【英语社会】先别为奥巴马鼓掌

One might say a lot about the bizarre decision to give Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize, starting with a few things about the panel that awarded it. Something you cannot say is that it is good news for the president.

Mr Obama has been in office just nine months. Apart from pushing through a controversial fiscal stimulus, he has done little. He gives memorable speeches, moves audiences and is widely admired. So far, that is it. The panel cited his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy”. Yes, he has changed the tone of US policy, which is good. But it is not unusual for a politician to give speeches. In foreign affairs, the most ardent admirer can point to no great exertion or persistence, let alone actual achievement.

As seen from the US, the timing is especially jarring. The committee has awarded its prize just as Mr Obama has begun to be the butt of jokes from previously friendly quarters about broken promises and the gap between words and deeds.

Much of his own party once felt the same dreamy adoration for Mr Obama that the Nobel prize committee expressed last week. Now, bitter criticism is coming from fellow Democrats – for the watered-down health reform he seems willing to back, for persisting with the war in Afghanistan, for the vacillation on torture prosecutions, and more. Most Republicans, needless to say, are ever more certain that the man is all talk. For them, the Nobel committee is merely celebrating that fact.

Certainly, much of this criticism is misconceived or exaggerated. Mr Obama has made mistakes – but just as it was too soon for the Nobel committee to reward his peacemaking, it is too early to be disappointed by his presidency. Notable successes are still within reach. The danger for Mr Obama, and for the Democrats in next year's midterm elections, is that inflated expectations can make success look like failure. In domestic and foreign policy alike, less inspiration and more nuts and bolts would serve the country and the president well. The Nobel prize does not help.

At home, healthcare reform is one such likely success – and a probable victim of inflated expectations. True, Mr Obama mismanaged the process at the start. He should not have let Congress take command: even if the White House was not going to write the legislation, for the sake of public confidence it needed to supervise. But the administration has also been dishonest about the costs. Promise Americans something for nothing, and they do not believe you. Even now, the White House continues to pitch the reform this way: near-universal coverage at no extra cost (except to the rich) and no loss of quality in existing services.

Tomorrow, the Senate finance committee votes on its healthcare bill. For all its flaws, this historic measure, or something like it, would greatly improve health security in the US. Yet liberals are disappointed because it lacks the “public option”, a government-run scheme that would compete with private plans; the electorate's wide centre is disappointed because the bill is expensive and complicated; and conservatives are disappointed because it is a Democratic plan. Later, when the costs fall due, everyone will be unhappy. The plan is good: its cost is justified. But the administration has made a hash of explaining it and preparing the country for its consequences.

In foreign policy, Afghanistan is the administration's greatest challenge and an even more striking instance of this gaping realism deficit. As on health reform, the White House has dithered. As on health reform, it has failed to make a convincing case for its policy, or even to decide what its policy should be. As on health reform, desirable ends have not been aligned with available means. Mr Obama inherited this problem; it was not of his making. But the time for that excuse has run out. He urgently needs to decide what the mission in Afghanistan is, be forthright about the costs and get the country behind it.

Mr Obama was always going to struggle to gratify the hopes that got him elected. He knows this better than anybody. In office, a key task was to temper expectations, face uncomfortable facts and bring the country to a more sober understanding of its choices. This is not going well and the Nobel committee's declaration of love has made it all a little harder.

In fact, the president's wisest course, as the commentator Mickey Kaus observed, was to have turned the prize down, saying he had not had time to accomplish the things he wanted to. Accepting the world's praise for having done nothing looks vain and is not without risk. The president could have turned the embarrassment to his advantage but has let the opportunity pass. He said he would accept the award as “a call to action” and was deeply humbled by the panel's choice. Yes, thinks much of America, he still has plenty to be humble about.

对于将诺贝尔和平奖授予巴拉克•奥巴马(Barack Obama)这一怪决定，人们或许有很多话想说，首先针对的是颁发该奖的诺贝尔委员会。但你怎么都不能说这对于奥巴马是则好消息。

奥巴马入主白宫仅9个月。除了令一项有争议的财政刺激计划获得通过，其政绩寥寥无几。奥巴马的演说令人难忘，听众为之折服，赢得了广泛赞誉。但也就仅此而已了。委员会称赞他“为加强国际外交做出了非凡努力”。没错，他改变了美国外交政策的基调，这是件好事。但作为一名政客，发表演说并非什么稀罕事。在外交事务方面，即使是奥巴马最热情的崇拜者，也说不出他付出了什么巨大的努力或坚持，更别提实际成效了。

从美国国内来看，颁奖时机尤其令奥巴马感到不自在。委员会授奖之时，奥巴马正因违背诺言及言行不一，开始成为以前的友好阵营嘲弄的对象。

奥巴马所在政党的许多人士，也曾对他抱有诺贝尔委员会上周所表示出来的那种如痴如梦般的崇敬。而今，民主党人却开始向他提出尖锐的批评——指责他似乎有意支持已大打折扣的医改，指责他坚持阿富汗战争，指责他在严刑逼供的问题上优柔寡断等等。不消说，大多数共和党人越来越肯定，奥巴马只会夸夸其谈。对他们而言，诺贝尔委员会只不过是在庆祝这一事实。

诚然，这些批评大多有失公允或言过其实。奥巴马的确犯了错误，但就像诺贝尔委员会授予他和平奖为时过早一样，对他的总统任期表示失望也言之尚早。他仍有可能取得令人瞩目的成就。对于奥巴马以及明年参加中期选举的民主党人而言，风险在于过高的期望会让成功看上去就像失败。无论是国内问题，还是外交政策，少说一些鼓动人心的话，多做一些脚踏实地的事，对于整个国家和总统都会是件好事。诺贝尔和平奖没无裨益。

在美国国内，医改就有希望成为这样一项成就，也可能成为过高期望的牺牲品。不可否认，奥巴马一开始就处理失当。他不应该让国会发号施令：为了公众的信任，白宫即使不去立法，也有必要进行监督。但奥巴马政府还谎报了医改的成本。向美国人承诺他们可以不劳而获，并不会令他们信服。即便是现在，白宫仍在用这种方式推行改革：几乎覆盖全民，美国民众无需负担额外成本（除了富人），且服务质量不会低于现有水平。

周二，参议院财政委员会将就奥巴马的医改方案进行投票。尽管存在缺陷，但这一历史性举措，或类似的措施，将极大地改善美国的健康安全。然而，自由主义者对此感到失望，因为该法案不包括“公众选择权”——一项由政府运作、与私人计划相抗衡的医保计划；广大中间派选民感到失望，因为法案成本高昂，内容复杂；保守人士也感到失望，因为这是民主党人提出的方案。日后，一旦成本超支，所有人都会不满意。计划本身不错：成本也很合理。但在阐释计划、并让整个国家为医改后果做好准备方面，奥巴马政府表现得一塌糊涂。

在外交政策方面，阿富汗问题是奥巴马政府面临的最大挑战，也是展示不断扩大的现实主义差距的更引人瞩目的例子。与医改一样，白宫表现得优柔寡断。与医改一样，白宫未能就其政策做出令人信服的理由，甚至没能决定应该采取什么样的政策。与医改一样，理想的目标并未伴以有效的手段。这是个历史遗留问题，不是奥巴马造成的。但以此为借口开脱的时机已经过去。他急需决定在阿富汗的使命，坦率地公布成本，争取全国的支持。

奥巴马很难兑现促使他当选的那些承诺。他比任何人都更明白这一点。在职期间，他的一项关键任务就是降低人们的期望，正视令人不安的事实，引导全国更加冷静地理解其选择。这项任务的进展并不顺利，诺贝尔委员会的示爱只会让事情变得更加棘手。

实际上，就像时事评论员米基•考斯(Mickey Kaus)所说的那样，奥巴马最明智的做法，应该是拒绝接受诺贝尔奖。考斯表示，奥巴马还没有时间去完成自己想做的事情。一事无成，却接受全世界的赞美，这看上去相当自负，也不无风险。奥巴马本可以将这一难堪境地转化为自己的优势，但却错失良机。他表示，他将接受该奖项，将其作为“行动的呼唤”，并对于委员会的选择深感惭愧。没错，为美国着想的话，他仍有太多的理由感到惭愧。

译者/陈云飞