原創翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.uhhij.com.cn 翻譯:TouHouPolice 轉載請注明出處
論壇地址:http://www.uhhij.com.cn/bbs/thread-485125-1-1.html



The United States and China are likely to reacha trade deal, but this willhardly be the breakthrough that ends a deep-rooted conflict. Any deal is likelyto focus primarily on multi-year narrowing of America’s outsize bilateralmerchandise trade deficit with China, which hit an astonishing US$419 billionin 2018, nearly half the total US trade gap.

美國和中國很可能達成貿易協議,但這很難成為結束一場根深蒂固的沖突的突破口。任何協議都可能主要集中在多年來美國對中國巨大的雙邊商品貿易逆差的縮小上,2018年美國對中國的貿易逆差達到4190億美元,幾乎是美國貿易總逆差的一半。

But there is no bilateral fix for America’s trade deficit with 102 countries last year.The multilateral imbalance stems from a profound shortfall of US domesticsaving, which will only worsen in the years ahead due to chronic and wideningfederal budget deficits.

但去年美國與102個國家的貿易逆差沒有雙邊解決方案。多邊失衡源于美國國內儲蓄的嚴重不足,這只會在未來幾年因長期和不斷擴大的聯邦預算赤字而惡化。

Instead of popping champagne corks when such a deal isreached, government officials and investors should think ahead to unresolvedstructural issues that remain – overtechnology, intellectual property rights, state-sponsored industrial policy andforced technology transfer through joint venture arrangements.

在達成此類協議時,政府官員和投資者應提前考慮尚未解決的結構問題,而不是一拍腦袋想出方法,這些問題涉及技術、知識產權、國家支持的產業政策以及通過合資安排強制轉讓技術。



Inasmuch as I donot expect China to capitulate on its core economic strategy, there is a stronglikelihood of a protracted struggle between two systems – call it “cold war2.0”. This, of course, would contrast with “cold war 1.0”, more of a militarystruggle between the US and the former Soviet Union.

因為我不認為中國會在其核心經濟戰略上屈服,所以兩個體系之間存在持久斗爭的可能性——可以叫做“冷戰2.0”。當然,這將與“冷戰1.0”形成對比,后者更像是美國和前蘇聯之間的軍事斗爭。

Significantly, forthe US, its economy is in much weaker shape to wage a cold war today than wasthe case during cold war 1.0 from 1947 to 1991. During that earlier period,real US gross domestic product growth averaged 3.5 per cent per year. Bycontrast, since 2010, real US growth has slipped to 2.3 per cent. Similarly, during the first cold war, productivity growth averaged2.2 per cent per annum, while over the past nine years the pace has slowed to1.1 per cent.

值得注意的是,與1947年至1991年的1.0冷戰時期相比,美國經濟在今天發動冷戰時的狀況要弱得多。在當時,美國實際國內生產總值年均增長3.5%。相比之下,自2010年以來,美國實際增長率已下滑至2.3%。同樣,在第一次冷戰期間,生產率平均每年增長2.2%,而在過去的9年中,增速已放緩至1.1%。

America’s domesticsaving position is woefully deficient – a 2.5 per cent net national saving ratesince 2010 versus an 8.8 per cent average during cold war 1.0. Such a profoundshortfall raises serious questions about America’s wherewithal to fund theinvestments in physical or human capital required for competitive revival.

美國國內儲蓄狀況嚴重不足——自2010年以來,美國凈儲蓄率為2.5%,而冷戰時期平均為8.8%。這樣一個巨大的缺口引發了嚴重的問題,即美國是否有足夠的資金來為競爭性復蘇所需的實物或人力資本投資提供資金。

Contrasting global perspectives ofthe US and China were evident from the beginning of the Trump administration.US President Donald Trump said in his January 2017 inaugural address, “Protection will lead to great prosperityand strength.” Three days earlier, on January 17, Chinese President Xi Jinpinggave the keynote address at the World Economic Forum in Davos, suggesting thatChina “should adapt to and guide economic globalisation”.

從特朗普政府執政開始,中美兩國的全球觀就形成了鮮明的對比。美國總統唐納德·特朗普在2017年1月的就職演說中說:“保護將帶來巨大的繁榮和力量。”三天前,1月17日,中國國家領導人在達沃斯世界經濟論壇上發表了主題演講,暗示中國“應該適應和引導經濟全球化”。



Contrary to the view of the Trumpadministration, trade wars have no winners – especially between two codependent economies that rely so heavily on each other.Trump’s argument that the US has the upper hand in a trade war because China isalready hurting could be a serious miscalculation.

與特朗普政府的觀點相反,貿易戰沒有贏家——尤其是在兩個嚴重相互依賴的經濟體之間。特朗普認為,美國在貿易戰中占上風,因為中國已經受到傷害,這可能是一個嚴重的誤判。

Yes, the Chinese economy is weakeningand likely to slow further in the months ahead. But in light of recentpolicy stimulus actions, both monetary and fiscal, thatweakening could run its course by mid-year. On the other hand, the sharp plunge in the US stock market in December 2018, inconjunction with a significant weakening in global trade, point to a test of USeconomic resilience in the months ahead.

是的,中國經濟正在減弱,并可能在未來幾個月進一步放緩。但鑒于最近的政策刺激行動,包括貨幣和財政方面,這種削弱可能會在年中就停止。另一方面,美國股市在2018年12月大幅下挫,加上全球貿易的顯著減弱,預示著美國經濟在未來幾個月的恢復能力受到考驗。

Notwithstanding aprobable superficial deal between the US and China, it is hard to be optimisticthat a meaningful breakthrough is at hand. Nothing short of bold, courageousand strategic vision by leaders of both nations is required to restore trust andrebuild the relationship.

盡管美中之間可能有一個表面上的協議,但很難樂觀地看到一個有意義的突破的到來。除了兩國領導人大膽、勇敢和戰略性的遠見外,恢復信任和重建關系都是必不可少的。

Stephen Roach, a faculty member at YaleUniversity and former chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, is author of Unbalanced:The co-dependency of America and China. This article is based on a paperprepared for last month’s 20th Annual China Development Forum in Beijing.

耶魯大學(YaleUniversity)教員、摩根士丹利(MorganStanley)亞洲區前董事長羅奇(StephenRoach)著有《不平衡:中美共同依賴》(Balanced:TheCo Dependency of America and China)。本文是基于上個月在北京舉行的第20屆中國發展論壇上準備的一篇論文。