外媒：美国会承认阿富汗地区的失败么？

美国会承认阿富汗地区的失败么？
Is the U.S. Admitting Defeat in Afghanistan?

译文简介:
美国会承认阿富汗地区的失败么？ 即使塔利班暴乱愈演愈烈，高付出低回报的现状可能促使西方从阿富汗撤军
译文来源:
原文地址：ht tp://ww w.lanacion.com.ar/1509644-la-china-que-impulso-el-otro-mao
原创翻译：龙腾网 w ww.ltaaa.com 翻译：萧陌 转载请注明出处
正文翻译:
Don’t expect to hear about it in the presidential debates, but the U.S. will leave Afghanistan locked in an escalating civil war when it observes the 2014 deadline for withdrawing combat troops set by the Obama Administration — and supported by Governor Mitt Romney. The New York Times reported on Tuesday that the U.S. military has had to give up on hopes of inflicting enough pain on the Taliban to set favorable terms for a political settlement. Instead, it will be left up to the Afghan combatants to find their own political solution once the U.S. and its allies take themselves out of the fight.

总统竞选辩论中肯定不会提到从阿富汗撤军，但2014年前从内战愈演愈烈的阿富汗撤军似乎已成定局----罗姆尼也很赞成奥巴马政府的这一决定。纽约时报周四报道称美军不得不放弃给塔利班以足够打击是的在政治协商解决中处以有利地位的打算。当美军及其联军撤出阿富汗后，阿富汗不得不自己寻找政治解决途径。

Washington has known for years that it had no hope of destroying the Taliban, and that it would have to settle for a compromise political solution with an indigenous insurgency that remains sufficiently popular to have survived the longest U.S. military campaign in history. Still, as late as 2009, the U.S. had hoped to set the terms of that compromise and force the Taliban to find a place for itself in the constitutional order created by the NATO invasion and accept a Karzai government it has long dismissed as “puppets.” This was the logic behind President Obama’s “surge,” which sent an additional 30,000 U.S. troops into the Taliban’s heartland with the express purpose of bloodying the insurgents to the point that their leaders would sue for peace on Washington’s terms. But the surge ended last month with the Taliban less inclined than ever to accept U.S. terms as the 2014 departure date for U.S. forces looms.

几年前华盛顿就放弃的彻底摧毁塔利班的想法。这是有史以来在美军进攻下维持时间最长的骚乱，至今从未停息，美军不得不妥协寻找折中的解决方案。同时，武力迫使塔利班接受北约条款承认被长期斥为“傀儡政权”的卡尔扎伊政府的行动也宣告失败，奥巴马政府为此增派3万士兵进入塔利班腹地血洗叛乱分子，但，随着美军撤离截止日期的临近，塔利班越发不可能接受美国条件。上月，美军的围剿行动停止。

Now, according to the Times, the best-case scenario has been reduced to one in which, as a result of NATO’s training and armaments, “the Taliban find the Afghan army a more formidable adversary than they expect and [will] be compelled, in the years after NATO withdraws, to come to terms with what they now dismiss as a ‘puppet’ government.” Some would see that as another in a long line of optimistic assessments. The Afghan security forces, or at least its ethnic-Tajik core, may well find the political will to fight the Pashtun-dominated Taliban and the means to prevent themselves from being overrun. But it’s a safe bet that the security forces will control considerably less Afghan territory than NATO forces currently do.

泰晤士报称，如今，原本最好的设想（译注：消灭塔利班）已经进一步变化，“联军撤离后，塔利班将不得不面对由于北约训练和装备而变得超出其预期的强劲敌手，并最终被迫向它认为的傀儡政府妥协”。很多人对此表示乐观。阿富汗安全部队，至少其塔吉克族核心很可能为政治因素继续与普什图人主导的塔利班战斗，以避免被欺凌。但可以百分之百确定，安全部队将失去现有的一些土地的控制。

And once it is clear that even a raging Taliban insurgency is no longer considered an obstacle to the departure of U.S. and allied combat units, the rationale for staying even through 2014 becomes murky. Already there’s been talk of having little more than a residual force of trainers and special forces in place by the time the withdrawal deadline arrives — and that such a force would stay beyond the deadline anyway. NATO’s Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen conceded in an interview with the Guardian that the Alliance is considering an earlier withdrawal, its morale battered by ongoing “insider” attacks, which in this year alone have seen more than 50 alliance troops killed by members of the very Afghan forces they’re mentoring.

一旦确定即使狂怒的塔利班叛乱军不在是北约联军撤离的障碍，驻留至2014年的打算也将可有可无。已有消息说撤离期限打来时会有一小批教官和特殊部队执行任务，无论如何他们会之后驻留下来。北约秘书长Anders Fogh Rasmussen在《英国卫报》的一次采访承认联军在考虑提前撤离，今年由于内部攻击牺牲了至少50名士兵，而这些袭击正是他们训练的阿富汗士兵，令军队士气大受打击。

More-pessimistic analysts harbor doubt that either the current system of government or the security forces will long survive a U.S. departure. Despite Western donors and backers still issuing the same pleas for good governance and anticorruption efforts that have been made of President Hamid Karzai for the best part of a decade, there are serious doubts that an election scheduled for 2014 — in which Karzai, after two terms, is constitutionally barred from running — would be any more successful in creating a new national consensus than previous, crooked elections have been. Karzai, in fact, is believed to be preparing to run his older brother Abdul Qayum in his stead and keep power within his immediate circle.

持消极态度的分析员harbor怀疑美军撤离后，现行的政府体系和安全部队是否可以长期存在。机关西方支持者和捐助人始终辩称卡尔扎伊政府在过去十年为更好的政府管理和治理腐败做出巨大努力和贡献，但依然有人坚信，计划于2014年的选举将比2009年被操纵的选举更能创造民族和谐。根据宪法，2014年卡尔扎伊不能再参选总统，但据称卡尔扎伊将帮助自己的哥哥Abdul Qayum竞选，使政府维持在自己人的掌控中。

His regime remains shot through with corruption, but the West has long struggled with the absence of a credible alternative. And a transition in which Afghans will be required to take charge of their own security against the Taliban is likely to exacerbate Karzai’s tendency to empower warlords whose backing he needs in a fight. And with NATO eyeing the exits, it’s an open question just how much pressure Karzai will face to ensure a credible election.

卡尔扎伊政府因为腐败横生而备受诟病，但西方一直没有更好的选择。政府要掌握安全不对对抗塔利班的过渡期是的卡尔扎伊不得不向军阀们放出部分权力，他需要军阀的支持。北约很清楚的看到这点，问题很明显，卡尔扎伊可以为公平的选举顶住多大的压力。

British Conservative MP Rory Stewart, who served the coalition authority in Iraq and who, in 2002, famously walked the of fghanistan, alone, documenting his encounters with locals along the way, insists it’s time to face up to grim reality in Afghanistan. He recently wrote in the Financial Times:

If the U.S., Britain and their allies leave Afghanistan, there will be chaos and perhaps civil war. The economy will falter and the Afghan government will probably be unable to command the loyalty or support of its people. The Taliban could significantly strengthen their position in the south and east, and attack other areas. Powerful men, gorged on foreign money, extravagantly armed and connected to the deepest veins of corruption and gangsterism, will flex their muscles. For all these reasons departure will feel — rightly — like a betrayal of Afghans and of the soldiers who have died.

英国保守派国会议员Rory Stewart，曾在伊拉克联合政府中供职，于2002年独自走遍阿富汗并记录下沿途所有遭遇。他坚持现在是时候正式阿富汗冰冷的现实，最近他在《金融时报》中写道：
如果美国、英国及其联军撤离阿富汗，骚乱甚至内战就会发生，经济动荡，卡尔扎伊政府很可能不能维持军队的民众的忠诚和信任。塔利班可以极大巩固他们在南部和东部的地位，并进攻其他地区。有外国金钱和武装支持的人和参与腐败、强盗的地下组织，将会蠢蠢欲动。这些都让人觉得撤军是对阿富汗人民和牺牲在这片土地上的人们的背叛。

But a decade of war has proved that Western armies are no more capable than their Soviet counterparts were in the 1980s of eliminating an indigenous insurgency in Afghanistan. Stewart continues:

In the absence of “victory,” three alternative strategies have been proposed: training the Afghan security forces, political settlement with the Taliban and a regional solution. But training Afghan forces, which cost $12bn in 2010 alone, will not guarantee their future loyalty to a Kabul government. Two years and many regional conferences have passed since the formation of the Afghan Higher Peace council, and the clear NATO endorsement of reconciliation: but there is no sign that insurgents, the Kabul government or its neighbours will reach a deal, or feel much desire so to do. So there is no military solution, and no political solution either. Nor will there be before the troops leave. We will have to deal for decades with a troubled Afghanistan, which is not likely in my lifetime to be as wealthy as Libya, as effectively governed as Iraq, as educated as Syria, or as institutionally mature as Pakistan.

但十年的阿富汗战争表明西方军队并没有像他们曾经的对手于20世纪80年代消灭阿富汗本土叛军的苏联那样能力非凡。Stewart继续写道：
由于各种失败，其他三个代替方案提了出来：训练政府军，与塔利班政治协商和地区融合。但单单训练政府军就与2010年一年消耗了120亿美元，这还不能保证军队未来对卡尔扎伊政府的忠诚。自从北约表达和谈意愿和阿富汗高级和平委员会成立以来，开过许多地区会议，但没有任何迹象表明反叛军、卡尔扎伊政府及其邻国达成和谈或有强烈意向。所以军事途径和政治途径均告失败。军队撤离前达到成功已成奢望。我们花了十年来解决阿富汗这个麻烦，但恐怕在我有生之年也难以见到阿富汗如利比亚般富足，如伊拉克般有效管理，如叙利亚般有教养，如巴基斯坦般成熟。

Western countries, he argues, have done as much as they are able; their only option now is to provide financial backing to sustain the Kabul government and the sort of military support — from nearby air bases — that would prevent the Taliban from mobilizing heavy weaponry to overrun its rivals. The rest will be up to the Afghans to sort out among themselves — a conversation that will be conducted with weapons until the limits of each side’s capacity to impose its will are apparent to their commanders and regional backers, and that new battlefield equilibrium sets the terms for new political arrangements. Chances are, it’s not going to look much like the Afghanistan the U.S. had hoped to leave behind.

Rory Stewart认为，西方世界已经做了他们所有能做的，现在唯一能做的就是为卡尔扎伊政府提供经济保障和一些来自附近的空军基地的军事支持，防止塔利班组织重型武器推翻政府。新的势力平衡可以为新的政治安排奠定基础。很可能，阿富汗形势不会像美军所期待的那样发展。
评论翻译:
1.Mexi Gogue
Afghanistan remains undefeated. How are they not in a BCS bowl???

阿富汗不败！他们怎么没有巴莱克银行股份呢？

2.rehan
The Freedom fighters、 of the most poor country in the world has finally defeated a coalition force of the most powerful countries in the world, this is how the faith in ALLAH helps Muslims to stand firm in front of Evil Forces. Time to accept a disrespectful defeat and go back home.

自由战士们、世界上最贫穷的国家最终击败世界上最强大几个国家的联军，是对阿拉的信仰帮助MSL坚定地抵抗邪恶的美联军。该接受这个丢脸的失败滚回家了·····

3.Yoshi_1
Foregone conclusion. The war was lost the moment it was declared. This country doesn't fight wars to win. It's become more of a business: lives in one end, money out the other to large private companies.
PLEASE, whichever of you "wins" in November, BRING MY GUYS HOME!

哥早就知道会这样，这场战争一开始就不会赢，美国不是为了胜利才打的，更像一场生意:收割生命，个人财团敛财。
摆脱，你们俩家伙不管谁胜了，把我们的孩子们带回家！

4.goldenrulejoe
I agree with you Yoshi but the american people and their leaders dont care about your guys. If they did they would do something about getting them home. Sorry if the truth hurts.
in reply to Yoshi_1

同意楼上，但美国人和政府压根不关心我们的战士，要是在意他们会做出对他们回家的努力，现实总是很伤人

5.DLeroy_1
So many of the difficulties in which we find ourselves in our foreign engagements are concomitant with the creation of the "All Volunteer Army". Administrations, both Democratic and Republican, were compelled to get the American people out of foreign policy and military decisions. They had their hats pulled down painfully over their ears in Vietnam. What better way to do so than to get rid of the draft, call for a volunteer army and tap the rich resources of young, desperate youth of the lower classes.
in reply to Yoshi_1

LSS，我们在对外干涉方面的各种困难都是纯种志愿军出现的副产物。民主和共和式管理迫使美国难以完成自己个对外政策和军事决定。我们得排除越南的噪音。比放弃原计划更好的方式是号召志愿军利用大量的年轻人，那些绝望的底层青年

6.snowleopard (cat folk gallery)
We have already lost the war - its time to accept it, admit it, and get our troops home before any more die. Its not the failure of the soldiers in any way; its the political leadership of the nation that has failed them.

我们已经失败了，接受承认它吧，关键是在跟多伤亡出现前把军队撤回来。失败不是因为我们的士兵而是领导层的责任

7.Mike259
And how exactly do you win a war in Afghanistan? What's the final objective? Hugs and kisses with the various tribes that live in the mountains? This was not a war that could be won. Armies, for centuries, had only one mission and that was to destroy everything in it's path and deliver so much pain that it would take generations before the enemy population had the nerve to rise again.
But here we are in the 21st century, sending the most powerful army the world has ever seen to wage a PR campaign,to win hearts and souls,...
in reply to snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

输赢的标准是啥，楼上的？最终目标是啥？和山里的部落拥抱亲吻么？这是场根本不可能胜利的战争。军队从来只有一种职能，碾碎一切阻路之人，屠杀敌人直至敌人不得不花好几代人的时间才能恢复人口再图崛起。军队只能带去痛苦而非欢乐
但我们身处21世纪，我们们竟然想送出世界有史以来最强大的军队发动一场战争来赢得敌人的心和灵魂？

8.DEVONECO
Its about the oil pipeline from the Central Asian countries through Afghanistan - not about wining any war!
in reply to Mike259

ls，为了中东石油，从不为赢得战争

9.airbornevet101
You are exactly right. The US wants to fight a war and come out in the end smelling like a rose with everyone loving us. You will never win a war that way, you will only at some point withdraw saying you won, as will be done in Afghanistan.
in reply to Mike259

lss，太对了！美国做了婊子还想立牌坊，做大梦吧！别想赢，只能边撤离便自夸胜利，就像对阿富汗一样

10.duduong
I don't think the political leadership of recent years could have done much better than they did. The fate was sealed when resources were diverted away from Afghanistan to prepare for a new war in Iraq back in 2002. The last ten years of fighting was done only because this was how long it took for the American populace at large to accept defeat.
in reply to snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

6楼的，我觉得这几年奥巴马政府已经做到最好了。2002年中心转向伊朗已经就定了阿富汗战场的命运，后十年的战争只不过是为了让国内接受失败。

11.oldmo
Why did we go back ? America can only handle so many Viet Nam's.
in reply to duduong

楼上的，我们为什么要撤，美国可以玩弄众多“越南”！

12.18235
it was all about scumbag pakistan, that usa still gives billions to.
the pakistan/afghanistan border is like a country onto itself...obama was hiding in plain sight in pakistan.
in reply to duduong

lss，都是因为卑鄙的巴基斯坦，咱们现在还给他援助，擦！
巴基斯坦、阿富汗两国就像一个一样····奥巴马就是不愿意正视这个问题

13.Deejay Revel
"Osama".....Obama was in plain sight last night..
in reply to 18235

sb奥巴马，昨晚上他的确一览无余~（译注：与楼上用了一个短语in plain sight ）

14.iRd
seems like the scumbags were well prepared and ripped you like they should of . Dont you get it? they had seen this coming since day 1 because they had seen USSR go down, so it was important for them to keep the other option open.
in reply to 18235

lss,我怎么觉得你像给巴基斯坦干了一样。你不明白么，从苏联陨落第一天他们就预见了这一天，有另一只大腿可抱对他们很重要

15.6thangle
Its the mentality of Afghan nothing else!
in reply to snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

6楼的，失败是因为他们是阿富汗人，疯狂的信仰 不为其他

16.hardworker777
My God, all you had to do was talk to the Russians. But no, we're mighty AMERICA, CAPTAIN AMERICA, we can do anything we want, blah blah blah. Makes me sad for the thousands of Americans and millions of Afghans and Iraqis killed.

天哪，只要跟俄罗斯人谈就好了么····不！我们是强大的美利坚，长官美利坚！我们可以为所欲为，blablabla···
唉，数千多大兵和数百万阿富汗人死亡，悲伤···

17.18235
the usa won, in the short time, in afghanistan----the dumb russians lost even from the start.
yes, thousands of great americans were killed----and a couple hundred thousand afghans and iraqis.
millions---that's michael moore and kgb russian putin propaganda.
there are more spanish speaking illegal aliens in usa than are afghan/iraqi dead.
and kurdistan is thriving, for first time in 100 years---thanks to usa.
in reply to hardworker777

ls，我们赢了，短期内。白痴俄罗斯人还有一开始就输了
是的，数千大兵牺牲了，还有数万阿富汗人和伊拉克人死了
数百晚？那是迈克尔·摩尔和普京的宣传，你也敢信
在美国死的西班牙语非法外籍人员要比阿富汗人和伊拉克人多
因为美国，未来100年库尔德斯坦很繁荣

（译注：库尔德斯坦包括土耳其东南部、伊拉克北部和伊朗西部若干地区，以及叙利亚和亚美尼亚的一小部分）
（译注：迈克尔·摩尔，美国著名导演、作家及自由派时事评论员，以制作讽刺时事的纪录片闻名，而史上最卖座的九部纪实电影中就有四部出于摩尔之手。）

18.dou44
18235: Your history and facts are your own. Like the US mission in Afghanistan, your position is not based in reality either.
in reply to 18235

ls，你历史、数据都自己编的。你的立场就像美国在阿富汗的任务一样不现实。

19.18235
YOU get your information from al jazera, so that's where YOUR prejudices come from.
Iraq's population was around 25 million at start of iraq war---with lots of the dead involving muslims killing muslims....which is what muslims are known for.
Muslims dont believe in life, they believe in death.

你的数据是基地组织发的，这也是你偏见的由来
伊拉克战争开始时总人口约2500万，而且MSL间的自相残杀造成了很多死亡，这事儿大家都知道
MSL不相信生命，他们相信死亡可以带来永远的幸福美国会承认阿富汗地区的失败么？
Is the U.S. Admitting Defeat in Afghanistan?

译文简介:
美国会承认阿富汗地区的失败么？ 即使塔利班暴乱愈演愈烈，高付出低回报的现状可能促使西方从阿富汗撤军
译文来源:
原文地址：ht tp://ww w.lanacion.com.ar/1509644-la-china-que-impulso-el-otro-mao
原创翻译：龙腾网 w ww.ltaaa.com 翻译：萧陌 转载请注明出处
正文翻译:
Don’t expect to hear about it in the presidential debates, but the U.S. will leave Afghanistan locked in an escalating civil war when it observes the 2014 deadline for withdrawing combat troops set by the Obama Administration — and supported by Governor Mitt Romney. The New York Times reported on Tuesday that the U.S. military has had to give up on hopes of inflicting enough pain on the Taliban to set favorable terms for a political settlement. Instead, it will be left up to the Afghan combatants to find their own political solution once the U.S. and its allies take themselves out of the fight.

总统竞选辩论中肯定不会提到从阿富汗撤军，但2014年前从内战愈演愈烈的阿富汗撤军似乎已成定局----罗姆尼也很赞成奥巴马政府的这一决定。纽约时报周四报道称美军不得不放弃给塔利班以足够打击是的在政治协商解决中处以有利地位的打算。当美军及其联军撤出阿富汗后，阿富汗不得不自己寻找政治解决途径。

Washington has known for years that it had no hope of destroying the Taliban, and that it would have to settle for a compromise political solution with an indigenous insurgency that remains sufficiently popular to have survived the longest U.S. military campaign in history. Still, as late as 2009, the U.S. had hoped to set the terms of that compromise and force the Taliban to find a place for itself in the constitutional order created by the NATO invasion and accept a Karzai government it has long dismissed as “puppets.” This was the logic behind President Obama’s “surge,” which sent an additional 30,000 U.S. troops into the Taliban’s heartland with the express purpose of bloodying the insurgents to the point that their leaders would sue for peace on Washington’s terms. But the surge ended last month with the Taliban less inclined than ever to accept U.S. terms as the 2014 departure date for U.S. forces looms.

几年前华盛顿就放弃的彻底摧毁塔利班的想法。这是有史以来在美军进攻下维持时间最长的骚乱，至今从未停息，美军不得不妥协寻找折中的解决方案。同时，武力迫使塔利班接受北约条款承认被长期斥为“傀儡政权”的卡尔扎伊政府的行动也宣告失败，奥巴马政府为此增派3万士兵进入塔利班腹地血洗叛乱分子，但，随着美军撤离截止日期的临近，塔利班越发不可能接受美国条件。上月，美军的围剿行动停止。

Now, according to the Times, the best-case scenario has been reduced to one in which, as a result of NATO’s training and armaments, “the Taliban find the Afghan army a more formidable adversary than they expect and [will] be compelled, in the years after NATO withdraws, to come to terms with what they now dismiss as a ‘puppet’ government.” Some would see that as another in a long line of optimistic assessments. The Afghan security forces, or at least its ethnic-Tajik core, may well find the political will to fight the Pashtun-dominated Taliban and the means to prevent themselves from being overrun. But it’s a safe bet that the security forces will control considerably less Afghan territory than NATO forces currently do.

泰晤士报称，如今，原本最好的设想（译注：消灭塔利班）已经进一步变化，“联军撤离后，塔利班将不得不面对由于北约训练和装备而变得超出其预期的强劲敌手，并最终被迫向它认为的傀儡政府妥协”。很多人对此表示乐观。阿富汗安全部队，至少其塔吉克族核心很可能为政治因素继续与普什图人主导的塔利班战斗，以避免被欺凌。但可以百分之百确定，安全部队将失去现有的一些土地的控制。

And once it is clear that even a raging Taliban insurgency is no longer considered an obstacle to the departure of U.S. and allied combat units, the rationale for staying even through 2014 becomes murky. Already there’s been talk of having little more than a residual force of trainers and special forces in place by the time the withdrawal deadline arrives — and that such a force would stay beyond the deadline anyway. NATO’s Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen conceded in an interview with the Guardian that the Alliance is considering an earlier withdrawal, its morale battered by ongoing “insider” attacks, which in this year alone have seen more than 50 alliance troops killed by members of the very Afghan forces they’re mentoring.

一旦确定即使狂怒的塔利班叛乱军不在是北约联军撤离的障碍，驻留至2014年的打算也将可有可无。已有消息说撤离期限打来时会有一小批教官和特殊部队执行任务，无论如何他们会之后驻留下来。北约秘书长Anders Fogh Rasmussen在《英国卫报》的一次采访承认联军在考虑提前撤离，今年由于内部攻击牺牲了至少50名士兵，而这些袭击正是他们训练的阿富汗士兵，令军队士气大受打击。

More-pessimistic analysts harbor doubt that either the current system of government or the security forces will long survive a U.S. departure. Despite Western donors and backers still issuing the same pleas for good governance and anticorruption efforts that have been made of President Hamid Karzai for the best part of a decade, there are serious doubts that an election scheduled for 2014 — in which Karzai, after two terms, is constitutionally barred from running — would be any more successful in creating a new national consensus than previous, crooked elections have been. Karzai, in fact, is believed to be preparing to run his older brother Abdul Qayum in his stead and keep power within his immediate circle.

持消极态度的分析员harbor怀疑美军撤离后，现行的政府体系和安全部队是否可以长期存在。机关西方支持者和捐助人始终辩称卡尔扎伊政府在过去十年为更好的政府管理和治理腐败做出巨大努力和贡献，但依然有人坚信，计划于2014年的选举将比2009年被操纵的选举更能创造民族和谐。根据宪法，2014年卡尔扎伊不能再参选总统，但据称卡尔扎伊将帮助自己的哥哥Abdul Qayum竞选，使政府维持在自己人的掌控中。

His regime remains shot through with corruption, but the West has long struggled with the absence of a credible alternative. And a transition in which Afghans will be required to take charge of their own security against the Taliban is likely to exacerbate Karzai’s tendency to empower warlords whose backing he needs in a fight. And with NATO eyeing the exits, it’s an open question just how much pressure Karzai will face to ensure a credible election.

卡尔扎伊政府因为腐败横生而备受诟病，但西方一直没有更好的选择。政府要掌握安全不对对抗塔利班的过渡期是的卡尔扎伊不得不向军阀们放出部分权力，他需要军阀的支持。北约很清楚的看到这点，问题很明显，卡尔扎伊可以为公平的选举顶住多大的压力。

British Conservative MP Rory Stewart, who served the coalition authority in Iraq and who, in 2002, famously walked the of fghanistan, alone, documenting his encounters with locals along the way, insists it’s time to face up to grim reality in Afghanistan. He recently wrote in the Financial Times:

If the U.S., Britain and their allies leave Afghanistan, there will be chaos and perhaps civil war. The economy will falter and the Afghan government will probably be unable to command the loyalty or support of its people. The Taliban could significantly strengthen their position in the south and east, and attack other areas. Powerful men, gorged on foreign money, extravagantly armed and connected to the deepest veins of corruption and gangsterism, will flex their muscles. For all these reasons departure will feel — rightly — like a betrayal of Afghans and of the soldiers who have died.

英国保守派国会议员Rory Stewart，曾在伊拉克联合政府中供职，于2002年独自走遍阿富汗并记录下沿途所有遭遇。他坚持现在是时候正式阿富汗冰冷的现实，最近他在《金融时报》中写道：
如果美国、英国及其联军撤离阿富汗，骚乱甚至内战就会发生，经济动荡，卡尔扎伊政府很可能不能维持军队的民众的忠诚和信任。塔利班可以极大巩固他们在南部和东部的地位，并进攻其他地区。有外国金钱和武装支持的人和参与腐败、强盗的地下组织，将会蠢蠢欲动。这些都让人觉得撤军是对阿富汗人民和牺牲在这片土地上的人们的背叛。

But a decade of war has proved that Western armies are no more capable than their Soviet counterparts were in the 1980s of eliminating an indigenous insurgency in Afghanistan. Stewart continues:

In the absence of “victory,” three alternative strategies have been proposed: training the Afghan security forces, political settlement with the Taliban and a regional solution. But training Afghan forces, which cost $12bn in 2010 alone, will not guarantee their future loyalty to a Kabul government. Two years and many regional conferences have passed since the formation of the Afghan Higher Peace council, and the clear NATO endorsement of reconciliation: but there is no sign that insurgents, the Kabul government or its neighbours will reach a deal, or feel much desire so to do. So there is no military solution, and no political solution either. Nor will there be before the troops leave. We will have to deal for decades with a troubled Afghanistan, which is not likely in my lifetime to be as wealthy as Libya, as effectively governed as Iraq, as educated as Syria, or as institutionally mature as Pakistan.

但十年的阿富汗战争表明西方军队并没有像他们曾经的对手于20世纪80年代消灭阿富汗本土叛军的苏联那样能力非凡。Stewart继续写道：
由于各种失败，其他三个代替方案提了出来：训练政府军，与塔利班政治协商和地区融合。但单单训练政府军就与2010年一年消耗了120亿美元，这还不能保证军队未来对卡尔扎伊政府的忠诚。自从北约表达和谈意愿和阿富汗高级和平委员会成立以来，开过许多地区会议，但没有任何迹象表明反叛军、卡尔扎伊政府及其邻国达成和谈或有强烈意向。所以军事途径和政治途径均告失败。军队撤离前达到成功已成奢望。我们花了十年来解决阿富汗这个麻烦，但恐怕在我有生之年也难以见到阿富汗如利比亚般富足，如伊拉克般有效管理，如叙利亚般有教养，如巴基斯坦般成熟。

Western countries, he argues, have done as much as they are able; their only option now is to provide financial backing to sustain the Kabul government and the sort of military support — from nearby air bases — that would prevent the Taliban from mobilizing heavy weaponry to overrun its rivals. The rest will be up to the Afghans to sort out among themselves — a conversation that will be conducted with weapons until the limits of each side’s capacity to impose its will are apparent to their commanders and regional backers, and that new battlefield equilibrium sets the terms for new political arrangements. Chances are, it’s not going to look much like the Afghanistan the U.S. had hoped to leave behind.

Rory Stewart认为，西方世界已经做了他们所有能做的，现在唯一能做的就是为卡尔扎伊政府提供经济保障和一些来自附近的空军基地的军事支持，防止塔利班组织重型武器推翻政府。新的势力平衡可以为新的政治安排奠定基础。很可能，阿富汗形势不会像美军所期待的那样发展。
评论翻译:
1.Mexi Gogue
Afghanistan remains undefeated. How are they not in a BCS bowl???

阿富汗不败！他们怎么没有巴莱克银行股份呢？

2.rehan
The Freedom fighters、 of the most poor country in the world has finally defeated a coalition force of the most powerful countries in the world, this is how the faith in ALLAH helps Muslims to stand firm in front of Evil Forces. Time to accept a disrespectful defeat and go back home.

自由战士们、世界上最贫穷的国家最终击败世界上最强大几个国家的联军，是对阿拉的信仰帮助MSL坚定地抵抗邪恶的美联军。该接受这个丢脸的失败滚回家了·····

3.Yoshi_1
Foregone conclusion. The war was lost the moment it was declared. This country doesn't fight wars to win. It's become more of a business: lives in one end, money out the other to large private companies.
PLEASE, whichever of you "wins" in November, BRING MY GUYS HOME!

哥早就知道会这样，这场战争一开始就不会赢，美国不是为了胜利才打的，更像一场生意:收割生命，个人财团敛财。
摆脱，你们俩家伙不管谁胜了，把我们的孩子们带回家！

4.goldenrulejoe
I agree with you Yoshi but the american people and their leaders dont care about your guys. If they did they would do something about getting them home. Sorry if the truth hurts.
in reply to Yoshi_1

同意楼上，但美国人和政府压根不关心我们的战士，要是在意他们会做出对他们回家的努力，现实总是很伤人

5.DLeroy_1
So many of the difficulties in which we find ourselves in our foreign engagements are concomitant with the creation of the "All Volunteer Army". Administrations, both Democratic and Republican, were compelled to get the American people out of foreign policy and military decisions. They had their hats pulled down painfully over their ears in Vietnam. What better way to do so than to get rid of the draft, call for a volunteer army and tap the rich resources of young, desperate youth of the lower classes.
in reply to Yoshi_1

LSS，我们在对外干涉方面的各种困难都是纯种志愿军出现的副产物。民主和共和式管理迫使美国难以完成自己个对外政策和军事决定。我们得排除越南的噪音。比放弃原计划更好的方式是号召志愿军利用大量的年轻人，那些绝望的底层青年

6.snowleopard (cat folk gallery)
We have already lost the war - its time to accept it, admit it, and get our troops home before any more die. Its not the failure of the soldiers in any way; its the political leadership of the nation that has failed them.

我们已经失败了，接受承认它吧，关键是在跟多伤亡出现前把军队撤回来。失败不是因为我们的士兵而是领导层的责任

7.Mike259
And how exactly do you win a war in Afghanistan? What's the final objective? Hugs and kisses with the various tribes that live in the mountains? This was not a war that could be won. Armies, for centuries, had only one mission and that was to destroy everything in it's path and deliver so much pain that it would take generations before the enemy population had the nerve to rise again.
But here we are in the 21st century, sending the most powerful army the world has ever seen to wage a PR campaign,to win hearts and souls,...
in reply to snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

输赢的标准是啥，楼上的？最终目标是啥？和山里的部落拥抱亲吻么？这是场根本不可能胜利的战争。军队从来只有一种职能，碾碎一切阻路之人，屠杀敌人直至敌人不得不花好几代人的时间才能恢复人口再图崛起。军队只能带去痛苦而非欢乐
但我们身处21世纪，我们们竟然想送出世界有史以来最强大的军队发动一场战争来赢得敌人的心和灵魂？

8.DEVONECO
Its about the oil pipeline from the Central Asian countries through Afghanistan - not about wining any war!
in reply to Mike259

ls，为了中东石油，从不为赢得战争

9.airbornevet101
You are exactly right. The US wants to fight a war and come out in the end smelling like a rose with everyone loving us. You will never win a war that way, you will only at some point withdraw saying you won, as will be done in Afghanistan.
in reply to Mike259

lss，太对了！美国做了婊子还想立牌坊，做大梦吧！别想赢，只能边撤离便自夸胜利，就像对阿富汗一样

10.duduong
I don't think the political leadership of recent years could have done much better than they did. The fate was sealed when resources were diverted away from Afghanistan to prepare for a new war in Iraq back in 2002. The last ten years of fighting was done only because this was how long it took for the American populace at large to accept defeat.
in reply to snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

6楼的，我觉得这几年奥巴马政府已经做到最好了。2002年中心转向伊朗已经就定了阿富汗战场的命运，后十年的战争只不过是为了让国内接受失败。

11.oldmo
Why did we go back ? America can only handle so many Viet Nam's.
in reply to duduong

楼上的，我们为什么要撤，美国可以玩弄众多“越南”！

12.18235
it was all about scumbag pakistan, that usa still gives billions to.
the pakistan/afghanistan border is like a country onto itself...obama was hiding in plain sight in pakistan.
in reply to duduong

lss，都是因为卑鄙的巴基斯坦，咱们现在还给他援助，擦！
巴基斯坦、阿富汗两国就像一个一样····奥巴马就是不愿意正视这个问题

13.Deejay Revel
"Osama".....Obama was in plain sight last night..
in reply to 18235

sb奥巴马，昨晚上他的确一览无余~（译注：与楼上用了一个短语in plain sight ）

14.iRd
seems like the scumbags were well prepared and ripped you like they should of . Dont you get it? they had seen this coming since day 1 because they had seen USSR go down, so it was important for them to keep the other option open.
in reply to 18235

lss,我怎么觉得你像给巴基斯坦干了一样。你不明白么，从苏联陨落第一天他们就预见了这一天，有另一只大腿可抱对他们很重要

15.6thangle
Its the mentality of Afghan nothing else!
in reply to snowleopard (cat folk gallery)

6楼的，失败是因为他们是阿富汗人，疯狂的信仰 不为其他

16.hardworker777
My God, all you had to do was talk to the Russians. But no, we're mighty AMERICA, CAPTAIN AMERICA, we can do anything we want, blah blah blah. Makes me sad for the thousands of Americans and millions of Afghans and Iraqis killed.

天哪，只要跟俄罗斯人谈就好了么····不！我们是强大的美利坚，长官美利坚！我们可以为所欲为，blablabla···
唉，数千多大兵和数百万阿富汗人死亡，悲伤···

17.18235
the usa won, in the short time, in afghanistan----the dumb russians lost even from the start.
yes, thousands of great americans were killed----and a couple hundred thousand afghans and iraqis.
millions---that's michael moore and kgb russian putin propaganda.
there are more spanish speaking illegal aliens in usa than are afghan/iraqi dead.
and kurdistan is thriving, for first time in 100 years---thanks to usa.
in reply to hardworker777

ls，我们赢了，短期内。白痴俄罗斯人还有一开始就输了
是的，数千大兵牺牲了，还有数万阿富汗人和伊拉克人死了
数百晚？那是迈克尔·摩尔和普京的宣传，你也敢信
在美国死的西班牙语非法外籍人员要比阿富汗人和伊拉克人多
因为美国，未来100年库尔德斯坦很繁荣

（译注：库尔德斯坦包括土耳其东南部、伊拉克北部和伊朗西部若干地区，以及叙利亚和亚美尼亚的一小部分）
（译注：迈克尔·摩尔，美国著名导演、作家及自由派时事评论员，以制作讽刺时事的纪录片闻名，而史上最卖座的九部纪实电影中就有四部出于摩尔之手。）

18.dou44
18235: Your history and facts are your own. Like the US mission in Afghanistan, your position is not based in reality either.
in reply to 18235

ls，你历史、数据都自己编的。你的立场就像美国在阿富汗的任务一样不现实。

19.18235
YOU get your information from al jazera, so that's where YOUR prejudices come from.
Iraq's population was around 25 million at start of iraq war---with lots of the dead involving muslims killing muslims....which is what muslims are known for.
Muslims dont believe in life, they believe in death.

你的数据是基地组织发的，这也是你偏见的由来
伊拉克战争开始时总人口约2500万，而且MSL间的自相残杀造成了很多死亡，这事儿大家都知道
MSL不相信生命，他们相信死亡可以带来永远的幸福