by John Reimann, East Bay DSA
Editor’s note: this piece serves as a response to R.L. Stephens’ piece in DSA Weekly regarding his thoughts on U.S. intervention in Syria following a chemical gas attack attributed to Syrian authoritarian regime leader, Bashar al-Assad.
编者按：这篇文章是对DSA周刊中R.L. Stephens的一篇文章的回应，内容涉及对叙利亚独裁政权领导人Bashar al-Assad进行毒气袭击后美国对叙利亚的干涉这一事件的思考。
The Arab Spring arose as a revolt against dictators like Bashar al-Assad throughout the Middle East and North Africa. It had nothing to do with a United States-inspired attempt at regime change.
阿拉伯之春起源于整个中东和北非对Bashar al-Assad等独裁者的反抗。 这与美国政府改变政权的企图无关。
In Syria, Assad responded through his Shabiha, whose slogan was: “Either Assad or we burn the country.” The organization and its members meant it. Since that time, there has been some 500,000 people killed and over half the population of Syria has been forced out of their homes. The regime is responsible for over 90% of the civilians killed. These numbers make sense based on the simple fact that it is the forces of Assad and Putin that maintain air superiority over Syria.
在叙利亚， Assad通过他的Shabiha做出回应，他的口号是：“ 或者选择Assad，或者我们焚烧这个国家”。该组织及其成员做到了这一点。 从那时起，大约有50万人丧生，超过一半的叙利亚人被迫离开家园。 这个政权对死亡平民中的超过90%的人负有责任。 这些数字基于一个简单的有意义的事实，即Assad和普京的力量维持着对叙利亚的空中优势。
When the Arab Spring first arose, U.S. imperialism at first supported Egyptian autocrat Hosni Mubarak, but then U.S. officials saw him as an obstacle to stability and called for him to step down. In Syria, things were a little more complex, but remained essentially the same. That was why Obama called for Assad to step down, but what he never ever did was in any way act to produce “regime change.”
当阿拉伯之春第一次出现时，美国帝国主义起初支持埃及独裁者Hosni Mubarak，但后来美国官员认为他是稳定的障碍，并要求他下台。 在叙利亚，情况稍微复杂一些，但基本保持不变。 这就是奥巴马呼吁Assad下台的原因，但他从未做过在任何产生“政权更替”的的事情。
In Iraq, regime change was produced by a military invasion. There has never been any serious evidence produced that either Obama or Trump has even considered such a sweeping invasion. In other words, similar to in Egypt, what the US regime wanted was “Assadism” without Assad. This has been supported by a number of sources, including the comments of then-Secretary of State, John Kerry, and remarks by then-CIA director, John Brennan.
在伊拉克，政权更迭是由军事入侵产生的。 从未有任何严肃的证据表明奥巴马或特朗普甚至考虑过如此彻底的入侵。 换句话说，与埃及类似，美国政权想要的是没有Assad的“阿萨德主义”。 这得到了许多消息来源的支持，包括当时的国务卿John Kerry的评论，以及当时的中情局局长John Brennan的评论。
By 2014, U.S. imperialism saw the rise of Sunni Islamic fundamentalism, especially the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), as a greater threat to US imperialism than the Syrian Regime, especially since Trump came into office. For example, Trump also stated that the United States should focus on defeating ISIS, and find common ground with the Syrians (Assad) and their Russian backers.
到2014年，美国帝国主义将逊尼派伊斯兰原教旨主义，尤其是伊拉克和叙利亚伊斯兰国（ISIS）的兴起看作是对美国帝国主义的比叙利亚政权更大的威胁，特别是在特朗普执政以后。 例如，特朗普还表示，美国应该重点打击伊斯兰国，并与叙利亚人（Assad）和他们的俄罗斯支持者找到共同点。
Some claim that U.S. aid to the Free Syrian Army shows the intent for regime change. This article by Schulman and Sloughter, however, shows that aid was minimal. And as of one year ago, according to journalist Anand Gopal, U.S. imperialism had carried out 8,000 airstrikes in Syria with only one—the strike at that time against the al-Shayrat airfield—being against the Assad forces.
有人声称美国援助叙利亚自由军显示出推动政权更迭的意图。 然而，Schulman和Sloughter的这篇文章表明，援助是微不足道的。 根据记者Anand Gopal的说法，美国帝国主义曾在叙利亚进行过8000次空袭，但只有一次——针对al-Shayrat机场的袭击——是针对Assad部队的。
On March 16, 2017, just weeks before the bombing of al-Shayrat, the U.S. Air Force attacked the Omar Ibn al-Khattab mosque. In that bombing, over forty civilians were killed. It was an attack on the al-Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front and Tahrir al-Sham which were fighting Assad. In other words, this strike was in support of the Assad regime! In contrast, in the U.S. bombing of al-Shayrat airfield, nobody was killed and it was back up and operational within twenty-four hours. Even this paltry strike represented a clear side preference, since, unlike the strikes in civilian-inhabited areas of Raqqa, US officials actually contacted Russian officials to warn them ahead of time to “minimize risk to Russian or Syrian personnel located at the airfield.” Similarly, in the recent US attack on Assad’s chemical weapons facilities, nobody was killed. Neither of these seriously weakened Assad.
2017年3月16日，就在al-Shayrat轰炸前几周，美国空军袭击了Omar Ibn al-Khattab清真寺。在这次轰炸中，有四十多平民遇害。 这是对与阿萨德作战的与基地组织有关的Nusra Front和Tahrir al-Sham的袭击。 换句话说，这次袭击是为了支持Assad政权！ 相比之下，在美国轰炸al-Shayrat机场时，没有人遇难，并且机场在24小时内恢复运行。 即使这种微不足道的袭击也显示出了明显的偏好，因为与Raqqa的平民居住区不同，美国官员实际上已经联系了俄罗斯官员，提前警告他们“尽量减少俄罗斯或叙利亚机场人员的风险”。 同样，在最近美国袭击阿萨德的化学武器设施时，没有人遇害。 这些都没有严重削弱Assad。
Contrast that with US imperialism’s bombardment of Raqqa, which was an attack on ISIS. Some 200 people were killed in the first several days of that attack. Over 11,000 buildings were destroyed or damaged, and the Washington Post reported that “it is easier to count the buildings that are still standing than the ones that have been reduced to shattered concrete and twisted reinforced steel… Raqqa has become nearly unrecognizable to those who try to return and navigate its streets. Public squares are hidden underneath debris, and the tallest residential towers are mere rubble.” The pictures within that slideshow of Raqqa are indistinguishable from photos of Gaza after the Israeli regime attacked it in 2014.
相反，美国帝国主义轰炸Raqqa，这是对伊斯兰国的攻击。 在这次袭击的头几天，大约有200人遇难。 超过11,000幢建筑物被摧毁或损坏，“华盛顿邮报”报道说：“对于那些仍然存在的建筑物，比那些已经被破坏的混凝土和扭曲钢筋的建筑物更容易计数……对于那些返回并寻找他们的街道的人来说，Raqqa已经变得几乎无法辨认。 公共广场隐藏在碎片下面，最高的住宅塔楼仅仅是瓦砾。“2014年以色列政府袭击后，拉卡在幻灯片中的图片与加沙的照片无法区分。
Why do these war crimes in Raqqa tend to be ignored by the left? The most charitable explanation is that what happened in Raqqa does not fit the common narrative. This is because the US regime’s attack on Raqqa was not an attack on the Assad regime. Instead, it was in fact in indirect support of that regime. The attack was carried out against the ISIS home base. It was carried out for the U.S. regime’s allies—the Kurds—to take over. But the Kurdish forces have been operating with a de facto truce with Assad for many years now!
为什么这些发生在Raqqa的战争罪行往往会被左派忽略？ 最慈善的解释是，在Raqqa发生的事情不符合常见的叙述。 这是因为美国政权对Raqqa的袭击并不是对阿萨德政权的袭击。 事实上，这实际上是对该政权的间接支持。 这次袭击是针对ISIS的基地进行的。 它是为美国政权的盟友 – 库尔德人 – 接管而进行的。 但是库尔德部队实际上已经与阿萨德休战多年了！
It is important not to equate U.S. and Russian imperialism in Syria. It is Russian forces, together with those of Assad himself, who have directly caused the majority of the damage through their bombing campaigns. They have been bombing hospitals, schools, residential neighborhoods, and public markets throughout the country. It is the Assad regime that is carrying out mass imprisonment and widespread torture and execution of political dissidents. There is also a program of ethnic cleansing being carried out throughout Syria by Assad and the Iranian military.
有一点很重要，不要把美国和俄罗斯的在叙利亚表现出的帝国主义等同。 俄罗斯部队和Assad本人一样，通过轰炸行动直接造成了大部分损失。 他们一直在轰炸全国各地的医院，学校，居民区和公共市场。 Assad政权正在进行大规模抓捕，普遍存在对政治异见人士的酷刑和处决。 Assad和伊朗军队还在叙利亚各地进行了种族清洗。
The 2,000 US troops in Syria are not there to conduct “regime change.” They are there to defend the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) in North East Syria and to oppose ISIS. Trump has made that clear.
在叙利亚的2000名美军并没有在那里进行“政权更替”。他们在那里捍卫叙利亚东北部的库尔德民主联盟党（PYD）并反对伊斯兰国。 特朗普明确表示了这一点。
Regardless of who U.S. imperialism supported, though, the main point is this: What happened in Syria in 2011 was a revolution from below. How, after all, could it be different? How was it that Syrian masses would not have participated in the Arab Spring and revolted against a brutal and corrupt autocrat? Refusal to recognize the fact that it was a popular revolution from below amounts to refusing to see the working class as the subject, not the object, of history. It denies the Syrian masses all agency.
不管美国帝国主义支持谁，主要问题是：2011年叙利亚发生的事情是从下层开始的革命。 毕竟，它有什么不同？ 叙利亚人民大众怎么会不参加阿拉伯之春，并且反抗一个残酷和腐败的独裁者呢？ 拒绝承认这是一场来自下层的大众革命的事实，等于拒绝将工人阶级视为历史的主体而不是对象。 它否认叙利亚人民大众的所有努力。
What does the future hold for Syrians? One possibility is that one region may come under the influence of Iranian sub-imperialism. Another would be of US imperialism under the PYD, and the rest under the control of the Assad regime and their sponsor, Russian imperialism. As for the 5 million plus Syrian refugees living outside Syria, it seems they will remain permanent refugees, at least for the present.
叙利亚人的未来会是怎样的？ 一种可能是一个地区可能受到伊朗次帝国主义的影响。 另一个可能是在PYD下的美帝国主义，其余的则在阿萨德政权及其资助者俄国帝国主义的控制之下。 至于生活在叙利亚之外的500多万叙利亚难民，似乎他们将永远是永久难民，至少目前是这样。
Socialists in the United States should be guided by the principle of international working class solidarity. First and foremost, we should be countering the disinformation campaign such as carried out by the Putin mouthpiece, RT, and repeated by many on the left here. Anything less will correctly be seen by the Syrians themselves as implicit support for one of the most brutal dictatorships of the present era. We should also be pointing out the massive U.S. war crimes in Raqqa, as well as the real role of U.S. capitalism in Syria, which is its opposition to the Syrian revolution. On the practical level, we should be demanding that Syrian refugees be admitted to the United States.
美国的社会主义者应该以国际工人阶级团结的原则做为指导。 首先，我们应该打击由普京话筒RT所实施的这种假情报活动，这些假情报被左派中的许多人重复。 任何干扰看到正确的叙利亚人自己的假新闻都会成为对当代最残酷的独裁政权之一的支持。 我们也应该指出在Raqqa的美国大规模战争罪行以及美国资本主义在叙利亚革命中扮演的反对叙利亚革命的真正角色。在实际层面上，我们应该要求叙利亚难民被允许进入美国。
Both the Republican and Democratic Parties support the Assad regime as the lesser evil when compared to either ISIS or a popular revolution. Therefore, the campaign to support the Syrian revolution is connected with the campaign to build a mass working class political party here in the United States.
无论是与伊斯兰国相比还是与人民革命相比，共和党和民主党都支持阿萨德政权，将其视为更小的邪恶。 因此，支持叙利亚革命的运动与在美国这里建立大众工人阶级政党的运动有关。
What side should socialists be on today—the side of the Syrian revolution or of the regime? The question answers itself.
社会主义者今天应该站在哪一边 – 叙利亚革命这边或独裁政权的这边？ 这个问题本身已经回答了自己。