阿富汗是這兩天的主新聞，不少人都問，為甚麼塔利班能如此迅速收復阿富汗，筆者用「收復」二字，是合乎歷史的。

　　2011年，美國911後，便策動阿富汗反對派，將執政約四年的塔利班政府趕下台，故今次塔利班是「收復」其之前的管治權。

　　為甚麼美國會在中東?請觀看相關視頻【按此】。一句:是帝國主義，搶石油、搶資源，今時美國有一千美軍在敘利亞，守護著敘利亞北部的油田。採出來的油不是歸敘利亞政府，是歸美國口袋。

(iStock)

出兵不仁義　戰敗是必然

　　當出兵是用奸，不是有個仁義之名時，戰敗是必然。為甚麼?民心不向嘛。外媒有個分析，文題是:《We Never Learn》，文如下:

　　The pattern is always the same. We go to places we're not welcome, tell the public a confounding political problem can be solved militarily, and lie about our motives in occupying the country to boot. Then we pick a local civilian political authority to back that inevitably proves to be corrupt and repressive, increasing local antagonism toward the American presence.

　　In response to those increasing levels of antagonism, we then ramp up our financial, political, and military commitment to the mission, which in turn heightens the level of resistance, leading to greater losses in lives and treasure. As the cycle worsens, the government systematically accelerates the lies to the public about our level of“progress.”

　　Throughout, we make false assurances of security that are believed by significant numbers of local civilians, guaranteeing they will later either become refugees or targets for retribution as collaborators. Meanwhile, financial incentives for contractors, along with political disincentives to admission of failure, prolong the mission.

　　This all goes on for so long that the lies become institutionalized, believed not only by press contracted to deliver the propaganda（CBS's David Martin this weekend saying with a straight face,“Everybody is surprised by the speed of this collapse”was typical）, but even by the bureaucrats who concocted the deceptions in the first place.

　　The look of genuine shock on the face of Tony Blinken this weekend as he jousted with Jake Tapper about Biden's comments from July should tell people around the world something important about the United States：in addition to all the other things about us that are dangerous, we lack self-knowledge.

　　Even deep inside the machine of American power, where everyone paying even a modicum of attention over the last twenty years should have known Kabul would fall in a heartbeat, they still believe their own legends. Which means this will happen again, and probably sooner rather than later.

　　簡譯過來是:美國出兵之處，不受該地人民所歡迎，趕走美國人的敵人後，便揀個當地人來做傀儡政府，以為用錢、用槍，就可以撐起這個不被當地人接受的政權，貪污、無能、管不了民生、人民生活更苦，是這類政府的通性，結果是:美國支持的傀儡政府會兵敗如山倒。美國的自以為是，亦是美國的通病（圖一、二、三）。

　　駐阿富汗的CNN外媒有如下一段對話（圖四）:「今年1月6日，美國政府政權交接，尚出現暴民入侵白宮的亂事。但昨日在阿富汗首都喀布爾的政權交接，是友善的，人們只高叫:『美國去死!』。有趣?」

　　其實不單喀布爾的政權交接是平和的，歷史上，就出現了不少次美國支持的傀儡政府也是平和地交出其管治權予所謂的「敵人」。

(1)北京的(國民黨與共黨)管治權交接是平和的；

(2)南越與北越在西貢的管治權交接也是平和的。

　　上文的一大段英文，如將「阿富汗」詞，替入「台灣」，是否夠台獨人士坐立不安?

　　使「台獨」人士坐立不安的，不是筆者的亂估，而是環球時報的看法（圖五）。

　　今次美國在阿富汗倉皇出逃，已使美國在中亞的名聲收工，要欲借事出兵，重返中亞，不再易了。不過美軍下個出兵區，應是向著中國而來，今後在東海、南海，局勢應要緊張了。

　　中國無論為自己、為阿富汗，都應力促阿富汗的塔利班政權建立起個包容性的政府，不易的，但如能有小成，已夠做個辦，做跟「尾」狗，無好下場，鼓勵他們努力地取法其上，得乎其「中」，就十分好了。軟實力，是互利而來，不是靠錢、靠槍的。塔利班政權建立起包容性的政府，例如對女性人身自由有所放寬，看似不易的，但塔利班不似美國，They can learn。

(投資涉風險，每投資者承受風險程度不一，務必要獨立思考。筆者會因應市況而買賣。)