事可以把在地方的安全条件，但文职机构是存放专门知识关于治理，经济，农业等。 Countries like Iraq and Afghanistan need these skills to cement progress in place. 国家，如伊拉克和阿富汗需要这些技能，以水泥进展情况的地方。

“There is a need for a much greater integration of our efforts,” Gates said. “是有需要的大得多整合我们的努力， ”盖茨说。 “There is clearly a need for a better way to organize interagency collaboration.” “这显然是一个需要有一个更好的方式来组织间合作” 。

The problem with the civilian agencies providing the personnel has not been a lack of will, but a lack of capabilities, Gates said. 问题与文职机构提供人事尚未缺乏意愿，但缺乏能力，盖茨说。 The State Department has about 6,600 Foreign Service officers. 国务院关于6600外交人员。 To put it in perspective, that’s barely enough to crew one carrier battle group in the Navy, the secretary said. 把它的角度看，这只能勉强船员一航舰战斗群在海军，局长说。

The upshot is that when civilian agencies cannot deploy personnel, service members step in to take up the slack. 其结果是，当文职机构不能部署人员，服务委员的一步采取行动疲弱。 The provincial reconstruction teams in Afghanistan and Iraq are primary examples of this, Gates said. 省级重建队，在阿富汗和伊拉克，小学这方面的例子，盖茨说。 The teams, which have slots for officials from the departments of agriculture, commerce, treasury, justice and so on, were staffed by military personnel so they effort could get up and running quickly. 队，其中有插槽官员从该部门的农业，商业，库务署，公义和等，配备军事人员，使他们的努力可以得到快速启动和运行。

“There aren’t deployable people in agriculture and commerce and treasury and so on that are prepared to go overseas,” Gates said. “有没有人部署在农业和商业及库务等，是准备前往海外， ”盖茨说。 And these skills are desperately needed, he emphasized. 而这些技能是迫切需要的，他强调。

Which all sounds comforting until you discover who’s going to be assigned to whom: 所有的声音安慰，直到你发现谁的去被分配到其中：

Defense personnel have always worked in the State Department, but now State Department personnel are assigned to DoD, especially with the combatant commands. 国防部人员一直工作在国务院，但现在国务院人员被分配到国防部，尤其是与战斗命令。 The newly formed US Africa Command, for example, has a large number of State Department personnel assigned to the organization. 新成立的美国非洲命令，例如，有一大批国务院人事分配给该组织。 US Southern Command also has a large number of personnel from civilian agencies as integral members of the command. 美军南方司令部也有大量的人员从民事机构作为成员的命令。 . 。 . 。

And he also called the civilian agencies a “combat multiplier,” hardly a reassuring description of peaceful diplomacy. 他还呼吁平民机构的一个“打击乘数， ”很难描述一个令人安心的和平外交政策。

Now consider this from an Economist article on Gates’ philosophy: 现在认为这是从一位经济学家的文章对盖茨的哲学：

In a recent article, General Peter Chiarelli, an adviser to Robert Gates, America’s secretary of defence, says more money has to be spent not on the Pentagon but on the “non-kinetic aspects of our national power”. 在最近的一篇文章，一般彼得chiarelli ，顾问罗伯特盖茨，美国的国务卿辩护说，更多的钱已被花了而不是五角大楼，但就“非动力学方面，我们国家的权力” 。 He recommends building up the “minuscule” State Department and USAID development agency (so small it is “little more than a contracting agency”), and reviving the United States Information Agency. 他建议建立“微不足道”美国国务院和美国国际开发署开发署（这么小，这是“多一点订约机构” ） ，和振兴美国新闻署。

As the American army expands, some thinkers. 作为美国军队的扩大，一些思想家。 . 。 . 。 say it needs not just more soldiers-nor even linguists, civil-affairs officers and engineers-but a fully fledged 20,000-strong corps of advisers that will train and “embed” themselves with allied forces around the world. 说它需要的不仅仅是更多的士兵-甚至也不语言学家，公务员事务人员和工程师，而是一个完全成熟的2.00万强团的顾问，将列车与“嵌入”自己与盟军在世界各地。 The idea makes army commanders blanch, but they do not question the underlying assumption. 的思想，使军队指挥官灼过，但他们并没有问题的基本假设。

As the American media has found in Iraq, embeddedness is not the repose of equals. 正如美国媒体在伊拉克发现的，镶嵌，是不是repose平等的。

o o Then there is the controversial Defense Department draft directive going around on the topic of irregular warfare that some believe lays down the basis for much further intrusion on civilian roles. 其次是争议的国防部指令草案绕过关于该专题的非正规战争，有些相信了基础，进一步入侵对平民的角色。 The directive would replace one that had already staked out sizable new turf, of which Patrick and Brown wrote: 该指令将取代一说，已孤注一掷了可观的新的草坪，其中帕特里克和布朗写道：

Chastened by its failure to plan for postwar Iraq and the chaos that resulted, the Pentagon has cast off its former aversion to nation-building. chastened其失败的计划和伊拉克战后的混乱所造成的，五角大楼已摆脱了其前的反感国家建设。 This shift was cemented in November 2005 with the signing of DoD Directive 3000.05, which declared that the US military would henceforth treat “Stability, Security, Transition and Reconstruction Operations” as a core mission, on a par with combat operations. 这种转变是硬质合金在2005年11月签署的国防部指令3000.05 ，其中宣称，美国军方今后对待“稳定，安全，过渡和重建行动”作为一项核心任务，就等同于作战行动。 Decidedly broad in scope, this directive extends DoD’s mandates and programs to a wide range of activities that are typically the province of civilian agencies, including reforming the security sector, establishing institutions of governance, reviving market activity and rebuilding infrastructure. 坚决范围广泛，这项指令扩展国防部的职权范围和程序，以各种各样的活动，通常是全省民用机构，包括改革安全部门，建立治理机构，恢复市场的活动和重建基础设施。 While the directive openly recognizes that many of these tasks are more appropriately carried out by civilian actors and agencies, it also states that this may not always be possible in highly insecure environments or where such civilian capabilities do not yet exist.” 同时，该指令公开承认，许多这些任务是较为恰当所进行的平民行动者和机构，它也指出，这并非总是可能在高度不安全的环境或如民用的能力，尚不存在“ 。

Still another way it all might look is described in American Diplomacy by Sam J,. 还有另一种方式，这一切看起来可能是描述在美国的外交由Sam J以来， 。 Holliday, a West Pont graduate and a former director of Stability Studies [sic] at the Army War College, and a retired army colonel. 霍利迪，西杜邦研究生和一名前任董事的稳定性研究[原文]在军队战争学院和一位退休的陆军上校。

Today there are two broad contending views regarding policy formulation and implementation for irregular warfare: 今天有两个广泛争论的意见，对于政策的制定和执行不规则战：

1. 1 。 Focus the military on conventional war against the armed forces of other states and focus the Foreign Service on diplomacy and negotiations to avoid war, while muddling through irregular warfare. 重点是军事上的常规战争对军队的其他国家和重点对外服务于外交和谈判，以避免战争，而muddling通过非正规战争。

2. 2 。 Recognize irregular warfare as being distinctive from both war and peace by creating a new Department of Stability with career personnel dedicated to irregular warfare. 认识到非正规战争作为独特的，由双方在战争与和平，创造一个新部门，稳定与职业的人员，专责非正规战争。 . 。 . 。

The first view has strong support within the military from those that do not want war-fighting forces to be used for internal security against insurgents attempting to overthrow those in authority. 第一种看法，具有很强的支持，军事，从那些不想作战力量被用于内部安全防范武装分子企图推翻那些在权威。 They do not want to be the handmaidens of “political strife,” and they want to avoid the cruel, violent, and unrewarding activities of internal conflict. 他们不想成为handmaidens “政治纷争” ，他们希望避免残忍，暴力，吃力不讨好的活动的内部冲突。 . 。 . 。 This first view sees the solution in a plan that unites all agencies of the US government. 这第一种看法认为，解决在一项计划，团结所有机构的美国政府。 These agencies have different philosophical, political, and institutional agendas. 这些机构有不同的哲学，政治和体制的议程。 Therefore, how to coordinate all US government agencies involved in foreign affairs (State, Defense, Justice, CIA, NSA, etc.) during policy formulation is the critical challenge. 因此，如何协调所有美国政府机构所涉及的外事（国家，国防部，司法部，中央情报局，国家安全局等）在政策的制定是至关重要的挑战。 Until this is done there will be turf battles, uncertainty, delays, and ineffectiveness. 直到这样做是会有的草地作战，不确定性，拖延，效率低下。 . 。 . 。

A Stability Department would allow the development of career personnel (military and civilian) dedicated to determining and using the means, strategies, tactics, and methods necessary for irregular warfare. 一个稳定，海关将允许开发人员的职业生涯（军事和文职人员）致力于确定和使用的手段，战略，战术和方法，必要的非正规战争。 This should make both policy formulation and implementation more effective and more efficient. 这应该使政策的制定和执行更有效和更有效率。 The result would be professionals without preconceptions shaped by war fighting or diplomacy, without institutional allegiance to either the military establishment or the foreign policy establishment, and without mindsets appropriate only for either war or peace. 其结果将是专业人士，没有先入为主的形由战争或外交，没有体制效忠，无论是军队编制或外交政策的建立，并没有适当的心态，只有无论是战争或和平。 Hopefully these professionals would be able to determine how to achieve stability through equilibrium at the lowest possible costs. 希望这些专业人士将可来确定如何实现稳定的平衡，通过在尽可能最低的成本。 . 。 . 。

Key to the concept of irregular warfare and a Department of Stability is the assumption of perpetual conflict, a chronic absence of peace and America’s continued colonial dominance, which others that see shrinking by the day. 关键的概念和非正规战争的一个部门，稳定是前提永久冲突，是一种慢性没有和平与美国的继续殖民统治地位，别人见萎缩，由天。 A Department of Stability would certainly seem as odd to young students a century from now as reading about the bureaucracy of British colonialism under Queen Victoria does today. 一个部门的稳定肯定会好像奇怪的青年学生一个世纪从现在起，作为读有关的官僚英国殖民主义下的维多利亚女王今天。

Besides, all morality aside, if there is one thing our time should have taught us it’s that war is about the dumbest way to go about anything that there is. 此外，所有的道德不谈，如果有一件事我们的时间应该有告诉我们，它的那场战争是关于dumbest路要走，什么是有。 After all, even the exceptionally well equipped and righteous America hasn’t won a real war against a comparable enemy since WWII and when you add in Vietnam, Korea and Iraq and then find yourself falling back on Grenada for props, it may finally be time to think of other approaches. 毕竟，即使是异常地好，装备和正义，美国并没有赢得一场真正的战争对一个可比的敌人，自二战和当您添加在越南，韩国和伊拉克，然后发现自己回落对格林纳达为道具，它可能最终时间想其他办法。

This has not, of course, been the fault of the troops, but of the star bedizened galaxy under which they serve, of presidents with testosteronic insecurities, and of toy boys on Capitol Hill willing to gamble our nation to satisfy another defense contractor aka campaign contributor. 这，当然不会被故障的部队，但明星bedizened银河下，他们所服务的，总统与testosteronic的不安全因素，和玩具男孩在国会山愿意赌我们的民族，以满足另一国防承包商又名运动投稿。 After all, even the best boatswain’s mate can’t save a ship from the rocks if those on the bridge can’t, or won’t, read the chart. 毕竟，即使是最好的绳架的伴侣无法保存的船舶，从岩石，如果那些在桥不能，或不会读图表。

The tragedy of modern military history is how much courage has been sacrificed for so many puerile, pointless or psychopathic ends. 悲剧的现代军事历史是多大的勇气，已经牺牲了这么多幼稚的，无谓的或心理变态结束。 Which is one good reason you want the better part of your foreign policy run by civilians and not generals. 这是一个很好的理由，您想要更好的一部分，您的外交政策所办的平民，而不是将军。

o o Another reason diplomats, development officials and civilians now working with the Pentagon are concerned abut the expansion of the military role was well outlined by an aide to General Petraeus: 另一个原因，外交官，发展的官员和平民，现在的工作与五角大楼关注的邻接扩张的军事作用，以及当时所概述的助手一般彼得雷乌斯：
At present, the US defense budget accounts for approximately half of total global defense spending, while the US armed forces employ about 1.68 million uniformed members. 目前，美国国防预算占了大约一半的全球总国防开支，而美国军队聘用约168.0万穿制服的成员。 By comparison, the State Department employs about 6,000 Foreign Service officers, while the US Agency for International Development has about 2,000. 相比之下，美国国务院员工约6000对外服务人员，而美国国际开发署已约2000年。 In other words, the Department of Defense is about 210 times larger than USAID and State combined - there are substantially more people employed as musicians in Defense bands than in the entire foreign service. 在其他的话，国防部是约210倍，大于美国国际开发署和国家结合起来-有大幅更多的人受聘为音乐家在防御带比，在整个对外服务。

There are plenty who won’t be all that happy having to deal with a military surge into diplomacy, including international non-profits, some of our allies and UN organizations. 有很多谁不会被所有的快乐不得不处理军事激增到外交，包括国际非利润，我们的一些盟国和联合国组织。 It is also hard to imagine rock stars throwing themselves into global fundraising fests when they know the money will go to pad the budget of a General Petraeus. 这亦是很难想象摇滚明星投身全球筹款巨星汇，当他们知道这笔钱将去垫预算一般彼得雷乌斯。

Here is how one civilian professional - who represents others who do a lot work for the Pentagon - reacted to the proposed new directive: 在这里，是如何一平民的专业-谁代表谁别人做了很多工作五角大楼-反应拟议的新指令：

As I understand things, if this change were to be implemented, we would have the following: 据我了解的东西，如果这种改变被实施，我们将有以下内容：

The connection between State and Defense to harmonize stability and reconstruction operations would become moot because the funding and control of the stability operations would be subsumed under “irregular warfare.” It would be up to DoD to decide if they needed to bring in civilians to help them out.之间的联系，美国国务院与国防部的协调，稳定和重建行动将成为模拟，因为资金和控制的稳定行动将归入“非正规战” 。便高达国防部，以决定他们是否需要把在平民的帮助出来。

It would become even more difficult for civilian organizations and agencies to be involved in any comfortable way, given that all humanitarian aid, providing essential services, building local governance, etc., would become part of “irregular warfare.” In fact, I can’t think of a single humanitarian aid organization that would agree to become involved in “irregular warfare.”它会变得更加困难，为民间组织和机构能够参与在任何舒适的方式，由于所有的人道主义援助，提供基本服务，建设地方治理等，将成为一部分“非正规战” ，事实上，我可以'吨认为，一个单一的人道主义援助组织，都会同意，成为所涉及的“不规则战争” 。

This would continue and extend the idea that “irregular warfare” is an appropriate approach to dealing with fragile or failed states, with post-conflict situations, or preventing future conflicts.这将继续和扩大的思想， “非正规战”是一个适当的办法来处理与脆弱或失败的国家，冲突后局势，或防止未来的冲突。 Such policies will be completely rejected by the civilian agencies of the US Government, NGOs, the international community, without even attending to what the fragile states would think.这些政策将完全拒绝了由文职机构的美国政府，非政府组织，国际社会，甚至没有参加什么脆弱的国家会认为。

We would have even more power and control in the military, creating an even greater imbalance between the civilian agencies and the military that are supposed to be working to “harmonize” their activities now.我们将有更权力和控制，在军事，创造一个更大的不平衡之间的民事机构和军队，是为了工作，以“协调”他们的活动现在。 They are so underfunded and undermanned at this point that it is very difficult to manage the civilian side of the “harmonization” process effectively.他们是如此不足和undermanned在这一点上，这是非常难以管理的民事方面的“协调”的过程中有效。

The military would then be left with a mission to provide for stability operations across the board for which they do not have training, are not equipped to do, have not been able to successfully accomplish (witness Iraq and Afghanistan), which would mean that the US capacity to contribute to serious peace building efforts would be seriously undermined even further than it is now.军事便只剩下一个特派团提供稳定的行动全国委员会，而他们没有训练，不具备这样做，仍未能圆满完成（证人伊拉克和阿富汗的） ，这意味着该美国作出贡献的能力严重的建设和平的努力将受到严重破坏，甚至进一步比现在。

The military takeover of traditionally civilian foreign policy roles is part of a mission creep that has been going on a long time. 军事接管的传统民用外交政策的角色是一个组成部分，蠕变的使命已经持续了很长的时间。 My first article on the topic was 12 years ago when the concerns were the military’s expansion of the futile and terribly damaging drug war and its growing interference with domestic civil liberties. 我的第一篇文章就这一专题是12年前，当关注军事的扩张，该是徒劳的和可怕的战争损害的药物和其日益增长的干扰与国内公民自由权。

Things have only gotten worse since. 事情只有恶化以来。 Now diplomacy and international development are joining the target list for the mission creep, by a military that has finally found a battleground it truly likes. 现在外交和国际发展，是加入的目标名单，该特派团的蠕变，由军队，终于找到了真正的战场，它喜欢。 And we, the citizens funding it all, will once again lose the war. 而我们，公民的资金，这一切，将再次失去了战争。

See More: 看到更多的： Warfare 战 World News 世界新闻

Have Your Say: All War All The Time 有您的说：所有战争的所有时间
Please note, only selected comments will be published.请注意，只有选定的评论将出版。

Or discuss this report in our our new forums 或讨论这个报告在我们的我们的新论坛

RSS 的RSS TrackBack URL 跟踪 RUI

Name (required) 姓名（必填）

Mail (will not be published) (required) 邮件（不会被公布） （必填）

Website 网站

This entry was posted on Saturday, May 24th, 2008 at 10:11 am and is filed under 此项目被张贴在周六， 2008年5月24日在上午10时11分，并提交下 War & Terrorism News 战争和恐怖主义新闻 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the 您可以按照任何的反应，此项目通过 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. 喂养。 You can 您可以 leave a response 留下的回应 , or ，或 trackback Trackback跟踪 from your own site. 从你自己的网站。

Loading ...载入中...

TOP NEWS DISCUSSIONS top新闻讨论

LATEST NEWS DISCUSSIONS 最新消息讨论

Activism & Protest News | Business News | Civil & Human Rights News | Environmental News | Media News | Globalisation News | Web Development News

ADVERTISEMENTS

SITE MAPS

7/7 Afghanistan阿富汗 Alternative Energy Art BBC Big Brother Bilderberg Biometrics Bush CIA Climate Change Cover Up Cults Culture Database State David Hicks David Ray Griffin Democrats Demos Drugs Education EU False Flag FBI Fraud Free Speech Freemasons G8 Globalization Guantanamo Health News History ID Cards Internet Iran伊朗 Iraq伊拉克 Israel以色列 Law Marches MI5 MI6 Microsoft Military MoD Money Music NASA Neocons NSA Oil Pakistan巴基斯坦 Podcast Police State Propaganda RFID RINF Rumsfeld Science Secrecy Security Space Sports Spying Stephen Lendman Technology Terrorism Tony Blair Torture TV UK News UN USA News Video Voting Warfare White House Wolfowitz World News Yahoo
2003 - 2005 Archives | 2005 - 2007 Archives | 2007 - 2008 Archives | Current Archives | Past Version

About | DVD Store | Opinion | Reviews | Special Guests | Webmasters