伊拉克大选：迷雾中的黎明:伊拉克大选

　　The large turnout in the Iraqi elections and the relative order on the day surprised the world and proved the skeptics wrong. No matter what opinion one can have about the war, the elections cannot be but viewed in a positive way. For the Bush administration it is seen as a vindication. For his allies in Europe, Italy, Poland and Britain, it promises that a way out of Iraq is that little bit closer.
　　Nonetheless, the elections by no means indicate that American involvement in Iraq, or the problems that are besetting that country, are coming to an end anytime soon. For Bush and his supporters, the success of Iraq"s first free elections in fifty years has one major advantage: it overshadowedall the negative media coverage of the occupation and balanced the books in their favour for the first time since the defeat of Saddam. The fact that it is very clear to the world ①at large now that there were no weapons of mass destruction, is no longer as important as it was before. Up to the fateful day when millions of Iraqis ②turned outto cast their votes, the invasion of Iraq could be viewed as a complete disaster. The supporters of the war can now offer the promise of democracy as a powerful sign of hope.
　　Reports in the American media, in the immediate aftermath of the elections, signified that it slightly increased optimism in the American public but that ,basically, opinions about the war were unchanged: those who backed it continued to do so, and those who were against it maintained their stance. The Democrats, while welcoming the prospect of a democratic Iraq, highlighted that there was still a long way to go.
　　The big question is how will the Iraqi elections effect US-European relations? Generally speaking, Germany and France"s position on Iraq will not change. They still continue to refuse to send troops to the country to train local security forces. It is possible that some of the smaller issues involved in the reconstruction plans will be able to be renegotiated. Likewise, if Iraq shows signs of stabilizing the Europeans are unlikely to remain aloof. The success of the elections means that Europe might get involved in Iraq but certainly not to any significant degree. It is also unlikely that Bush will have a stronger hand in dealing with Europe on other international issues. In the case of Iran, the Middle East and the China arms embargo, America"s strongest European ally, the UK, stands much closer to its neighbours. 　
　　There has also been a lot of talk from the Bush camp about the spread of democracy in the Arab world. Advocates of Bush claim that democracy is the greatest gift that America can give to the world and that Bush is the man for the job. Without getting into the sheer hypocrisy of such statements, to say that elections in Iraq could spawn the growth of democracy in the Middle East is optimistic to say the least. If anything, it could create a clampdown on democratic tendencies by regimes in neighbouring countries. Many of those neighbouring states are also US allies and as long as the US needs support for its mission in Iraq they will ③have a free hand to deal with their own people as they please. This idea also poses another disturbing thought: if the vindication for invading Iraq is not that it was a self-defensive action but a mission to spread democracy, does that mean that the US is beginning a holy war of its own? Who"s next?
　　The elections in Iraq have failed to create any major sense of optimism among its neighbours. Most Arabs view the presence of Americans in Iraq as an act of imperialist aggression. The elections, no matter how successful they were, are tarnished by the stain of US occupation. Other country"s in the region fear that a Shia dominated Iraq could lead to the dreaded scenario of a civil war and stir up Shia-Sunni tensions within their own borders. Turkey is concerned that Iraq"s new constitution could give the Kurds more autonomy there, thus creating an independence movement in its Kurdish areas. Iran is the only country in the region that has cause to rejoice as the outlook of a Shia control of power in Iraq means the possibility of an end to old hostilities and better relations between the two countries.
　　In Iraq itself, the majority of the people, the Shias, for the first time in centuries, have the chance to control the destiny of their own country. The low turnout of Sunnis at the election has sparked fears that, feeling excluded from the future of the nation, they might take up arms and a civil war will ensue. That is a possible outcome, but can be avoided. The Sunnis hold a majority in four provinces and any government will have to respect them if they wish to administer a stable state.
　　The elections do offer some hope for the future of Iraq. It brings the country one step closer to ending its troubles. But those troubles are far from over and it would be a mistake to be complacent now. The insurgents that having been causing havoc there are showing no signs of packing their bags and leaving. However, by defying the terror groups and going out to vote, the Iraqi people scored a victory over the militants that threaten them with violence. Extraordinary accounts of courage have been told of the voting itself. In some cases, lines of people waiting to vote would scatter when attacked by a suicide bomber only to return to vote after the explosion. That they did this does not attest to their approval of the occupation. It does prove their determination to control their own affairs.
　　
　　伊拉克大选的投票率之高以及当天局势的相对稳定，使世界为之一惊并证明了怀疑论者的谬误所在。无论人们对那场战争持有什么看法，必须以积极的态度来看待这次大选。对于布什政府来说，这被视为一种开脱。而对于其欧洲盟友，即意大利、波兰和英国来说，这预示着在从伊拉克脱身的道路上又前进了那么一点。
　　然而，这次大选绝不是在表明，美国深陷伊拉克的局面，或者说困扰那个国家的问题就要在不久的将来得到解决。对于布什和其支持者来说，伊拉克50年来首次自由大选的成功有一个主要的好处：它盖过了所有关于占领的负面媒体报道，并使他们自萨达姆落败以来首次扭转了颓势。全世界现在非常清楚那里并没有大规模杀伤性武器，但这一事实已不再像以前那样重要了。数百万伊拉克人在这个重大日子里前来投票，而在此前，入侵伊拉克可能被当作了一个彻底的灾难。现在，那场战争的支持者就可以把那里的民主前景称作是一种预示着希望的有力象征了。
　　这次大选一结束，美国媒体就立刻做出了报道，称它使美国公众的乐观程度略有提高，但关于那场战争的舆论走向基本上没有得到改观：支持者一如既往地支持，而反对者则坚持其立场不变。在对伊拉克民主前景表示欢迎的同时，民主党人强调，前路仍旧漫长。
　　而重要的问题是，伊拉克大选将如何影响美欧关系？一般来讲，德国和法国在伊拉克问题上的立场不会改变。它们仍旧不会为了训练当地安全部队而同意向该国派兵。有可能的是，在与重建计划相关的次要问题中，有一些可以再行商榷。而且，如果伊拉克显示出稳定的迹象，欧洲人是不可能仍旧置之度外的。这次大选的成功，意味着欧洲可能会介入伊拉克问题，但程度不一定会有多高。而布什也不可能在与欧洲就其它国际问题进行交涉时，拥有更多的优势可言。在伊朗问题、中东问题和中国武器禁运问题上，英国这个美国最坚定的欧洲盟友，与其邻国的立场靠拢得更近一些。
　　在布什阵营中，一直充斥着大量关于在阿拉伯世界传播民主的言论。布什的支持者称，民主是美国可以给予世界的最好礼物，而布什就是胜任这份工作的人。且不谈这些说法纯粹是虚伪的，光是伊拉克大选可能在中东地区推动民主这一说法就够极其乐观的了。如果其主张会产生什么结果的话，那就是会使周边国家的政府对民主潮流进行压制。那些周边国家中有许多也是美国的盟友，而只要美国在伊拉克开展行动上需要帮助，它们可以就如己所愿地对自己的民众肆意加以处置。这种想法同样引起了另一个焦虑：如果入侵伊拉克被证明不是一种自卫行动，而是一项传播民主的使命，那是否意味着美国正在开始一项属于自己的圣战呢？谁会是下一个？
　　伊拉克的这次大选没能在其邻国激起任何极大的乐观情绪。大多数阿拉伯人把美国在伊拉克的存在看作是一种帝国主义侵略行为。这次大选，无论有多么成功，美国的占领都是其污点，使其光彩不再。该地区的其它国家担心，一个由什叶派控制的伊拉克可能会导致令人担心的内战局面，并在其境内激起什叶派和逊尼派之间的紧张关系。土耳其的忧虑是，伊拉克的新宪法可能会使那里的库尔德人获得更多的自治权，从而在库尔德人聚居区掀起独立运动。伊朗是该地区唯一一个有理由感到高兴的国家，因为什叶派在伊拉克掌权的前景就意味着，以往的敌对状态可能会终结，而两国的关系也可能得到改善。
　　就伊拉克本国来讲，其民众中的多数群体――什叶派，数百年来第一次拥有了可以掌控自己国家命运的机会。而逊尼派的大选投票率之低已经引起了担忧，即感到被排除在国家未来之外的他们，可能会拿起武器，随之便会出现内战。这种结果是有可能出现的，不过却是可以避免的。逊尼派在四个省份里都是多数群体，而任何政府只要想管理一个安定的国家，就不得不对他们予以尊重。
　　这次大选确实为伊拉克的未来带来了一些希望。它使这个国家在结束动乱方面又前进了一步。但这些动乱还远未结束，现在就自鸣得意是错误的。一直在那里制造混乱的叛乱分子，并没有显示出要打包走人的迹象。然而，置恐怖组织于不顾前去投票的举动，使处于好战分子暴力威胁之下的伊拉克人赢得了一场胜利。而就投票活动本身来讲，出现了一些不同寻常的报道，描述了那些勇敢的事迹。在有些地方，排队等候投票的人们会在受到自杀性炸弹袭击时散开，而这只是为了能在爆炸过后重新去投票。他们这样做并非是在表明他们对占领予以承认。那只是在证明他们要自行处理事务的决心。