【主旨演讲】贾庆国：中美经贸关系问题不能靠“脱钩”解决（中英文对照）

点击蓝字

关注我们

【小i导读】

    2021年3月20日，全国政协常委，北京大学中外人文交流研究基地主任，北京大学国际关系学院原院长、教授贾庆国在第22届“中国发展高层论坛”专题会“中美经贸协定何去何从”上发表题为“China’s commitment to the phase-one trade deal with the US and the way to address the economic relations between China and the US” 的英文讲话，对中美贸易在科技、经贸领域的现状与未来作出了分析与展望。小i整理了中英文发言全文，与读者分享~

本文约1800字，读完约5分钟

中国发展高层论坛现场

非常荣幸应邀在中国发展高层论坛上发言。

表面上看，第一阶段贸易协议并没有得到全面执行。根据彼得森国际经济研究所的报告，在2020年中国从美国的进口只有999亿美元，只占双方达成协议的数量的58%。然而，这并不能说中国没有诚意。正如美国农业部部长汤姆·维尔萨克所说，贸易协议将市场条件作为北京从美国进口农产品数量的决定标准，而新冠疫情作为实质性的市场条件确实影响了中国的购买量。同时，美国对高科技的出口限制也导致中国购买美国产品数量的减少。因此实际上中国是认真兑现了自己在第一阶段贸易协议中的承诺的，只不过由于新冠疫情和美方的原因导致没有完全兑现。

The first phase of the trade agreement was not implemented in full. According to a Peterson Institute report, in 2020, “China's total imports of covered products from the United States were only $99.9 billion, reaching only 58 percent of the commitment.” However, that is not a testament of bad faith on China’s part. As Tom Vilsack, US Secretary of Agriculture said, that the trade deal allows for market conditions to dictate how much Beijing is required to purchase from U.S. farmers. The Covid pandemic would qualify as a material market condition that would impact how much China has to buy.[1] The US high-tech export restrictions have also contributed to less Chinese purchase of US products. Therefore, China has made good on the commitment it made as part of the phase one trade deal.

那么，未来中国是否会继续履行在贸易协定中的承诺呢？我认为如果美方坚持要执行完第一阶段协议的话，中国是会接受这一点的。我提出这个问题的原因是，虽然协议的大部分内容符合自由市场原则，但协议的另一部分——要求中国购买特定数量的美国产品，以解决美国贸易逆差，却违背了自由市场的原则。正如一些美国人士指出的那样，这是一种人为管理的贸易，不符合美国的长期利益。

Will China continue to honor its commitment in the trade deal? If the US still insists, China is likely to do so. The reason I ask the question is that while most part of the deal is consistent with the free market principles, the part that requires China to purchase a specific quantity of American products to address US trade deficit goes against the spirit of such principles. As some Americans point out, it smacks of managed trade and does not serve the long-term interests of the US.

那么两国政府如何应对他们未来的经贸关系呢？在这个问题上，中美双方和两国国内有很大争议，并以国家安全的为由对未来两国经贸关系提出了不同的解决方案——脱钩、部分脱钩与确保自身安全的相互依存。

How should the two countries tackle with their economic relations whether trade or investment in the future? There is much controversy on this question in both countries, ranging from decoupling, to decoupling, to reassured interdependence, all in the name of national security.

支持中美经贸脱钩的人士认为，在物联网时代技术的触角已经侵入到人们的工作和生活的方方面面，无论是办公室与卧室中。5G的发展又使得信息的流动变得几乎无法控制，两者叠加就带来了越来越严重的安全隐患。在这种情况下，各国必须要有最起码的信任才能保持互联互通。既然中国和美国缺乏这样的信任，他们就只能将经济脱钩。

According to the decoupling argument, in the age of internet of things, the technological tentacles have penetrated deep into the work and life of people, whether it is office or bedroom. With the 5G, it becomes almost impossible to control the flow of information. This development poses increasingly serious security risks to all. Under the circumstances, countries have to have minimum trust in order to stay connected. Since China and the US lack such trust, they have to decouple their economies.  

支持选择性脱钩这一派的人士认为，在全球化时代，各国，特别是中美两国，已经在贸易和投资方面形成了强大的利益关系。某些经贸活动的确会带来不可接受的安全风险，但大部分不会。在这种情况下，完全脱钩的成本太高，也没有必要。因此，明智的政策是将那些对国家安全至关重要的经济活动脱钩，同时保持在其他经济活动中的联系。

According to the selective decoupling argument, in the age of globalization, countries have developed huge stakes in trade and investment. This is especially true for China and the US. Some aspects of trade and investment pose unacceptable security risk while others are not. Under the circumstances, total decoupling is both too costly and unnecessary. Therefore, the wise policy is to decouple those economic activities that are deemed essential to one’s security while staying connected in other economic activities.

根据确保自身安全相互依存的观点，脱钩和选择性脱钩都无法一劳永逸地解决国家安全问题，反而还会增加更多难以承担的成本。因此，最好的办法就是解决安全风险问题本身，包括共同识别这些安全风险，制定行为规范，并通过谈判和协商，商定监督机制和对违规行为的惩罚措施。此外，各国应尽量将重点放在自己具有比较优势的部门或行业，使自身成为其他国家不可或缺的贸易伙伴，以防受到国际经济讹诈。

According to the reassured interdependence argument, neither decoupling or selective decoupling can solve security risks problem and the cost of decoupling, whether it is total or partial, is unacceptable. The best approach, it claims, is to address the security risks directly themselves. This means trying to identify the risks, develop norms of behavior, and agree on monitoring mechanisms and punitive measures for violation through negotiation and consultation. In addition, countries should try to focus on sectors or industry they have comparative advantage and make them indispensable for other countries to ensure against international blackmail.

综合考虑，最后一个观点在我看来可能是比较合理的。它既可以更有效地防范安全上的风险，也保留了经贸关系所带来的利益和其他诸多的好处。

On balance, the last approach appears to make more sense. It addresses the problem of security risks while keeping the benefits of trade and economic relations.

一句话总结，一个国家应该认真对待风险，并采取必要措施来化解这些风险；同时，不应夸大风险而采取适得其反的措施，防止“倒洗澡水连孩子也倒掉”。

In a word, a country should take the risks seriously and take necessary measures to address them. In the meantime, it should not exaggerate the risks and adopt counterproductive measures. That is to say, it should avoid the practice of throwing out the baby together with the bath water.

我希望双方能够在第三种方案上多努点力，争取把它变成现实，但是就目前中美两国国内的政治氛围来看，这是相当困难的。不过，如果是正确的事情，还是应该试一试。虽然不太现实，但我还是愿意期待。谢谢！

It is my hope that China and the United States can agree on the reassured interdependence. However, given the current atmosphere and the way the interactions between the two countries unfold, it is quite difficult. However, if it is the right thing to do, there is no harm to have a try.

欢迎转载，转载时请标明来源

往期精选

点个

在看

你最好看