“空调”是中国制造，“遥控器”却在美国人手里——这不公平
Club提要：“我敢打赌这台空调肯定是中国制造的，但遥控器却在他们（美国人）手里——这不公平”。
在北京对话和联合国南方中心South Center共同主办、中国公共外交协会指导的“金砖国家货币和金融体系改革”对话会上，巴西学者、北京对话特约专家马可（Marco Fernandes）接过翟东升关于空调遥控器的比喻 （一屋子人用空调，为什么美国拿着遥控器？），批评美元霸权。
8月下旬，北京对话将邀请国内外专家继续就“金砖国家与多极世界构建”展开对话。为了更好地承上启下，我们精选部分特约专家在五月份研讨会上的发言，以中英文形式陆续发布。
以下为马可发言：
马可在“ 金砖国家货币和金融体系改革”对话会发言 （图源：北京对话）
我非常喜欢翟老师关于空调的比喻，非常贴切。李世默补充的（美国）“一手拿枪一手拿遥控器”的细节也很好。但这个比喻中缺少了一个重要的点：我敢打赌，这台空调肯定是中国制造的，但遥控器却在他们（美国人）手里——这不公平。
但值得我们注意的是，美国现在所感到的压力也越来越大了。过去一年里有很多迹象都能表明这一点。最近的一个是特朗普的讲话，不知道你们有没有听到，他在一次集会上说：“如果我赢了，我们将制裁那些远离美元的国家。”这是一个直接的威胁。
如果我们继续谈论去美元化，美国就威胁要制裁我们。但我们正是因为他们一直在制裁我们才谈论去美元化，而他们的回应是进一步制裁。所以我觉得这也表现了他们（美国人）的绝望。现实就是他们也不知道该怎么办了。几个月前，佛罗里达州的参议员马尔科·鲁比奥也说，去美元化的问题在于，如果去美元化成功了，美国将失去制裁其他国家的能力。
最有意思的是最近来自美国大型银行和投资基金的两份报告。其中一份是去年六月来自摩根大通的报告，指出了一些去美元化的初现迹象。我手头有一些有趣的数据，因为我们知道美元在各个方面依然占据主导地位，无论是储备还是贸易等领域。但即便如此，他们也意识到了美元在全球储备中的比例正在下降，比如去年就降至58%的历史最低点。虽然还是占多数，但确实也是历史最低点。同时他们还指出，过去五年中黄金储备从全球总量的11%上升到15%。所有这些都是迹象。最近几周，黑石也向投资者发出了警告。他们表示，由于去美元化的原因，持有美元现金的投资者现在应该将资金部分分散到债券上。因为在接下来的几个月和几年里可能会有不好的事件发生。所以我认为这些都是来自美国的信号——我们离去美元化这一目标还有很远——但即便是美国也承认“遥控器”不再那么安全了。
我最近在读一些作品，是一位全球市场和去美元化问题专家写的。有趣的是他认为去美元化无论如何都会发生。所以他已经在以一种无需急躁的态度对待这件事，因为它终将到来。但他强调的一个重点是由中央银行控制的数字货币。在他看来，因为美国无法对其进行干预，所以数字货币是很关键的。所以我对各位的问题是：现在有超过100个国家正在进行数字货币的测试，我们知道中国在这方面已经非常领先。那么，中央银行控制的数字货币（CBDC）作为去美元化的潜在解决方案有多大意义呢？
马可在“金砖国家货币和金融体系改革”对话会发言 （图源：北京对话）
我必须承认，在我们巴西前总统罗塞夫和我们的大使面前演讲，让我有点紧张，我感到责任重大。我们需要的是想法和行动。金砖国家已经走过了15年，面临许多挑战和曲折。例如，当博索纳罗担任巴西总统时，巴西实际上几乎退出了金砖国家——虽然不是名义上，但实际上确是如此。让五个国家坐在一起并制定一个共同的战略并非易事。
但同时我们要注意到，特别是在过去两年对乌克兰的特别军事行动开始之后，全球南方的态度有所不同。正如罗塞夫行长所提到的，现在有40个国家希望申请加入金砖国家。所以很显然，现在的情况与三年前不同。我们取得了一个重大的胜利，那就是在2015年成立了新开发银行，当时罗塞夫还是巴西的总统。但我们需要更进一步。我认为在这一点上，也许在未来几年我们需要实现的一项战略是金砖国家的一些共同胜利——这些胜利要能体现在造福我们的国家和人民上。这并不容易。
将金砖机制作为我们共同胜利的一个样板，向拉丁美洲宣传，我认为这可能是未来几年领导人可以采纳的想法之一，因此我认为其中一件事是，去年金砖国家扩展后，金砖国家成为地球上两种基本商品——食品和能源的潜在巨头。我们知道，美元霸权的基础之一是石油、天然气、小麦、大豆——大部分都以美元计价。对于食品，全球平均约78%的食品贸易以美元计价。对于石油，视来源而定，约80-90%，对于天然气，约80%。世界上所有国家都需要食品和能源。如果食品和能源以美元交易，你就必须购买美元，你的储备中必须有美元。但看看上个月在俄罗斯提出的一个很有意思的提议——这是得到普京总统公开支持的——即创建一个金砖国家的粮食交易所。这背后的意义是什么呢？今天的金砖国家大约生产了全球60%的大米。中国、印度和巴西是主要生产国。对于玉米，大约占30%，对于小麦，占45-50%。
想象一下，如果我们创建这个粮食交易所。其实现在金砖国家内部也已经在进行讨论了。我们应该在10月喀山峰会上会看到一份报告。这可能会使金砖国家能够对粮食进行定价。如果这些国家坐在一起并有一个共同的战略，我们也许能够真正定义粮食价格。最大的好处是我们可以开始用其他货币进行贸易——比如卢布、比如人民币，人民币将是一个主要货币，但也包括巴西雷亚尔，因为巴西也是粮食的主要生产国之一。所以普京总统说，我们生产了地球上大部分的粮食，但定价权却在巴黎和芝加哥，这在道理上是说不通的。我们需要对此采取一些行动。
第二点，正如罗塞夫行长已经提到的，是关于全球能源市场的。我们都知道这个问题非常敏感。截至目前沙特阿拉伯尚未正式加入金砖国家，这并非一个巧合；这个问题还需要讨论。我们希望到10月他们能在喀山峰会做出决定，但我们可以想象他们正承受着来自美国的巨大压力。
让我们简要谈谈能源问题。现在暂时将沙特阿拉伯（加入金砖）视为一个梦想，一种愿景。如果算上沙特阿拉伯，金砖国家拥有全球45%的石油储备，并拥有56%的天然气储备。如果我们再算上核能——很多人认为这是实现低碳排放的主要可能（方法）之一，而浓缩铀是核电站的燃料。俄罗斯国家原子能公司生产了全球一半的浓缩铀，而中国生产了18%的浓缩铀。所以这意味着几乎70%的浓缩铀来自金砖国家，特别是中国和俄罗斯。
我不知道大家有没有注意到，就在上周，美国禁止了从俄罗斯购买浓缩铀，这又是一次搬起石头砸自己脚的行为。正如罗塞夫行长常说的那样，他们常常自缚手脚，但其实现在他们别无选择。欧盟也面临同样的问题，目前欧洲大约25%到30%的浓缩铀也来自俄罗斯。今天，俄罗斯国家原子能公司在全球十个不同的国家进行34个项目的建设。中国在自己国内的扩展最大，国内有21个核电站，但俄罗斯正在十个不同国家进行核电站项目，扩大其全球影响力。
最后，关于可再生能源，我们知道中国是遥遥领先的，位居世界第一；美国位居第二，印度第三，巴西第四。所以中国、印度和巴西加起来生产的可再生能源超过了七国集团的总和。看看金砖国家在全球能源市场上的潜在影响力。重申一下关于定价权的问题，实际上这已经开始了，因为目前俄罗斯和沙特阿拉伯决定了世界石油的价格。这也可以在天然气、铀领域实现，同时，这也是一个开放市场、接纳非美元货币的机会。
最后，作为总结，我们一直在谈论新的万隆时刻。就像1955年的万隆会议，以及我们在提新的不结盟运动。我们这里有南方中心，作为77国集团和不结盟国家的官方代表。但我认为这也是我们回顾历史上最成功的第三世界和全球南方机构的时刻，也就是OPEC。OPEC是万隆和不结盟运动的产物，但这是第三世界国家第一次联合起来，在委内瑞拉的倡议下共同努力的成果。1949年，委内瑞拉去见了伊朗人，跟他们说：“我们应该多谈谈，因为美国、英国和荷兰的大公司正在拿走我们所有的资源，而我们却一无所有。”委内瑞拉、伊朗、伊拉克、科威特和沙特阿拉伯在1960年如何能够建立机构，并至少在石油市场上转移全球力量？这值得思考。最后，我想说我听过罗塞夫行长不止一次提到的一点，我们必须记住，新开发银行只有9年历史。建立这些机构是需要时间的。
许多历史学家认为，OPEC的第一个十年是一个失去的十年。也许这么说有些不公平，因为他们已经取得了一些里程碑式的成就，但OPEC真正变得强大是在十年之后的70年代。这对我们来说也是如此。我们想要成就，想要胜利，但这需要时间。而对方有武器，也许他们会搞破坏。他们非常强大，但毫无疑问，地球上已经有了一种新的气氛，许多证据表明我们可以胜出。我们必须有远大的想法，大胆行动，勇敢无畏。非常感谢大家。
（翻译：王樟宸）
马可在“金砖国家货币和金融体系改革”对话会发言 （图源：北京对话）
以下为英文原文：
First of all, I really like Di Laoshi’s metaphor about the AC. I think it’s perfect. I think Eric added another good detail about the gun in one hand and the remote control in another. But there’s one thing missing in this metaphor. I bet the AC was made by the Chinese, but they control the remote—that’s not fair.
Just a couple of comments and one question. First of all, one of the interesting things is that I know Eric is impatient, and I think many in the room are too. But it is also interesting to see how much the US is feeling the heat from that. There have been many signs in the last year. I think the most recent sign, I don’t know if you saw what Trump said. I think it was last week or something like that. At a rally, he said, “If I win, we’re going to sanction the countries that are moving away from the dollar.” It’s a direct threat.
If you guys keep talking about dedollarization, we’re gonna sanction you, which is very smart, right? Because we are just talking about dedollarization because they have been sanctioning us. And their response is to sanction more. So, I think this also shows the desperation. They don’t know what to do. That’s the reality. Also, a few months ago, Marco Rubio, the senator from Florida, said the problem of dedollarization is if this works, we’re gonna lose our capacity to sanction countries.
Most interesting were two recent reports from huge US banks and investment funds. One from JP Morgan, June last year, issued a report flagging some signs of emerging dedollarization. I have some interesting data because we know that the US dollar is still fully dominant in all aspects, in reserves, in trade, etc. Even then, they realized that, for instance, last year, the dollar reached a record low of international reserves globally, 58%. This is a record low—still a lot, still the majority, but it’s a record low. Also, they realized that in the last five years, the gold reserves increased from 11% to 15% of the global total. So there are signs. And very recently, I think a few weeks ago, BlackRock issued a warning to investors. They said that because of dedollarization efforts, investors who have cash in US dollars should diversify to bonds. Because bad things can happen in the next months and years. So I think these are some signs from the US that—we are still far from this, and we are still impatient as Eric—but even they are recognizing that things, the “remote control,” might not be so safe.
So, for a last question for all of the speakers on the panel. I have been reading some of Sultan Bazar’s work, and he has become a celebrity in these discussions of global markets and dedollarization. It’s funny because, for him, it’s almost like “guys, what are you talking about? Dedollarization will happen no matter what.” So he’s already treating it as if there’s no reason to be impatient because it’s coming. But one of the things that he highlights is the idea of digital currencies controlled by central banks. For him, this is going to be critical because there’s no way for the US to move against that. So that was my question for the speakers: There are more than 100 countries now conducting tests, and we know that China is already very advanced in their tests. So, how much do digital currencies, the CBDCs controlled by central banks, mean as a potential solution for the dedollarization issue?
Speaking session:
I have to confess I’m a little bit nervous to speak in front of my president, Dilma Rousseff, and my ambassador. This is a big responsibility. I hope I can give some ideas as we were provoked by Eric at the beginning, right? We want ideas and actions. So, first of all, I think I really liked what Busani was speaking about this morning because one of the things is that BRICS is now 15 years old with a lot of challenges, a lot of zigzags. For instance, when Bolsonaro was president of Brazil, Brazil was almost off BRICS in practice—not in fact, but in practice. Of course, it's not easy for five countries to sit together and build a common strategy.
But at the same time, especially in the last two years after the special military operation began in Ukraine, there is a different mood in the Global South. As President Dilma mentioned, 40 countries are now wanting to apply to join BRICS. So clearly, it’s different from three years ago. We had one big victory, which was the foundation of the NDB in 2015, by the way, when President Dilma was president of Brazil. But we need to go deeper. I think at this point, maybe one of the strategies we need in the next few years is some common victories for BRICS—victories that are also reflected in our countries, benefiting our countries and our people. And this is not easy.
For instance, right now, there's a huge campaign against China and Russia in many countries of the West or the Global South. In Latin America, for instance, having BRICS as an example of common victories for our countries, I think this is one of the things that maybe the leaders in the next years could pick one or two ideas as Eric was provoking, and let's have some benefits. So, one of the things is that after the expansion of BRICS last year, BRICS became a potential superpower for two basic commodities on the planet, which are food and energy. We know how much US dollar hegemony is also based on the fact that oil, gas, wheat, soy—everything is mostly invoiced in US dollars. For food, on average, about 78% of the food trade on the planet is invoiced in US dollars. For oil, depending on the source, maybe around 80-90%, and for gas, around 80%. All the countries in the world need food and energy. If food and energy are traded in dollars, you have to buy dollars, you have to have dollars in your reserves. But look at an interesting proposal that came out in Russia last month—this was publicly backed by President Vladimir Putin—is the creation of a grain exchange for BRICS. What's behind that? BRICS countries today produce around 60% of the global production of rice. China, India, and Brazil are major producers. For maize, around 30%, and for wheat, between 45-50%. We were talking over lunch that soy is not a grain, but soy accounts for between 40-45%.
Imagine if we create this grains exchange. This is being discussed right now inside BRICS. We should have a report in October at the summit in Kazan. This could allow BRICS to define prices. If the countries sit together and have a common strategy, we could maybe define prices. And the best thing is we could start doing trade in other currencies—rubles, RMB would be the major one, but even reals since Brazil is a huge producer of all of these grains. So, President Putin said we are producing most of the grains on the planet, but the prices have been defined in Paris and Chicago. It doesn't make sense. We need to do something about it.
The second one, as President Dilma already mentioned, is about the global energy market. We know how sensitive this is. It's no coincidence that until now, Saudi Arabia still hasn't officially entered BRICS; it's still being discussed. We hope that by October in Kazan, they will make a decision, but we can imagine the huge pressure they are suffering from the United States right now.
Let's go for energy very briefly. Let's consider Saudi Arabia for now as a dream, as wishful thinking. But considering Saudi Arabia, BRICS countries own 45% of the oil reserves, and we own 56% of the gas reserves. And if we go to nuclear energy, which many people believe is one of the major possibilities for the transition to lower carbon emissions, enriched uranium is the fuel for nuclear power plants. Rosatom from Russia produces half of the enriched uranium, and China produces 18% of the enriched uranium. So, this means almost 70% of the enriched uranium comes from BRICS countries, especially China and Russia.
And I don't know if you saw, but very recently, last week, the US banned the purchase of enrichment from Russia, which is another shot in the foot. As President Dilma always mentioned, you have a loss to shoot its own foot, but they don't have an option right now. And actually, the European Union has the same issue. Around 25% to 30% of the enriched uranium in Europe is also coming from Russia right now. Today, Rosatom is building 34 projects in ten different countries in the world. China has the biggest expansion domestically with, I think, 21 nuclear power plants domestically, but Russia is doing projects in ten countries, spreading its influence. Finally, regarding renewable energy, China is by far the number one, the US is number two, but India is number three, and Brazil is number four. China, India, and Brazil combined produce more renewable energy than the entire G7 combined. Look at the power that BRICS has potentially in terms of global energy markets. And again, the possibility of defining prices, which, by the way, is already happening because right now Russia and Saudi Arabia are defining the oil prices in the world. This could also be done with gas, uranium, and again, would be a chance to open the market to other currencies that are not the dollar.
Finally, in conclusion, we have been talking a lot about a new sort of Bandung moment, right? Like the Bandung Conference in 1955, the new non-aligned movement of countries, and we have here the South Centre as the official representative of the G77, the non-aligned countries. But I think it's the moment also for us to go back to the history of the most successful institution of the Third World and Global South in history, which was OPEC. OPEC is a result of this wave of Bandung and the non-aligned movement, but it was the first time that the Third World together—a few countries—joined efforts with the initiative of Venezuela. It took a crazy Latin American to think about this. They went in 1949 to meet with the Iranians and said, "we should talk more because major companies in the US, UK, and Netherlands are getting all of our resources and we don't have anything." How were Venezuela, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia able in 1960 to set this institution and to shift the global power, at least in oil markets? And one thing, finally, that President Dilma, I've heard her say this more than once, we have to remember that the NDB is only nine years old. It takes time to build these institutions.
Many historians say that the first decade of OPEC was a lost decade. Maybe that might not be so fair because they already achieved some milestones, but OPEC really became powerful after 10 years in the 70s. This is also true for us. I know I’m also impatient like Eric. Many of us here are impatient. We want achievements, we want victories, but it takes time. And the other side has guns. Maybe they kill presidents. They are very powerful, but we have a new mood on the planet, that’s for sure, and a lot of evidence is showing that we can prevail. We have to think big, act big, and be bold. Thank you very much.