This is an edition of The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here.
这是《大西洋日报》（Atlantic Daily）的版本，该新闻通讯可以指导您了解当今最大的故事，可帮助您发现新的想法，并推荐最好的文化。在这里注册。
When Donald Trump raised the idea of toppling Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei yesterday, it wasn’t just the idea that was surprising. It was the particular phrase he used to describe it.
当唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）提出了昨天推翻伊朗最高领导人阿里·哈梅内伊（Ali Khamenei）的想法时，这不仅是令人惊讶的想法。这是他用来形容它的特定短语。
“It’s not politically correct to use the term, ‘Regime Change,’ but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!” he posted yesterday on Truth Social.
“在政治上使用'政权变更'在政治上不是正确的，但是如果目前的伊朗政权无法再次使伊朗变得伟大，为什么不存在政权改变呢？他昨天发布了真相社交。
The phrase became toxic for a reason. Two years ago, an essay in the Claremont Review of Books noted that regime change entered the popular lexicon in “the early days of the 9/11 wars, when the Bush (43) Administration argued that the security of America and of the entire world depended not merely on defeating hostile countries militarily but on changing their governments into ones more inherently peaceable and favorable to our interests.” Of course, regimes change all the time, but regime change came to mean “external, forcible transformation from ‘authoritarianism’ or ‘dictatorship.’”
该短语有毒是有原因的。两年前，克莱蒙特（Claremont）的一篇文章中的一篇文章指出，政权的变化在“ 9/11战争的早期”中进入了受欢迎的词典，当时布什（43）政府辩称，美国和全世界的安全性不仅依赖于军事上击败敌对国家，而且依赖于将他们的政府更加固有地改变为我们的利益，并赢得了我们的利益。”当然，政权一直在改变，但是政权的变化却意味着“外部，强迫从'威权主义'或'独裁统治。”。
This sounds very much like what Trump is discussing. Having switched from discouraging Israeli military strikes against Iran to joining them, he appears to now be toying with broader ambitions. (Trump offers few endorsements stronger than calling something “politically incorrect.”) But the writer of the Claremont Review essay, a prominent right-wing intellectual, warned about such projects. “We know how that worked out. Regimes were changed all right, but not into democracies,” he wrote. “And some of them—e.g., the one in Afghanistan—20 years later changed back to the same regime American firepower had overthrown in 2001.”
这听起来很像特朗普正在讨论的内容。他不鼓舞以色列对伊朗的军事罢工而加入他们的加入后，他似乎正在以更广泛的野心为戏弄。（特朗普提供的认可比称之为“政治上不正确的东西”更为强烈。）但是，克莱蒙特评论论文的作者是一位著名的右翼知识分子，警告说。他写道：“我们知道这是如何解决的。政权已经改变了，但没有变成民主国家。”“其中一些人 - 例如，在阿富汗的那个 - 20年后，2001年推翻了同一政权美国火力。”
That writer was Michael Anton. Today he is the director of the policy-planning staff at the State Department (a bit of an oxymoron in this administration), and in April, the White House named him to lead the U.S. delegation at technical talks with Iran on a nuclear deal—negotiations that are presumably irrelevant for the time being.
那个作家是迈克尔·安东。今天，他是国务院政策计划人员的主任（本届政府中有点矛盾），四月份，白宫命名为他在与伊朗进行核协议的技术会谈中领导美国代表团进行核协议（可能是当时无关紧要的）。
Trump’s abrupt shift has thrown the MAGA right into acrimony. In truth, the president has never been a pacificist, as I wrote last week. During the 2016 GOP primary, Trump cannily grasped public anger at the Iraq War and turned it against his rivals. Thinkers such as Anton and politicians such as Vice President J. D. Vance then tried to retrofit a more complete ideology of retrenchment and restraint onto it, but Trump is an improviser, not an ideologue. No one should have been too surprised by the president’s order to bomb.
特朗普的突然转变使杂志陷入了挑战。实际上，正如我上周写的那样，总统从来都不是太平洋。在2016年共和党初选期间，特朗普在伊拉克战争中抓住了公众的愤怒，并将其与他的竞争对手反对。然后，安东（Anton）和政客等思想家（例如副总统J. D. Vance）试图对其进行更完整的裁员和限制意识形态，但特朗普是即兴演奏者，而不是意识形态。总统的命令炸弹命令不应该太惊讶。
Still, his rhetorical embrace of regime change was stunning even to those who never bought into his identity as a dove, and certainly to some of his aides. Perhaps Anton was not surprised to see his view so cavalierly discarded; after all, he once likened backing Trump to playing Russian roulette. But Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio were unprepared for the change in rhetoric. Rubio solemnly told Fox Business that the U.S. is not at war with the country it just dropped hundreds of thousands of pounds of ordnance on. Vance, on Meet the Press, insisted, “Our view has been very clear that we don’t want a regime change. We do not want to protract this or build this out any more than it’s already been built out.” A few hours later, Trump contradicted him directly, in what would have been embarrassing for someone still capable of the emotion.
尽管如此，即使对于那些从未像从未成为鸽子身份的人，当然对于他的某些助手身份的人来说，他对政权改变的言辞拥抱也令人惊叹。也许安东看到他的观点如此勇敢地被丢弃了。毕竟，他曾经比作支持特朗普的俄罗斯轮盘赌。但是万斯和国务卿马可·卢比奥（Marco Rubio）对修改的改变没有准备好。卢比奥庄严地告诉福克斯商业，美国没有与该国交战，它刚刚放弃了数十万磅的军械。万斯在媒体见面时坚持说：“我们的观点很清楚，我们不想改变政权。我们不想伸展它或建立它比已经建立的更多。”几个小时后，特朗普直接与他矛盾，这对于仍然有能力情绪的人来说是令人尴尬的。
Vance’s views on foreign policy are deeply shaped by the Iraq War, in which he served. Now his boss is at risk of speedwalking that conflict one country to the east. The Iraq War was the product of months of preparation by the George W. Bush administration: military mobilization, avid though unsuccessful attempts to rally international support, an extended period of manufacturing consensus in Congress and in the American public. Yet despite that work, and as even proponents of regime change in Iran acknowledge, the Bush administration’s handling of the Iraq War was a disaster, perhaps the worst American foreign-policy blunder in history. The U.S. government had good war plans for getting rid of Saddam Hussein’s regime but had not effectively thought through what would happen after that.
万斯对外交政策的看法是由伊拉克战争深深地塑造的。现在，他的老板有危险行走的风险，向东方一个国家冲突。伊拉克战争是乔治·W·布什（George W. Bush）政府：军事动员，狂热的尝试集会国际支持的尝试，这是国会在国会和美国公众中建立共识的长期尝试。尽管如此，尽管这项工作，甚至随着伊朗政权变革的支持者的承认，布什政府对伊拉克战争的处理是一场灾难，也许是历史上最严重的美国外交政策失误。美国政府制定了良好的战争计划，以摆脱萨达姆·侯赛因的政权，但没有有效地思考在那之后会发生的事情。
Trump has done even less of that thinking, and leads a nation far more politically divided and warier of foreign intervention. Americans have long viewed Iran negatively: A Fox News poll before this weekend’s airstrikes found that roughly three-quarters of them view Iran as a “real security threat.” Still, another poll earlier this month found that most don’t want the U.S. to get involved in armed conflict there. A Pew Research Center poll in May even found that slightly more Americans think that the United States is its own “greatest threat” than that Iran is.
特朗普的思维少了，领导一个在政治上更加分裂和外国干预的国家。长期以来，美国人一直对伊朗进行负面看法：本周末的空袭之前，一项福克斯新闻民意调查发现，大约四分之三的人将伊朗视为“真正的安全威胁”。尽管如此，本月早些时候的另一项民意调查发现，大多数人不希望美国参与那里的武装冲突。皮尤研究中心（Pew Research Center）在5月份进行的民意调查甚至发现，美国人认为美国是其自己的“最大威胁”，而不是伊朗。
Trump’s flippant transformation of “Make America great again” into “Make Iran great again” exemplifies the hubris of the Iraq War project that he had promised to leave behind. Just as U.S. officials claimed that Iraq could be easily and quickly converted into an American-style democracy, Trump wants to export his catchphrase to Iran, where the implementation would be even hazier than it is here. Iran is a country of some 90 million people, not a dollhouse to be rearranged.
特朗普对“使美国再次伟大”转变为“再次使伊朗再次伟大”的转变体现了他承诺将要留下的伊拉克战争项目的傲慢。正如美国官员声称伊拉克可以轻松，迅速地转变为美国风格的民主一样一样，特朗普希望将其口号出口到伊朗，在那里，实施比在这里更加朦胧。伊朗是一个约9000万人的国家，而不是一个要重新安排的娃娃屋。
Can regime change work? The answer depends on how success is defined. In 1973, for example, the U.S. backed a coup in Chile, toppling the leftist leader Salvador Allende. It worked: Allende was killed and replaced by Augusto Pinochet, who created a stable, market-based, U.S.-friendly Chilean government. But doing that involved horrifying repression and the killing and disappearances of thousands of critics, leaving a black mark on the U.S. record.
政权可以改变工作吗？答案取决于如何定义成功。例如，1973年，美国支持智利政变，推翻了左派领导人萨尔瓦多·阿伦德（Salvador Allende）。它起作用了：Allende被奥古斯托·皮诺切特（Augusto Pinochet）杀害并取代，后者创建了一个稳定的，基于市场的，对美国友好的智利政府。但是这样做涉及令人恐惧的镇压以及成千上万的批评家的杀戮和失踪，在美国记录中留下了黑色标记。
In another case of regime change, the U.S. government helped topple Iranian leader Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953. This, too, was an immediate success. Mossadegh was removed, and the Washington-friendly Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was restored to power. But the legacy of the moment stretched on much longer. The shah was also brutally repressive, and Iranians remembered the 1953 coup bitterly. In 1979, a revolution swept Iran, deposing Pahlavi and installing a virulently anti-American government. That regime still rules in Tehran—for now, at least.
在政权变更的另一种案例中，美国政府在1953年帮助推翻了伊朗领导人穆罕默德·莫萨德格（Mohammed Mossadegh）。这也是一项直接的成功。莫萨德（Mossadegh）被删除，对华盛顿友好的沙阿·穆罕默德·雷扎·帕拉维（Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi）被恢复到上台。但是当下的遗产延伸了更长的时间。沙阿（Shah）也很残酷地压抑，伊朗人对1953年的政变表示痛苦。1979年，一场革命席卷了伊朗，席卷了帕哈维并安装了一个强烈的反美政府。这种政权至少至少在德黑兰统治着。
Related:
有关的：
Here are three new stories from The Atlantic:
这是来自大西洋的三个新故事：
Today’s News
今天的新闻
Dispatches
派遣
The Wonder Reader: How do you deal with insults? Isabel Fattal compiles stories on different ways to control your experience when you feel insulted.
奇迹读者：您如何应对侮辱？Isabel Fattal会在您受到侮辱时以不同的方式编译故事，以控制您的体验。
Explore all of our newsletters here.
在这里探索我们所有的新闻通讯。
Evening Read
晚上阅读
A fenced driveway leading to farmland belonging to the South African farmer Stefan van Huyssteen outside Senekal (Marco Longari / AFP / Getty)
一条通往南非农民斯特凡·范·赫斯斯汀（Stefan van Huyssteen）的围栏车道（Marco Longari / AFP / Getty）
Extreme Violence Without Genocide
没有种族灭绝的极端暴力
By Graeme Wood
由格雷姆·伍德（Graeme Wood）
Signs of violent criminality are ubiquitous in South Africa. Electric fences and guard dogs protect homes containing something worth stealing. Reported rapes, carjackings, and armed robberies all occur far more frequently than in the United States. In Bloemfontein, one of the safer cities, I asked a hotel clerk for directions to a coffee shop, and she said it was “just across the road,” not more than 500 feet away. When I headed out on foot, she stopped me and said that for my safety, “I would prefer that you drive.”
在南非，暴力犯罪的迹象无处不在。电围栏和护卫犬保护装有值得偷东西的房屋。据报道，强奸，劫车和武装抢劫的发生频率要比美国的频率要高得多。在一个更安全的城市的布隆方丹，我向酒店店员询问了一家咖啡店的路线，她说这“就在马路对面，不超过500英尺。当我徒步前进时，她停下来说，为了我的安全，“我更喜欢你开车。”
Read the full article.
阅读全文。
More From The Atlantic
来自大西洋的更多
Culture Break
文化中断
Illustration by The Atlantic. Sources: Sony
大西洋的插图。资料来源：索尼
Play. In Death Stranding 2, people play as an unlikely hero: a courier who trips over rocks and experiences sunburn. It’s the Amazonification of everything, now as a video game, Simon Parkin writes.
玩。在《死亡杂物2》中，人们扮演着一个不太可能的英雄：一名快递员，骑着岩石和晒伤。西蒙·帕金（Simon Parkin）写道，这是所有事物的亚马逊化，现在是电子游戏。
Disconnect. Franklin Schneider has never owned a smartphone. And, based on the amount of social and libidinal energy that phones seem to have sucked from the world, he’s not sure he ever wants to.
断开。富兰克林·施耐德（Franklin Schneider）从未拥有智能手机。而且，基于手机似乎从世界吸引的社会和性欲能量的数量，他不确定自己是否愿意。
Play our daily crossword.
播放我们的每日填字游戏。
Stephanie Bai contributed to this newsletter.
斯蒂芬妮·拜（Stephanie Bai）为该新闻通讯做出了贡献。
