门罗主义不会轻易消亡
2023-12-26 21:20阅读：
在200年的生命历程中，门罗主义被赞誉为美国外交政策的基石，同时也作为一种帝国主义工具遭到辱骂。
在未作明确宣布的情况下，美国已寻求把门罗主义变成一种全球原则。我们不仅主张我们干预非洲和中东等地方的权利，而且反对别的大国做同样的事情。今天，我们把“你们靠边站，我们会处理此事”的门罗主义原则运用于世界的大部分地区。
为了庆祝本月的纪念日，国会议员们提出一些宣告门罗主义永恒价值的决议案。这些决议案的发起人之一、共和党参议员皮特·里基茨说：“200年来，门罗主义对外国势力在西半球的干涉发出警告。鉴于目前来自俄罗斯、伊朗之类敌对国家的威胁，这些警告在今天尤其贴切。”
一些拉丁美洲人士对此却不敢苟同。墨西哥《尤卡坦日报》称，门罗主义始于“反对欧洲殖民主义，但在历史进程中，它却一直被用来为美国对拉丁美洲的干预辩护”。多米尼加共和国专栏作家称门罗主义是“一项旨在保护美国在西半球经济利益的扩张主义政策”。
约翰·肯尼迪总统在1962年古巴导弹危机期间曾被要求援引这一学说，但他对这一想法嗤之以鼻，反问道：“门罗主义，这是什么鬼东西？”
2013年当国务卿约翰·克里告诉西点军校的学员们“门罗主义时代一去不复返”的时候，学员们对他报以响亮的欢呼。
但是且慢，2018年当特朗普总统的国家安全顾问约翰·博尔顿告诉迈阿密听众“门罗主义将依然盛行”时，他获得了同样响亮的欢呼。
尽管被称为门罗主义，但它并非出于詹姆斯·门罗总统的思想。他的国务卿约翰·昆西·亚当斯当时担心欧洲列强可能会寻求夺回在拉美刚刚独立的殖民地。于是，他在门罗1823年向国会发表的年终演说中，偷偷插入了几行文字。门罗宣称，拉美国家“从今以后将不再被任何欧洲大国视为殖民对象……我们将把它们将自己的制度沿用到西半球任何部分的企图
，视作对我们的和平与安全的威胁”。
1904年，西奥多·罗斯福总统极端地扩展了这一学说。他宣称美国有权对被美国判定犯有“慢性罪行”的任何拉美国家进行干预，即便这种罪行与外部干预没有任何关系。在后来被称为“罗斯福推论”的陈述中，他宣称“美国对门罗主义的坚持可以迫使美国在遇到此类罪行或不作为的情形时(无论多么不情愿)都能行使国际警察权力”。
在接下来的10年里，这一宣言——并未写入国际法或被其他任何国家认可——被用来作为向多米尼加共和国、尼加拉瓜和海地派出美国海军陆战队的理由。
第一次世界大战后的几年里，在三任保守的共和党总统任内，美国曾远离这种大张旗鼓宣示强权的做法。美国国务院1928年曾宣布，美国将不再对拉丁美洲进行干预，除非是为了阻止外国势力的进入。这就是富兰克林·罗斯福总统后来对拉丁美洲采取“睦邻”政策的开始。当时，门罗主义奄奄一息。
冷战的寒流使它死灰复燃。在1954年的一次拉美会议上，时任美国国务卿约翰·福斯特·杜勒斯赢得了一项授权美国对被“国际共产主义运动”统治的任何国家发动打击的决议。三个月后，他利用这一决议筹划推翻了危地马拉的左倾政府。
门罗主义是关于大国势力范围(即影响邻近国家政治的决心)的经典论述。然而，美国却不认可其他大国采取类似做法的权利。比如，我们谴责伊朗支持其境外的武装组织。华盛顿的许多人认为，门罗主义是一个永远有用的工具。这一点在格兰德河以南的地方得到了广泛验证。如果美国坚持将其应用于其他大陆，得到的反应将不会有很大不同。
The Monroe Doctrine just won't die
A policy meant to ward off European colonialism has been used to
justify much more than that.
By Stephen Kinzer
Musty old documents can shape and shatter worlds. Among the most
potent is the Monroe Doctrine, which was proclaimed 200 years ago
this month.
For many people in the United States, it conjures only vague
memories from high school history classes. In Latin America,
however, some see it as a bloody club that has beaten their
continent down for generations. Over its 200-year lifespan, the
Monroe Doctrine has been hailed as a cornerstone of US foreign
policy and reviled as an imperialist tool.
The most curious piece of this doctrine’s history has unfolded in
recent decades. The policy was crafted as a direct warning to
outside powers: Stay out of the Western Hemisphere. Today, however,
we apply it far beyond our own hemisphere. Without explicitly
saying so, the United States has sought to turn the Monroe Doctrine
into a global principle. We not only assert our right to intervene
in places like Africa and the Middle East but oppose other powers
that do the same. Today we apply the Monroe Doctrine principle —
you stay out, we’ll handle this — to much of the world.
To commemorate this month’s anniversary, members of Congress have
introduced resolutions declaring the eternal value of the Monroe
Doctrine. “For 200 years, the Monroe Doctrine has warned foreign
powers about meddling in the Western Hemisphere,” said Republican
Senator Pete Ricketts, one of the sponsors. “These warnings are
particularly relevant today, given current threats from adversaries
like Russia, Iran, and the People’s Republic of China.”
Some Latin Americans beg to differ. A Mexican newspaper, Diario de
Yucatán, said that the Monroe Doctrine began as “opposition to
European colonialism, but over the course of history it has been
used to justify United States intervention in Latin America.” A
columnist in the Dominican Republic, which like Mexico has been
invaded by US Marines, called it “an expansionist policy aimed at
protecting US economic interests in the Western Hemisphere.”
President John F. Kennedy was urged to invoke the doctrine during
the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis but scorned the idea by asking, “The
Monroe Doctrine — what the hell is that?” In 2013 Secretary of
State John Kerry was loudly cheered when he told West Point cadets,
“The era of the Monroe Doctrine is over.”
But wait — in 2018, President Trump’s national security adviser
John Bolton was cheered just as loudly when he told a Miami
audience, “The Monroe Doctrine is alive and well!” Secretary of
State Rex Tillerson called it “as relevant today as it was the day
it was written.”
Despite the doctrine’s name, it wasn’t President James Monroe’s
idea. His secretary of state, John Quincy Adams, feared that
European powers might seek to retake their newly independent
colonies in Latin America. So he slipped a few lines into Monroe’s
year-end address to Congress in 1823. Monroe declared that Latin
American countries were “henceforth not to be considered as
subjects for colonization by any European powers. . . . We would
consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any
portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and
safety.”
Presidents Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses Grant used the Monroe
Doctrine as it was intended. They supported revolutionaries in
Mexico who were fighting against Emperor Maximilian, a king imposed
by the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. In 1904, however, President
Theodore Roosevelt radically expanded the doctrine. He asserted the
right of the United States to intervene in any Latin American
country it judged guilty of “chronic wrongdoing,” even if it had
nothing to do with outside intervention. In what became known as
the Roosevelt Corollary, he declared: “Adherence of the United
States to the Monroe Doctrine may force the United States, however
reluctantly, in flagrant cases of such wrongdoing or impotence, to
the exercise of an international police power.”
Over the next decade, that declaration — not enshrined in
international law or accepted by any other nation — was used to
justify the deployment of US Marines to the Dominican Republic,
Nicaragua, and Haiti.
In the years after World War I, under three conservative Republican
presidents, the United States stepped back from such grandiose
assertions of power. The State Department declared in 1928 that the
United States would no longer intervene in Latin America except to
block the entry of foreign powers. This was the beginning of the
“good neighbor” policy toward Latin America, which President
Franklin Roosevelt later embraced. The Monroe Doctrine was
dying.
The freezing blast of the Cold War revived it. At a Latin American
conference in 1954, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles won
approval of a resolution giving the United States the right to
strike against any country dominated by “the international
communist movement.” Three months later, he used that resolution to
promote the overthrow of Guatemala’s left-leaning government.
The Monroe Doctrine is a classic assertion of a great power’s
sphere of influence — its determination to shape politics in nearby
countries. Yet the United States has not recognized the right of
other powers to behave similarly. We condemn Iran for sponsoring
militias outside its borders and regularly denounce China for
pressuring Pacific island nations. Many in Washington consider the
Monroe Doctrine an eternally useful tool. South of the Rio Grande,
it is widely detested. If the United States insists on applying it
to other continents, the reaction will not be much different.
