英文原文: The End of Treason
Daniel Pipes, 转自纽约太阳报，2005年10月16日
来自英国的新报道指出在这个国家的三个伊斯兰教主义者领袖（Omar Bakri Mohammed，Abu Uzair，和Abu Izzadeen）可能面对叛国罪的指控。
在7月7日伦敦袭击事件以后，其中的两个人说如果他们知道将要在英国实施的另外一次爆炸事件的计划，他们不会报告警察。第三个人称赞伦敦爆炸事件是让英国“清醒并闻到咖啡的味道”。
但是叛国罪指控是否现实呢？不那么现实。Mohammed先生逃跑了，另外两位伊斯兰教主义者不是英国公民。另一位官员Lord Carlile指出大概没有“曾经在叛国罪的案件中任何环节出现的律师仍然活着并且继续工作。” 实际上，自从1966年在英国没有见到任何叛国罪法案的适用（最初在1351年颁布），除了两件小案子。
这种案例的缺乏指向了一个更深的现实：叛国罪现在和蓝色法律，禁酒案，或者禁止种族间通婚的法律一样都是死法。我预测，没有根本的改革，没有任何西方国家会再一次因为叛国而起诉国民。
直到最近，叛国是一个强有力的概念。美国宪法定义叛国罪为“发动反对美国的战争，或者通敌，给与敌人帮助和安慰”。历史上有名的叛国者包括Benedict Arnold, Vidkun Quisling和Lord Haw-Haw。
叛国罪法案总是很难实施，但现在已经不可能实施，正如美国塔利班分子John Walker Lindh 的案子表明的。他在阿富汗的战场上被捕，因为对他的同胞使用武力，叛国罪的指控很明显适用于他。但是他被指控为更轻微的犯罪，并且被判处更小的犯罪，“为塔利班提供服务”。
为什么这次失败了呢？ 因为对忠诚的定义根本被改变了。传统上，一个人一出生就被假设是对他的国家忠诚。西班牙人或者瑞典人对他的君主效忠，法国人对共和国效忠，美国人对宪法效忠。
这种假设现在已经陈旧了，新型的是为个人的政治团体效忠――社会主义、自由主义、保守主义或者伊斯兰教主义来命名一些可选项。地理的和社会的联系比过去的更不重要。
1899年到1902年的布尔战争是这个演变的里程碑，当英国公众一个重要的片断就是口头反对政府的战争的论点和行为。第一次出现被称为“小的英国人”集团公开对抗政府并且呼吁政府结束进行战争。
另一个先锋在一战中出现，当联合军队领袖的无能导致了和政府的巨大的疏远。第三个例子是法国在阿尔及利亚的战争期间，愤怒的知识分子包括让-保罗-萨特Jean-Paul Sartre，曾极力呼吁谋杀他们的同胞：“击毙一个欧洲人有一石二鸟之效果，毁灭压迫者和受欺压者”。
这个隔离在越南战争时期达到了全盛时期，那时美国的持不同政见的人挥舞着越南共和国的国旗并且高举 支持河内的标语（ “Ho ho, Ho Chi Minh, NLF一定会赢”）。
以色列提供了国内颠覆的登峰造极的例子。她的人口中有六分之一阿拉伯人，对犹太民族掌权的国家很少忠诚，有时公开的呼吁对以色列的暴力行为或者反对以色列国家的存在。 有些犹太的学者也呼吁阿拉伯的暴力行为。这种气氛甚至还导致犹太人帮助阿拉伯恐怖分子的情况。
现今，对个人的祖国效忠已经不再是一种理所当然之事；祖国必须提供如此行的原因。相反，痛恨自己的祖国和支持敌人是普遍的。“叛国者”，就像“私生子”一样已经没有耻辱了。
这一新趋势有着意义深远。例如，在战争中，各方必须竞争以吸引各自的国民和敌人效忠于己。在二战中，协约国与德国和日本作战；现在他们并不集中在整个国家而是集中在塔利班或者萨达姆身上，希望能够赢得阿富汗人或者伊拉克人的衷心。
这会带来全新的联盟：在2003年伊拉克战争的内建中，西方的反战组织有力的站在萨达姆侯赛因的一边， 而反过来联军强调它的伊拉克的支持者。在反恐战争中，赢得衷心的战争是大范围的逼近，并且这一战争是可以改变的。
叛国罪作为一个概念在西方是已死去了。为了赢得战争，政府需要考虑这种改变。
The End of Treason
by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
August 16, 2005
http://www.danielpipes.org/2865/the-end-of-treason
 Print |  Send |  Comment |  RSS | Share:    |
Translations of this item:
News reports from Britain indicate that three Islamist leaders in that country – Omar Bakri Mohammed, Abu Uzair, and Abu Izzadeen – could face treason charges.
The first two of them said, after the July 7 attacks in London, that they would not warn the police if they knew of plans to carry out another bomb attack in Britain. The third praised the London bombings for making the British "wake up and smell the coffee."
But are treason charges realistic? Not terribly. For starters, Mr. Mohammed has fled and some Islamists are not British citizens. For another, as an official, Lord Carlile, pointed out, there is probably not "a lawyer still alive and working who has ever appeared in any part of a treason case." Indeed, Britain has seen no application of the Treason Act - originally passed in 1351 - since 1966, except for two minor instances.
This absence points to a deeper reality: the crime of treason is now as defunct as blue laws, prohibition of alcohol, or laws banning miscegenation. I predict that, short of radical changes, no Western state will again prosecute its citizens for treason.
Until recently treason was a powerful concept. The U.S. Constitution defines it as "levying war against [the United States], or in adhering to [its] enemies, giving them aid and comfort." Famous traitors in history include Benedict Arnold, Vidkun Quisling, and Lord Haw-Haw.
The law of treason was always difficult to apply but now it is impossible, as illustrated by the case of the American Talib, John Walker Lindh. Captured on a battlefield in Afghanistan bearing arms against his countrymen, treason charges clearly applied to him. But he was charged with lesser offences and pled guilty to even more minor ones such as "supplying services to the Taliban."
Why this collapse? Because the notion of loyalty has fundamentally changed. Traditionally, a person was assumed faithful to his natal community. A Spaniard or Swede was loyal to his monarch, a Frenchman to his republic, an American to his constitution.
That assumption is now obsolete, replaced by a loyalty to one's political community – socialism, liberalism, conservatism, or Islamism, to name some options. Geographical and social ties matter much less than of old.
The Boer War of 1899-1902 marked an initial milestone in this evolution, when an important segment of the British public vocally opposed its government's war arguments and actions. For the first time, a faction dubbed "Little Englanders" openly defied the authorities and called for ending the war effort.
Another bellwether came during World War I, when the incompetence of the Allied military leaders led to a massive alienation from government. A third came during the French war in Algeria, when angry intellectuals such as Jean-Paul Sartre effectively called for the murder of their fellow-citizens: "To shoot down a European is to kill two birds with one stone, to destroy an oppressor and the man he oppresses."
This alienation reached full florescence during the Vietnam war, when American dissidents waved Vietcong flags and chanted pro-Hanoi slogans ("Ho ho, Ho Chi Minh, NLF is gonna win").
Israel offers an extreme case of internal subversion. Arabs, one-sixth of the population, owe little allegiance to the Jewish state and sometimes openly call for violence against it or oppose its very existence. Some Jewish academics have also called for Arab violence. This climate has even led to several cases of Jews assisting Arab terrorists.
At present, loyalty to one's home society is no longer a given; it must be won. Conversely, hating one's own society and abetting the enemy is common. "Traitor," like "bastard," has lost its stigma.
This new situation has profound implications. In warfare, for example, each side must compete to attract the loyalty of both its own and the enemy's population. In World War II, the Allies fought Germany and Japan; now, they focus not on whole countries but on the Taliban or Saddam Hussein, hoping to win Afghan or Iraqi allegiance.
This can lead to novel complexities: in the build-up to the Iraq war of 2003, anti-war organizations in the West effectively took Saddam Hussein's side, while the coalition in turn emphasized its Iraqi supporters. In the war on terror, the battle to win allegiances looms large and is fluid.
Treason as a concept is defunct in the West. To succeed in war, governments need take this change into account.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oct. 11, 2006 update: A U.S. grand jury today indicted Al-Qaeda operative Adam Gadahn on the charge of treason, the first American so accused since World War II. He first has to be caught, however, before he can be tried.
