美国应换个角度审视TPP谈判.

　　The Senate’s rejection of Pre-sident Woodrow Wilson’s commitment that the US would join the League Of Nations was the greatest setback to American global leadership of the last century. While not remotely as consequential, the House votes last week that, unless revisited, would doom the Trans-Pacific Partnership, send a similarly negative signal regarding US willingness to take responsibility at a critical time for the global system.

　　美国参议院拒绝伍德罗?威尔逊(Woodrow Wilson)总统关于美国加入国联(League Of Nations)的承诺，是上世纪美国全球领导地位遭遇的最大挫折。虽然重要性不可相提并论，但美国众议院上周的投票将使《跨太平洋伙伴关系》(TPP)的失败成为必然(除非再次投票)，这对美国在建立该全球体系的关键时刻承担责任的意愿，发出了相似的负面信号。

　　Repudiation of the TPP by Congress would neuter the presidency for the next 19 months. It would reinforce concerns that the vicissitudes of domestic politics are rendering the US a less reliable ally. Coming on top of US failure to stop or join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, it would signal a lack of US commitment to Asia at a time when China is flexing its muscles. And it would strengthen companies overseas at the expense of US businesses.

　　国会对TPP的否决将使总统在接下来19个月中艰难度日。它将强化一种担忧，即国内政治的演变正在将美国变成一个不那么可靠的盟友。这恰巧发生在美国未能阻止或加入亚洲基础设施投资银行(AIIB)的同时，标着在中国展示肌肉之时美国对亚洲缺乏承诺。而且，它将以牺牲美国企业为代价加强外国企业的优势。

　　Both the House and Senate have delivered majorities for the trade promotion authority necessary to complete TPP. The problem is with the complem-ent-ary trade adjustment assistance programme, designed to assist American workers, which most Republicans do not support and Democrats are opposing in order to bring down the TPP. It is to be fervently hoped that a way through will be found to avoid a catastrophe for US economic leadership.

　　美国参众两院都以多数票通过了完成TPP谈判所需要的“贸易促进授权”(TPA)。问题在于一项旨在援助美国工人的补充性议案——“贸易调整援助计划”(TAA)，大多数共和党人都不支持该议案，而民主党人为了毁掉TPP也反对该议案。现在只能热切盼望，可以找到一条道路来避免美国经济领导力发生灾难。

　　Perhaps success can be achieved if its advocates can acknowledge that rather than being a model for future trade agreements, the TPP debate should lead to carul rlection on the role of trade agreements in America’s international economic strategy.

　　如果TPP的倡导者能够承认，TPP不是要设定未来贸易协定的典范，相反，TPP辩论应该带来对贸易协定在美国国际经济战略中所扮演角色的仔细反思，这样的话，也许还能获得成功。

　　Four points seem salient. First, the era of agreements that achieve freer trade in the classical sense is over. The world’s remaining tariff and quota barriers are small, and often result from deeply held cultural values, such as Japan’s attachment to rice farming. What we call trade agreements are in fact deals on the protection of investment and on achieving regulatory harmonisation and establishment of standards in areas such as intellectual property. There may be substantial potential gains from such agreements, but their merits must be considered case by case. No rlexive presumption in favour of free trade should be used to justify further agreements.

　　有四点值得注意。首先，通过协定实现传统意义上更自由贸易的时代已经结束。世界剩余的关税和配额壁垒已经很少，而且经常源于根深蒂固的文化价值观，如日本对稻米种植的执着。我们所说的贸易协定实际上是关于保护投资、以及在诸如知识产权等领域实现监管协调和建立标准的协定。此类协定可能带来大量潜在回报，但对它们的优点须就事论事。不能用支持自由贸易的反射性假设来证明未来协定的合理性。

　　Second, there must be a balancing of the political cost of legislating trade agreements. If just a fraction of the US political capital expended on the TPP had been devoted to supporting rorm of the International Monetary Fund and ad-equate funding for international fin-ancial institutions and the UN, those objectives could have been attained, with greater benit. Trade deals are of-ten dended on the grounds that commerce builds ties to other nations. A rebalancing by the US towards backing multilateral institutions that provide support for other countries, and away from demands for changes to their domestic policies, would enhance US prestige and influence.

　　第二，必须平衡将贸易协定立法的政治成本。假如美国拿出推动TPP的政治资本的一小部分来支持国际货币基金组织(IMF)的改革，以及让国际金融机构和联合国获得足够融资，这些目标可能全都已经实现了，而且还会带来更大的益处。人们往往以商业能促进与其他国家的关系为由支持贸易协定。美国如果调整方向，去支持那些为其他国家提供帮助的多边机构，而不是要求其他国家改变国内政策，那将会增强美国的威望和影响力。

　　Next, there should be carul consideration of the ramifications of trade deals that include some countries but exclude others. Where the grouping is natural, as with the North American Free Trade Agreement, or it rlects a clear political strategy, the argument is stronger than where the criteria are not clear. In rec-ent weeks, political necessity has led ad-vocates of TPP to offer increasingly ag-gressive formulations about how it enables the US to gain ad-vantage at the expense of China. We may come to reg-ret such provocation. But it will become important down the road to consider possible Chinese membership of TPP on terms no different from those applied to others.

　　第三，美国应该认真考虑将一些国家包括在内、同时将其他国家排除在外的贸易协定带来的后果。当协定是自然形成的，比如《北美自由贸易协定》(North American Free Trade Agreement)，或者它反映了明确的政治战略，那么缔结该协定的理由就比缺乏明确标准的协定强。在最近几周，由于政治上的需要，支持TPP的人士提出了日益激进的让美国获益而中国受损的方案。我们最终可能会对此类挑衅感到懊悔。但接下来重要的是考虑让中国以与其他国家同样的条款加入TPP。

　　Last, the global economic challenge is profoundly different from a generation ago. Just after the cold war and the Latin American debt crisis, and with Asia’s China-led renaissance in its early stages, the challenge was to enable new mark-ets to emerge. Trade agreements that encouraged adoption of market institutions in developing economies and helped them access the industrial economies were crucial in creating a global economy. Today, we have such an economy, one that has supported the greatest economic progress in emerging markets. It works spectacularly well for capital and a cosmopolitan elite that moves fortlessly around the world. But it presses down on the middle classes who lack the wherewithal to take advantage of new global markets and who do not want to compete with low-cost foreign labour. Our challenge now is not to create more globalisation, but to make sure the globalisation we have works for all our citizens.

　　最后，全球面临的经济挑战与一代人之前有着显著不同。在冷战和拉美债务危机刚刚结束之后——当时以中国为首的亚洲国家复兴还处于初期阶段——挑战在于让新的市场出现。鼓励发展中经济体采用市场机制、并帮助它们进入工业化经济体的贸易协定，对创造全球经济至关重要。现在，我们已经有了让新兴市场取得最伟大经济进展的全球经济。它尤其有利于资本以及轻松往返于世界各地的精英阶层，但那些缺乏财力利用新的全球市场、以及不想与低成本的外国劳工竞争的中产阶级却受到压力。我们现在面临的挑战不是创造更多的全球化，而是确保目前的全球化让全体公民受益。

　　Ultimately, trade diplomacy must be one component of a broader approach whose primary stakeholders are not just global companies but also those concerned with economic equity, the environment, opportunities for workers to migrate and financial stability. If the TPP is to be secured, there must be clear signs that international economic diplomacy will turn to these concerns.

　　最终而言，贸易外交必须是更广泛策略的一个组成部分，它的主要利益相关群体不仅仅是全球公司，还包括关切经济公平、环境、工人迁徙机会以及金融稳定的所有人。要想达成TPP，就必须释放出明确信号：国际经济外交将会致力于解决这些令人关切的问题。

　　The writer is Charles W Eliot university professor at Harvard and a former US Treasury secretary

　　本文作者是美国哈佛大学(Harvard)查尔斯·W·艾略特校级教授(Charles W. Eliot University Professor)，曾担任美国财政部长