评论｜读懂中国：世界再次来到道路的岔口

Editor's note: Ernesto Zedillo is former President of Mexico, and Chairman of the 21st Century Council. This is an excerpt of his speech at the Understanding China Conference 2020, held in Guangzhou, China in November. The article reflects the author's opinion, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

编者按：塞迪略是墨西哥前总统和21世纪理事会主席。这是他在2020年11月“读懂中国”国际会议上讲话的节选。本篇仅代表专家观点，不代表本台观点。

In September of 2003, Kofi Annan famously gave a speech titled “A Fork in the Road.” He was deeply worried at the time about recent events that in his view had indeed put the world at a point where tough choices had to be made.

2003年9月，科菲·安南发表了一篇著名的演讲，题目是“道路的岔口”。他对当时发生的事件深感担忧。在他看来，世界到了必须做出艰难选择的时候。

The UN Secretary General’s serious concern essentially stemmed from a reemergence of unilateralism and disregard of international law whose chief expression had been the invasion of Iraq earlier that year.

联合国秘书长的担忧主要源于单边主义的再次兴起和对国际法的藐视，就像当年对伊拉克的入侵一样。

Annan thought that the unilateral use of force --that is, not properly sanctioned by the Security Council-- in reaction to real (or even just perceived) threats such as terrorism or weapons of mass destruction, posed a fundamental challenge to the principles on which, however imperfectly, world peace and stability had rested during almost six decades.

安南认为，应对恐怖主义或大规模毁灭性武器的威胁时，未得到安理会的授权便单方面使用武力是对联合国的原则提出了根本性的挑战。无论这些原则多么不完善，它们是近六十年中世界和平与稳定的基石。

He was raising the alert about a precedent that could result in the unilateral and lawless use of force, with or without justification. That precedent, he warned, would run against the belief in collective answers to our common problems and challenges, and neglected the shared vision of global solidarity and collective security that had been pledged in the Millennium Declaration three years earlier, in September of 2000.

他警告说，这样的先例可能会导致单方面和非法使用武力，不管有没有正当的理由。他又警告说，这一先例有悖于我们集体应对共同问题和共同挑战的信念，并且忽视了2000年《千年宣言》所承诺的全球团结和集体安全的共同愿景。

The international rules-based system and certainly its key multilateral institutions have been under an incredibly brutal and unprecedented assault for almost four years. Although there is much blame to go around for the damage inflicted recently to the multilateral system, the United States’ share as an aggressor stands-out by far.

在最近四年的时间里，国际体系以及重要的多边机构都遭到了极其残酷和前所未有的攻击。尽管有很多原因造成了最近对多边体系的破坏，但作为侵犯者的美国所占的份额远高于其他国家。

The Trump Administration has literally vandalized many of the system’s institutions and agreements, which ironically were spearheaded –and used to the United States’ own national advantage-- since their founding by that very country.

特朗普政府破坏了多边体系中的许多机构和协议。具有讽刺意味的是，这些原本都是美国领导和或由美国建立的、对美国有利的机构和协议。

Instances of such assault abound: the withdrawal from the Paris Climate Change Agreement, the UN Human Rights Council and the UNESCO, and the threat to do it from the WHO; the termination of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty; the refusal to negotiate and join the Global Compact for Migration; the repudiation of the Iran nuclear deal; and the paralysis of the WTO’s dispute resolution mechanism.

美国进行破坏的例子比比皆是：退出《巴黎气候变化协定》、退出联合国人权理事会和教科文组织、威胁退出世界卫生组织、终止《中导条约》、拒绝谈判并加入《全球移民契约》、废除伊核协议、以及导致世贸组织争端解决机制的瘫痪。

Although practically all of the Trump government’s attacks on the international system can be shown to be against the national interests of the U.S. itself, this result is strikingly evident in the case of Trump’s trade policy.

尽管实际上特朗普政府对国际体系的所有攻击都不利于美国的国家利益，但这种情况在特朗普的贸易政策中尤其明显。

Consider for a moment the main components of such policy.

思考一下其贸易政策的主要内容。

One, the Trump administration aimed to correct the trade deficit that for many years has been a feature of the American economy. The wrongheaded approach to pursue this equally wrongheaded goal was to engage aggressively, one by one, the country’s main trade partners and force deals supposedly to fix the respective imbalances. This approach, which not only ignored the basic insights stemming from the essential notion of comparative advantage in its modern version and the basic national income identity, but also conceives of international trade as a bellicose zero-sum game, led the U.S. government to use self-defeating protectionism to try to fix the external imbalance.

第一，特朗普政府想要纠正多年来美国经济中一直存在的贸易赤字问题。为了达到这个错误目标，他们采用了错误的方法，一个一个地攻击美国的主要贸易伙伴，强迫对方达成协议，妄图解决与对方的贸易失衡问题。这种方法不仅忽视了现代比较优势理论的基本概念和基本国民收入核算恒等式的基本原理，而且将国际贸易视为零和博弈的战场，导致美国政府妄图使用作茧自缚的保护主义方式来解决外部不平衡的问题。

The result: the U.S. trade deficit in August reached its highest level in 14 years, thus recording for the period of January to August a trade gap of $422 billion, up - despite the dramatic global economic slowdown - almost 6 percent from the equivalent period of last year.

结果是:八月份美国的贸易赤字达到14年来的最高水平，因此尽管全球经济急剧下滑，但1至8月的美国贸易逆差仍达到4220亿美元，较上年同期增长近6％。

Two, on day three of his administration, Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) without providing any economic or geopolitical justification for the move. That this action went against the interests of the U.S. is clear from the fact that the TPP was agreed and constructed to satisfy the interests and demands, as well as the standards and practices, of the U.S. to a much greater extent than any previous trade agreement ever subscribed by that country.

第二，在特朗普执政的第三天，美国在没有给出任何经济或地缘政治的理由的情况下就退出了《跨太平洋伙伴关系协定》。实际上，相比之前美国加入的任何贸易协定，TPP的达成在更大程度上满足了美国的利益和要求、以及美国的标准和惯例。美国的退出违背了自己的国家利益。

The result: Trump’s decision caused the U.S. to incur not only a meaningful economic cost but also a substantial loss in geopolitical influence in a critical part of the world. Furthermore, the eleven remaining partners slightly modified the TPP agreement and signed it in March 2018.

结果是：特朗普的决定不仅导致美国蒙受了巨大的经济损失，还极大削弱了美国在世界上一个重要地区的地缘政治影响力。此外，另外11个合作伙伴对TPP协议进行了少许修改，并于2018年3月签署了协议。

Interestingly too, a few days ago --on November 15, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, or R.C.E.P. was formally signed. It is an agreement among China and 14 other nations from Japan to New Zealand to Myanmar. This pact was spearheaded by China purportedly, in the view of some observers, as a counterweight to American influence in the region. The successful negotiation of this pact, which is now the largest free trade agreement in the world, truly highlights Trump’s inanity of dropping, for no good reason for the U.S. interests, the TPP.

有意思的是，几天前，11月15日，《区域全面经济伙伴关系协定》（RCEP）已正式签署。这是中国与日本、新西兰、缅甸等14个国家之间的协议。一些观察家认为，这项协定是中国有意领导的，目的是平衡美国在该地区的影响力。这一目前世界上最大的自由贸易协定的谈判成功，更加凸显了特朗普的无能，做出了退出TPP这样伤害美国利益的事情。

Three, based on fallacious arguments, Trump forced Mexico and Canada to renegotiate NAFTA. Although his negotiators did not get all the rather awkward demands they maintained throughout most of the talks, they did get an agreement, now called the USMCA. This, for the most part, by diminishing the region’s competitiveness in global markets, is inferior to the old NAFTA.

第三，特朗普荒谬地迫使墨西哥和加拿大重新谈判《北美自由贸易协定》。尽管在大多数会谈中，美国的谈判代表并没有完全得到他们所坚持的无理要求，但他们确实达成了一项协议，现称为《美墨加三国协议》。在很大程度上，这削弱了北美在全球市场上的竞争力，不如以前的《北美自由贸易协定》。

The result: with the USMCA, both Mexico and Canada lose, but so does the US as well.

结果就是《美墨加三国协议》是通过了，但墨西哥和加拿大都输了，美国也输了。

Four, the Trump administration, by blocking the appointment of new members of the Appellate Body of the Dispute Settlement mechanism, has crippled the WTO. To justify his animosity towards the WTO, Trump has argued that his country loses almost all lawsuits and that the system has been “terrible” for the U.S.

第四，特朗普政府通过阻止任命争端解决机制上诉机构的新成员，让WTO寸步难行。为了证明他对WTO的敌意是合理的，特朗普辩称这是因为美国几乎输掉了所有诉讼，这个制度对美国来说是“可怕的”。

The facts: the U.S. is the most frequent user of the dispute settlement system, having brought to it more cases than China and the EU combined, and the U.S. has a higher proportion of cases won (91 percent) than the rest of the complainants. No serious analysis has ever produced evidence of bias against the U.S.

事实是：美国是争端解决机制的最频繁的使用者，提起的诉讼量比中国和欧盟的总和还多，而美国胜诉的比例（91％）高于所有其他国家。任何严肃的分析都没有发现此机制对美国有偏见的证据。

Almost always one of the judges of the appellate body has been an American, a circumstance not enjoyed by any other country.

而且几乎上诉机构的法官中总有一个是美国人，这种情况是其他国家都没有的。

What traditionally has upset American officials is to lose cases brought against U.S. trade remedy actions (antidumping and countervailing duties).

以前，美国官员一直感到不满的是在针对美国贸易救济行动（反倾销和反补贴税）提起的诉讼中美国会败诉。

It is clear, however, that those complaints are caused first and foremost by the U.S.’s own aggressive use of such remedy actions that plainly violate the rules agreed at the WTO - rules certainly accepted by the U.S. itself.

但是，很明显，这些起诉首先是由美国自己滥用这种救济措施而引起的，明显违反了美国自己接受的WTO议定的规则。

The result: one of the best and most useful multilateral institutions, the WTO, has been left in a state of hibernation by the courtesy of the Trump government.

结果是: 托特朗普政府的福，WTO，这个最优秀、最有用的多边机构之一现在就一直处于休眠状态。

Five, initiating unjustified trade wars has been the most egregious trade policy by the Trump administration. It did so against its “friendly” trade partners like Canada, Mexico, Brazil and the European countries, by imposing tariffs arbitrarily on imports of products such as steel and aluminum on the grounds that they constitute a threat to the country’s national security. The illegality of this action was flagrant -- as was opined immediately by many experts.

第五，无缘无故发起贸易战是特朗普政府最恶劣的贸易政策。美国对其“友好”的贸易伙伴 - 如加拿大、墨西哥、巴西和欧洲等国家和地区 - 以对美国国家安全构成威胁为理由发起贸易战，对他们的钢铁和铝等进口产品任意征收关税。正如许多专家立即指出的那样，这是明目张胆地藐视法律。

Still, the unwarranted and abusive treatment of its “friendly” trade partners pales in comparison to the trade aggressiveness displayed by the U.S. government against China. Step by step, although rather quickly, the Trump administration set off an authentic trade war practically without precedent since the 1930s.

然而，与美国政府在贸易问题上对中国表现出的咄咄逼人之势相比，美国对其“友好的”贸易伙伴表现出的肆无忌惮就相形见绌了。特朗普政府在很短的时间里，一步一步地，引发了一场自20世纪30年代以来空前的、实打实的贸易战。

Regretfully, but not surprisingly, China responded in kind. The clock of these two countries’ trade cooperation and interdependence has been set back many years.

并不意外的是，中国进行了回应。这两个国家的贸易合作和相互依存已经大幅度退步。

Every serious legal and economic analysis of the arguments provided by the U.S. government to justify its massive trade attacks on China have found the alleged American justification questionable in the best of cases -- if not patently illegal.

对美国政府为证明其对中国的大规模贸易攻击有理而提供的论据进行的所有严肃的法律和经济分析都认为，美国所谓的理由都是有问题的，甚至是明显非法的。

The result: the US has not won the trade war initiated by Trump – actually, there are never winners in these kinds of episodes, and it has been left to the American consumers, farmers and taxpayers to suffer the folly of Trump’s acute trade bellicosity against China.

结果是:美国没有赢得特朗普发起的贸易战。事实上，在这种情况下从来没有赢家，最终是美国的消费者、农民和纳税人为特朗普针对中国的疯狂贸易战的愚蠢行为买单。

The ill-fated events of recent years have led to a boom in the dubious occupation of predicting unavoidable fatalities. Concepts such as the Thucydides Trap or the Cold War have been given a renaissance by pundits of geopolitics.

近年来的这些时间导致悲观理念盛行。修昔底德陷阱或冷战这样的概念被地缘政治专家们给予新生。

Much ink has been spent in describing the inevitable confrontations to come, including the military ones, rather than denouncing the folly of the tit-for-tat game being irresponsibly played by global powers.

人们花了大量笔墨描述未来不可避免的对抗，包括军事对抗，而不是谴责全球大国不负责任地搞针锋相对的愚蠢竞争。

That is how the world has arrived at a 2021-vintage Fork in the Road situation, a much more challenging circumstance than the one described by Kofi Annan in 2003.

世界就是这样走到了2021年的岔路口，这比科菲·安南在2003年描述的情况更具挑战性。

The global powers can choose to move forward along the path that in all likelihood would lead to disaster. This path is about dismissing the rules-based international system; neglecting the value of international cooperation; reaffirming unilateral, or at best bilateral, approaches to address issues of truly collective interest; expending on military capabilities instead of on diplomacy and human well-being; continuing to blame “the others” and interdependence for the social consequences of essentially homegrown policy failures; continuing to look at international trade, investment, and migration as zero sum games; in short, proceeding to undo the positive aspects of the world order painstakingly constructed only after the shameful experiences (two world wars and a great depression) suffered in the first half of the 20 th century.

全球大国可以选择沿着极有可能导致灾难的道路前进。这条道路摒弃基于规则的国际体系、无视国际合作的价值、重申用单边或双边办法解决涉及集体利益的问题、扩大军事能力，而不是关注外交和民生；继续把本质上是本土政策失败导致的社会后果甩锅给“其他国家”和相互依存的实际情况；继续把国际贸易、投资和移民视为零和游戏；简而言之，就是继续削弱20世纪上半叶人类遭受可耻的经历(两次世界大战和一次大萧条)后才努力建立起来的世界秩序积极的方面。

Staying on this path could lead to a repetition, or even much worse, of past episodes of immense, unnecessary and unjust human suffering.

继续走这条路可能会导致历史重演，像过去一样造成巨大的、不必要的和无谓的人类苦难，甚至比过去更加严重。

Or the global powers, joined decisively by enlightened emerging countries, can decide to work together on the other path where international peace and prosperity, which are good for every country, if not guaranteed, indeed constitute the most probable outcome.

或者全球大国和开明的新兴国家可以果断决定携手走另一条道路，那是通向国际和平与繁荣的道路，是最可能对所有国家都有利的道路。

Needless to say, moving on that path, despite its promise, will not be easy. For one thing, inertia towards the other direction has gained significant momentum in recent years. The adversarial view of the world has become influential even among otherwise cosmopolitan citizens of open societies.

毋庸置疑，尽管走第二条路前景美好，但要走上这条路并不容易。首先，往第一条路上走的惯性近年来显著增长，即使对于生活在开放社会的世界公民来说，相互对抗的世界观也开始有影响力了。

Repairing the damage suffered by international relations and cooperation will be a work of patience, diplomatic craftsmanship and slow recovery of mutual trust.

修复破损的国际关系与合作需要耐心、外交技巧和缓慢恢复互信。

But let me emphasize that although the United States has been the worst offender during the Trump administration, the reconstruction and improvement of the system requires the goodwill and effort of all the other stakeholders.

但我要强调的是，尽管美国在特朗普执政期间做出了最恶劣的动作，但多边体系的重建和完善需要所有其他利益攸关方的善意和努力。

Of course, the Biden government must proceed decisively to repair the most egregious misdeeds of the outgoing US government, as already committed by the President-elect himself.

当然，拜登政府必须果断着手修复前一届的美国政府最恶劣的行径，正如当选总统他本人承诺的那样。

Observing the U.S. return to the international agreements and institutions repudiated by Mr. Trump will be not only a source of relief to the rest of the world but also a firm step towards the restoration of the country’s leadership and respectability.

看到美国重返被特朗普抛弃的国际协定和机构，不仅会让世界其他国家松一口气，也有助于恢复美国的领导地位和尊严。

However, great responsibility rests with others.

然而，其他国家还要肩负起重大责任。

This is certainly the case for China.

中国肯定是需要这样做的。

推荐阅读：