Full Text: Severe Humanitarian Disasters Caused by US Aggres(8)
时间:2024-04-08 12:21 来源:网络整理 作者:墨客科技 点击:次
In April 2011, the US-based magazine Foreign Policy summarized five reasons for the frequent foreign wars waged by the United States, such as the military advantages of the United States making it hard to resist the temptation to resort to force, and the checks and balances mechanism within the United States failing to play an effective role, while excluding any reason related to the values of the United States. "To safeguard human rights" was not a clear driving force for US foreign wars and that waging foreign wars was only a means to an end, although such an act did not exclude a sense of morality. The United States may feel an impulse to start a foreign war as long as it is considered necessary, believed to be in its own favor, and within its ability, while a sense of morality is not a sufficient or necessary condition to initiate such a war; and as for the terrible humanitarian disasters caused by these foreign wars, they will be borne by others instead of directly harming US citizens and preventing the United States from reaching its goals. Choosing to use force irrespective of the consequences reveals the hegemonic aspirations of the United States, which propel the United States to prioritize itself, demonstrate its "winner-take-all" mentality, and expose its unilateralist ideas of dominating the world and wantonly doing injustice to other countries. 在口口声声尊崇“普世价值”的美国政客眼里，“天赋给他们的人权”是否也被同等地赋予了普天下其他的人呢？ US politicians claim that they respect "universal values", but do they agree that their own natural human rights are also natural for other people in the world? 既然美国国内确立了所有族群一律平等的法律，那么在面对国外民众时，美国是否真正认为他们也应享有同等的基本权益，还是仅仅因为他们手中没有美国选票就无须顾忌？ The United States has formulated laws to ensure equality among all its ethnic groups within the country, but does it really believe that people of other countries should enjoy the same rights? Or, does it think that it can act wantonly in foreign countries just because the people there do not have a vote in US elections? 美国相信发生在其本土的针对平民的恐怖袭击是卑劣的、应受惩罚的，难道发生在美国以外、由美军实施、导致大量无辜平民死伤的残暴事件就是可接受的、“必要的”牺牲吗？ The United States believes that terrorist attacks targeting civilians within its territory are despicable and punishable, then what makes it accept that the incidents created by the US military in other countries, which have led to a large number of civilian deaths and injuries, are acceptable and even "necessary"? 在别人的国土上就“宁可错杀、绝不漏杀”，肆意使用放射性武器，用有毒试剂摧毁所有植被，未辨明目标性质就随意开火，在实施这些行为时，美国价值观中“不言而喻”的人权被赋予了谁呢？ When they adopt the principle "better to kill by mistake than to miss out by accident", when they arbitrarily use radioactive weapons and destroy all vegetation with toxic reagents, and when they open fire before clearly identifying the targets, do the US forces still respect the "natural" human rights treasured by the values of the United States? 那些仅仅因为无力逃离交战区域就随时要承担被当成恐怖分子射杀风险的平民，人权在哪里？那些出生时就因美军的化学武器而致残并将痛苦终生的孩童，人权在哪里？那些为躲避美军的战火流落他乡却无处落脚的难民，人权在哪里？ The civilians who were unable to flee their war-affected areas and were treated as terrorists and shot at randomly did not have any human rights. The children who have been disabled at birth by the chemical weapons of the US forces and will suffer for the rest of their lives do not have any human rights. The refugees who have been forced to flee their homes and become homeless in other countries because of the US foreign wars do not have any human rights. 归根结底，动辄以单边战争手段来解决争端的思维模式，本身就存在问题。人道主义与霸权主义存在内在的对立，期待霸权主义国家去捍卫他国人权无异于与虎谋皮。国际争端的解决要靠在联合国框架下的平等协商，要靠规范完善的国际机制来协调，要靠构建人类命运共同体来推进。只有丢弃私利至上的霸权思维，才能避免“人道主义干预”变成人道主义灾难，才能实现互利共赢，才能使各国人民都能真正享有各项基本人权。 (责任编辑：admin) |