The Death of American Competence
美國國家能力的喪失
原文：Foreign Policy https://tinyurl.com/rxelzmo
譯文：觀察者 https://www.guancha.cn/StephenMWalt/2020_04_02_545076_s.shtml
作者：Stephen M. Walt
譯者：劉笑陽
Washington’s reputation for expertise has been one of the greatest sources
of its power. The coronavirus pandemic may end it for good.
華盛頓當局在專業知識方面的聲譽一直是其力量的最大來源之一。然而，新型冠狀病毒足
以將之終結。
No matter how the federal government responded, the United States was never
going to escape COVID-19 entirely. Even Singapore, whose response to the
virus seems to be the gold standard thus far, has several hundred confirmed
cases. Nonetheless, U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration’s belated,
self-centered, haphazard, and tone-deaf response will end up costing
Americans trillions of dollars and thousands of otherwise preventable deaths.
Even if the view that the dangers may have been exaggerated due to a lack of
accurate data turns out to be correct, Trump’s entire approach to governing
and the administration’s erratic response squandered public confidence and
made a more measured reaction untenable. Despite his denials, he is still
responsible for where the country is today.
無論美國政府如何回應，美國終究無法完全從COVID-19疫情中倖免。截止目前，即便像新
加坡這種在應對疫情方面達到“黃金標準”的國家，也出現了數百例確診病例。然而，川
普政府那遲來的、利己的、混亂的和音盲般的反應，卻會使美國人喪失數萬億美元和成千
上萬個本可被挽救的生命。即便“由於缺乏準確數據而使風險被誇大”的觀點是正確的，
但川普的執政方式和政府的反應失誤，依然揮霍了公眾的信心，使其後續採取的更加符合
標準的回應也站不住腳。儘管他矢口否認，但川普依然要對美國今天的狀況負責。
But that’s not the only damage the United States will suffer. Far from
making “America great again,” this epic policy failure will further tarnish
the United States’ reputation as a country that knows how to do things
effectively.
然而，這並非美國遭受的唯一損失。這種史詩般的政策失敗並沒有使美國“再次強大”，
反而會進一步損害美國作為一個行事有效的國家的聲譽。
For over a century, the United States’ outsized influence around the world
rested on three pillars. The first was the its awesome combination of
economic and military strength. The United States had the world’s largest
and most sophisticated economy, the world’s best universities and research
centers, and a territory blessed with bountiful natural resources. These
features eventually enabled the United States to create and maintain military
forces that none of its rivals could match. Taken together, these combined
assets gave the United States the loudest voice on the planet.
近一個多世紀以來，美國的全球影響力建立在三個支柱上。第一個支柱是經濟和軍事實力
的強大結合。美國擁有著全世界最大體量也最高水平的經濟，擁有著世界上最好的大學和
研究中心，擁有著得天獨厚的自然資源。這些特徵最終使得美國能夠締造和維持其競爭對
手無法匹敵的軍事力量。這些資產的聚合，使美國在全球擁有最強的話語權。
The second pillar was support from an array of allies. No country every
agreed with everything Washington wanted to do, and some states opposed
almost everything the United States sought or stood for, but many countries
understood that they benefited from U.S. leadership and were usually willing
to go along with it. Although the United States was almost always acting in
its own self-interest, the fact that others had similar interests made it
easier to persuade them to go along.
第二個支柱是一系列盟友的支持。沒有哪個國家會贊同美國政府想做的所有事情，甚至於
美國的一些州也幾乎會反對聯邦政府所尋求或代表的一切。但是，很多國家都明白它們會
從美國的領導中受益，並且通常願意與美國保持一致。儘管美國幾乎總是為了自己的國家
利益而行事，但因為利益一致，美國很容易說服其他國家與她同行。
A third pillar, however, is broad confidence in U.S. competence. When other
countries recognize the United States’ strength, support its aims and
believe U.S. officials know what they are doing, they are more likely to
follow the United States’ lead. If they doubt its power, its wisdom, or its
ability to act effectively, U.S. global influence inevitably erodes. This
reaction is entirely understandable: If the United States’ leaders reveal
themselves to be incompetent bunglers, why should foreign powers listen to
their advice? Having a reputation for competence, in short, can be a critical
force multiplier.
第三個支柱則是對美國能力的廣泛信心。當其他國家認識到美國的實力、支持美國的目標
、相信美國官員知道自己在做什麼時，這些國家更有可能追隨美國的領導。但如果它們質
疑美國的力量、智慧或採取有效行動的能力，那麼美國的全球影響力必然會受到侵蝕。這
種反應完全可以理解：如果美國領導人透露出自己是個無能之輩，那麼其它大國又為何要
聽取美國的建議呢？簡而言之，在能力方面享有聲譽，可以成為關鍵的力量倍增器。
The glowing reputation that Americans used to enjoy was built up over many
decades. It was partly a reflection of the United States’ industrial might
and world-class infrastructure: the network of highways, roads, railways,
bridges, skyscrapers, dams, harbors, and airports that used to dazzle foreign
visitors upon their arrival. Victory in World War II, the creation of the
Bretton Woods economic institutions, innovative acts such as the Marshall
Plan, and the successful moon landing all reinforced an image of the United
States as a place where people knew how to set ambitious goals and bring them
successfully to fruition.
美國人曾享有的光輝聲譽是數十年建構的結果。這在一定程度上反映了美國的工業實力和
世界一流的基礎設施：高速公路、道路、鐵路、橋樑、摩天大樓、水壩、港口和機場所構
成的網絡，曾經使來到美國的外國遊客眼花繚亂。第二次世界大戰的勝利和佈雷頓森林體
系的建立，以及馬歇爾計畫和登月計畫等創舉都提升了美國的形象：在美國的土地上，人
們知道如何設定遠大的目標，並最終將其實現。
Even blunders such as the Vietnam War did not fully tarnish the aura of
competence that surrounded the United States. Indeed, the peaceful and
victorious end of the Cold War and the smashing U.S. victory in the 1990-1991
Gulf War exorcized the ghosts of Vietnam and made the United States’ model
of liberal democratic capitalism seem like the obvious model for others to
emulate. Add to that a continued stream of technological innovations—the
personal computer, the smartphone, and all those fancy weapons—and one can
understand why people around the world still looked upon the United States as
a meritocratic, accomplished, and above all, competent country. Small wonder
pundits such as Tom Friedman began to portray the United States as the only
viable model for an increasingly globalized world, telling aspiring countries
that if they wanted to succeed, they had to don the “Golden Straitjacket”
and become more like the United States.
甚至諸如越南戰爭的失誤也沒有完全破壞包圍著美國能力的光環。的確，冷戰的和平結束
以及美國在1990-1991年的海灣戰爭中所取得的巨大勝利，驅散了“越戰的幽靈”，使得
美國的自由民主資本主義模式看上去是可以被效仿的“顯學”。此外，持續的技術創新浪
潮（包括個人計算機、智能手機和所有這些花哨的創造），都使得我們可以理解：為什麼
全世界都認為美國是一個精英化的、有成就的——最重要的是——有能力的國家。難怪包
括湯姆‧弗裡德曼在內的專家們會將美國模式描繪成日益全球化的世界中唯一可行的選擇
，他們告訴有抱負的國家：如果想要成功，就必須穿上“金色緊身衣”，就必須變得更像
美國。
Over the past 25 years, however, the United States has done a remarkable job
of squandering that invaluable reputation for responsible leadership and
basic competence. The list of transgressions is long: there is former
President Bill Clinton’s irresponsible dalliance with a White House intern,
former President George W. Bush’s administration’s failure to heed warnings
of a terrorist attack before 9/11, the Enron and Madoff scandals, the bungled
responses to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and Hurricane Maria in 2017, the
inability to either win or end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the
ill-advised interventions in Libya, Yemen, Syria, and elsewhere, the Wall
Street meltdown of 2008, the Boeing 737 Max debacle, the Republican-led
gridlock in Washington, and so on. Nor should we forget the long-concealed
criminal misdeeds of Harvey Weinstein (and many others) and the sordid tale
of the very well-connected Jeffrey Epstein, whose conveniently timed demise
in a New York jail may prevent us from ever knowing the full extent of his—
and others’—misconduct.
然而，過去的25年裡，美國在揮霍其寶貴聲譽（負責任的領導和具有基本能力）方面卻做
得格外“出色”。它們可以拉出一長串的違章罰單：前總統比爾‧柯林頓對白宮實習生不
負責任的調戲；小布希政府忽視了“9‧11”之前的恐怖襲擊警告；安然醜聞和馬多夫騙
局；對2005年卡特裡娜颶風和2017年瑪麗亞颶風的笨拙反應；無力贏得或結束在阿富汗和
伊拉克的戰爭，以及對利比亞、也門、敘利亞等地不明智的干預；2008年的華爾街危機；
波音737MAX客機的空難；以及共和黨的領導多引起的“政府關門”，等等。我們也不應忘
記哈維‧溫斯坦以及其他許多人長期隱瞞的犯罪行為，以及與前者關係密切的傑弗裡‧愛
潑斯坦的骯髒故事——他在紐約監獄中的適時死亡，使我們無法完全瞭解他（以及其他人
）的不法行為。
And all the while the United States told itself it was the greatest country
in the world, with the ablest officials, the best-run businesses, the most
sophisticated financial firms, and the most virtuous leaders. Instead, former
Soviet Premier Nikolai Ryzhkov’s description of life in the Soviet Union may
be a more accurate description of American life than Americans would like to
admit: “[We] stole from ourselves, took and gave bribes, lied in the
reports, in newspapers, from high podiums, wallowed in our lies, hung medals
on one another. And all of this—from top to bottom and from bottom to top.”
與此同時，美國一直自稱是世界上最偉大的國家，擁有最具能力的官員、運轉最好的企業
、最先進的金融公司和最賢達的領導人。然而，前蘇聯總理尼古拉‧雷日科夫對蘇聯生活
的描述，似乎比美國人所承認的更符合美國人的切實生活：“（我們）監守自盜，收受賄
賂，在報告中、報紙裡、甚至在講台上撒謊，一邊相互授予勛章，一邊沉迷於謊言。整個
國家全都如此——從上到下，從下到上。”
Then came COVID-19. Trump’s handling of the crisis has been an embarrassing
debacle from the start—despite repeated warnings—but it was also utterly
predictable. His long business career has shown that he was more of a showman
than a leader, better at conning people out of money and evading
responsibility than at managing complex business operations. His tawdry
personal life offered equally clear warnings. Since taking office, Trump has
perfected the art of the lie, while gradually purging his administration of
people with genuine expertise and relying instead on B-list hacks,
sycophants, and his unqualified son-in-law. When suddenly faced with a
complicated problem requiring grown-up leadership, it was inevitable that
Trump would mishandle it and then deny responsibility. It is a failure of
character unparalleled in U.S. history, and it could not have come at a worse
time. The amazing thing is that anyone is even remotely surprised.
緊接而來的是COVID-19的爆發。川普對這場危機的處理從一開始就是一場令人尷尬的慘敗
（儘管已經被多次警告），不過這種局面也完全可以預見。他漫長的商業生涯驗證：相比
於領導者，川普更像是一個表演者；相比於管理複雜的商業運作，他更擅長矇騙他人和逃
避責任；他雜亂無章的個人生活同樣釋放出了清晰的信號。自上任以來，川普完善了謊言
的藝術，逐步將管理團隊中真正的專家清除，取而代之的則是二線的僱傭文人、諂媚者及
其不稱職的女婿。當面臨需要成熟的領導才能解決的突發性複雜問題時，川普不可避免地
會處理失當，然後推卸責任。這是美國歷史上絕無僅有的角色失敗，即便在情況更為糟糕
的時代也不會出現。而令人驚訝的是，人們都只是對此略感驚訝。
How did the United States get here? How did it squander its reputation for
knowing what it is doing, and for being able to get the right things done as
well or better than anyone else? I’m not sure, but let me venture a few
guesses.
美國是怎樣走到這一步的？那些知道自己在做什麼以及可以做出正確乃至更好選擇的聲譽
，又是怎樣被揮霍掉的？我不能確定，但是我有一些大膽的猜想。
Part of the problem is the hubris that comes from the United States’
remarkably favorable history. It has been by far the luckiest country in the
modern world, and Americans started to assume that success was their
birthright instead of something that needed to be earned, nurtured, and
protected. And with that complacency came a willingness to gamble on utterly
untried leadership, despite all of the warning signs described above.
問題的一部分來自於美國對其輝煌歷史的傲慢。迄今為止，美國一直是現代世界中最幸運
的國家，美國人甚至開始認為成功是他們與生俱來的權利，而非必須去爭取、培育和保護
的東西。儘管出現了前文所述的諸多警示，但這種自滿情緒卻使美國人願意下注在完全沒
有經驗的領導層身上。
A related problem, I’m inclined to think, has been a broader relaxing of
standards and a refusal to hold people accountable. One can see this at many
universities, where grade inflation is well entrenched, faculty have few
incentives to judge poor work harshly, and more attention is paid to sports
teams than to genuine academic achievement. The recent college recruiting
scandal exposed the lengths to which well-heeled parents would go to get
their kids into colleges for which they weren’t qualified, but universities
have acted similarly when they reserved slots of alumni children (“legacies”
) or for the offspring of major donors.
我傾向於認為，與此相關的另一個原因是：被放寬的評價標準以及拒絕追究民眾的責任。
我們可以在許多的大學中看到，成績通脹的趨勢根深蒂固，教師們少有動機對差勁的論文
進行嚴厲批評，而學生們則將更多的關注放到體育隊伍而非真正的學術成就上。最近的大
學招生醜聞更是暴露出一些長期存在的問題：有錢的父母會不遺餘力地讓孩子進入其力所
不能及的大學，而大學本身也同樣為校友子女（“學校遺產”）或主要捐贈者的後代預留
名額。
I’ve focused on higher education because that’s the business I know best,
but this problem is hardly confined there. In the contemporary United States,
CEOs mismanage a company such as Boeing and then depart with
multimillion-dollar golden parachutes. Top officials in the George W. Bush
administration and a chorus of outside cheerleaders deceive themselves and
the country into a foolish war in the Middle East, yet hardly any of them
suffer adverse professional or personal consequences. Wall Street firms can
crater the economy through a combination of greed, indifference, and fraud,
and no one gets investigated, let alone prosecuted. Highly decorated generals
favor “staying the course” in distant battles, fail to achieve victory, and
then retire to corporate boards and influential positions as respected
pundits. Meanwhile, whistleblowers and dedicated public servants strive to
fulfill their oaths of office, only to be vilified, fired, or worse. When
integrity and dedication go unrewarded and failure carries no penalty,
competence is bound to suffer.
我關注高等教育的原因，是因為我對這一行業最為瞭解，但上述問題卻並不侷限於此。在
當代的美國，即便首席執行官們出現管理不善（比如波音），也可以帶著數百萬美元的“
金元降落傘”離開；小布希政府內的高級官員和外部鼓吹的“啦啦隊”欺騙了他們自己和
整個國家，使美國捲入了一場愚蠢的中東戰爭。可是，他們之中卻幾乎沒有人遭受到不利
的職業影響或個人後果；華爾街的公司可以融合貪婪、漠視和欺詐來重創經濟，但沒有人
會被調查，更不用說被起訴；功勛卓著的將軍們喜歡在遙遠的戰場中“堅持到底”而又無
法取得勝利，但是他們卻可以作為受人尊敬的專家，退休進入公司董事會並謀得高位。與
此同時，告密者和恪盡職守的公務員卻因為試圖履行誓言而遭到誹謗、解僱甚至更為嚴重
的對待。當正直和奉獻沒有回報，而失敗又得不到懲罰時，一個國家的能力必然會受到損
害。
To speculate further, I suspect a broader cultural current of selfishness is
at work here as well. Former President John Kennedy was no saint, but he did
devote his adult life to public service and told Americans to “ask not what
your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” By the
time Ronald Reagan became president, however, Americans were being told that
government was the enemy and (to quote the film Wall Street) that “greed is
good.” The market was everything, public service was devalued, and taxes
were for suckers. Having spent decades hollowing out many of their public
institutions, Americans suddenly find themselves unprepared for a real public
crisis. The apotheosis of this trend is Trump himself: How could a serious
country possibly choose as its leader a narcissistic, manifestly unqualified
self-promoter with a long track record of failure and deceit?
進一步推測的話，我懷疑更為廣泛的自利文化潮流也是原因之一。前總統約翰‧甘迺迪不
是聖徒，但他確實將自己的成年生活奉獻給了公共服務，並告訴美國人“不要問你的國家
能為你做些什麼，而要問你能為你的國家做些什麼。”然而，當羅納德‧雷根成為總統後
，美國人被告知：政府是敵人，“貪婪是好事”（引自電影《華爾街》），市場就是一切
，公共服務要被貶低，傻瓜才會去納稅。數十年來，美國人花費大量時間來清理公共機構
，但突然之間，他們發現自己對真正的“公共問題”卻毫無準備。川普本人就是這種趨勢
的典範：一個嚴肅的國家，怎麼可能選擇一個明顯不稱職的且擁有長期失敗與欺瞞記錄的
自我推銷者作為國家領導人呢？
Am I overstating the case? Perhaps. There are plenty of American firms that
still do terrific and innovative work; there are tens of thousands of
scientists and scholars who remain more committed to searching for truth than
to making a fast buck, and there are politicians and public servants at the
local, state, and federal levels who are more interested in doing good than
in getting reelected or feathering their own nests. There are dedicated
teachers and hard-working students at every level of the U.S. educational
system. But the rot is still widespread.
我是否誇大了這個案例？也許。的確還有很多的美國公司持續著出色而創新的工作，還有
成千上萬的科學家與學者們致力於尋找真相而不是賺快錢，還有很多地方、州和聯邦的政
治家與公務員更重視善舉而非尋求連任或中飽私囊，還有很多敬業的教師和努力的學生在
美國教育系統的各各層級之中。但是，腐敗現象也同樣普遍存在。
Absent a reversal of this trend, the United States’ global influence will
continue to recede. Not because the country has embraced “America First”
and deliberately chosen to disengage, but because people around the world
will not take its ideas or advice as seriously as they once did. They’ll
listen, perhaps, and they may agree with it from time to time, but the
deference U.S. leaders used to be able to count on will fade. Once COVID-19
is over, Americans are likely to discover to their chagrin that other voices
(Beijing, anyone?) are receiving more respectful attention. That’s not an
omen of imminent disaster, but it will be a different world than the one
Americans have been accustomed to inhabiting. At the margin, the broad
contours of world politics and some important aspects of the world economy
will no longer slant so heavily in the United States’ favor.
如果這種趨勢沒有得到逆轉，美國的全球影響力將會繼續衰退。這並不是因為美國拋出“
美國第一”的理念並有意選擇脫離世界，而是因為全世界不會像以前那樣認真地對待美國
的理念或建議。他們也許會傾聽，他們可能會不時地表示贊同，但對美國領導人所寄託的
敬意卻會逐漸褪去。一旦COVID-19疫情結束，美國人很可能會懊惱地發現其他聲音（中國
，或者其他國家？）得到了更多的尊重。這並不是災難即將來臨的預兆，但這個世界將會
與美國人所習慣的有所不同。在變化的臨界地帶，世界政治的寬廣輪廓和世界經濟的某些
重要方面，將不再會如從前一般偏袒美國。
Can this situation be fixed? I don’t know. Cultural rot cannot be fixed by
legislation, executive orders, or even jeremiads like this one. One may hope
that the present crisis will remind enough Americans that having competent
and reliable people in key leadership positions really matters, and that
holding people more accountable for corruption, cronyism, or sheer
incompetence is essential to effective public policies. Whether you favor a
big welfare state or a small libertarian one, you should above all want it to
be competently led and staffed with knowledgeable and dedicated experts.
Whoever the next president is, he needs to staff his administration with
people who have demonstrated qualifications for the jobs they are assigned,
instead of being chosen for their personal loyalty or their talents as
sycophants.
這種情況能夠得到解決嗎？我不知道。文化腐朽不能通過立法、行政命令，甚至“耶利米
哀歌”來解決。人們或許希望當前的危機能夠提醒足夠多的美國人：讓賢能而可靠的人擔
任關鍵領導職位至關重要，讓相關人員為腐敗、任人唯親或完全無能承擔更多的責任對有
效的公共政策至關重要。無論你喜歡的是強政府的福利國家還是弱政府的自由主義國家，
你首先應當希望它擁有淵博而敬業的專家，從而可以採取具有能力的領導。無論下一任總
統是誰，他都需要為其政府配備可以勝任被指派工作的人員，而不是那些因為對某個人忠
誠或諂媚才被選中的人。
Americans will need to rethink a political system that recruits and rewards
those who are most adept at selling themselves to the highest bidder. And
there has to be something seriously wrong with a political system that has
devoted many months and spent billions of dollars preparing for the 2020
election and ends up giving the country a choice between three old white
guys. For that matter, Americans ought to rethink whether spending a full
year electing someone to a four year term makes any sense at all. No other
advanced democracy does it this way. And while we’re at it, let’s scrap the
absurd Electoral College, an indefensible relic that systematically
disempowers voters in most of the country.
美國人需要反思這樣一個政治體系：獲得招募和獎勵的都是那些最善於將自己賣給出價最
高的人。而正是這樣一個政治體系，花費了數月時間和數十億美元來為2020年大選做準備
，卻最終要讓國民在三個白人老頭之間做出選擇。就此而言，美國人應該反思：花費一整
年的時間去選舉一個任期四年的人是否真的有意義？事實上，其他先進的民主國家都沒有
採取這種方式。但即使我們現在身處這種情形，也讓我們廢除荒謬的選舉團制度——它確
實是一個不可辯駁的歷史遺物，在系統地剝奪全國大部分地區選民的權力。
Looking forward, the possibility of fundamental political change is the only
silver lining I can see right now. America hasn’t faced a crisis like this
since the 1930s and 1940s, and it was in a better position to meet those
challenges then than it is today. But a previous generation of Americans
eventually rose to the occasion, and showed themselves and the world what
their country could do. It is upon Americans now to remember that experience,
put the past few decades of hubris, division, and indulgence aside, and prove
that their country is still competent enough to figure out what it needs to
do. And then they need to do it.
展望未來，政治的根本變革可能是我現在僅能看到的一線希望。當前，美國正在經歷自20
世紀30-40年代以來最大的危機，但昔日的美國比現在更能應對這些挑戰。當時，上一代
的美國人最終應聲而起，向本國和世界展示了自己的國家可以做些什麼。現在，美國人必
須記住過往的經歷，拋開過去幾十年的傲慢、分裂和放縱，證明他們的國家仍然有能力找
到什麼需要去做——然後，他們就會去做需要去做的事情。