美國對自由貿易關上大門
Donald Trump wants to slap punitive tariffs on China. Hillary Clinton opposes the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership she once hailed as a gold standard for a new generation of free trade deals. Republicans are embracing Democrat demands for “fair” trade. The US, the architect of the open global system, is turning inwards.
唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)想對中國徵收懲罰性關稅。希拉里•克林頓(Hillary Clinton)反對12個國家締結的《跨太平洋戰略經濟夥伴關係協定》(Trans-Pacific Partnership, TPP)。她曾對TPP表示歡迎，稱之爲新一代自由貿易協議的典範。共和黨人開始支持民主黨人對於“公平”貿易的要求。一手設計了全球開放體系的美國，如今開始自我封閉。
The rest of the world should sit up. This is about more than the raw political emotions stirred by a US presidential race. The World Trade Organisation’s failed Doha Round saw the end of the multilateral trade liberalisation that gave us the globalised economy. The failure of the TPP would read the rites over the big plurilateral deals that promised an alternative. Free trade has been a powerful source of prosperity. It has lost political legitimacy. And not only in the US: European populists of left and right share the Trumpian disposition to throw up the barricades.
世界其他地區應感到吃驚。這不只是反映出美國總統大選激起的不加掩飾的政治情緒。世界貿易組織(WTO)多哈回合談判失敗，表明給我們帶來全球化經濟的多邊(multilateral)貿易自由化的終結。TPP的失敗將爲有望給世界另一個選項的大型諸邊(plurilateral)協議宣讀悼詞。自由貿易曾一直是促進繁榮的強大動力，但如今已失去了政治上的合法性。這並不僅僅表現在美國：歐洲左右兩翼的民粹主義者都像特朗普一樣想要豎起屏障。
Optimists hope the protectionist turn in the US is cyclical. Things will get back to normal once the cacophony of the presidential contest subsides. Freed from the primary challenge of Bernie Sanders, Mrs Clinton, the most likely successor to President Barack Obama, will find a way to change her mind again. The TPP could yet be smuggled through Congress during the lame-duck interlude after November’s elections. Such is the line from Mr Obama’s White House and from a diminishing band of Republicans true to their free trade heritage.
樂觀者希望，美國的保護主義新傾向是階段性的。一旦總統競選中刺耳的雜聲消散，局面將會迴歸常態。一旦消除了主要對手伯尼•桑德斯(Bernie Sanders)的挑戰，最有可能接替現任總統巴拉克•奧巴馬(Barack Obama)上臺的希拉里將有辦法改變自己的觀點。在11月選舉之後短暫的“跛腳鴨”時期，TPP仍有可能被國會悄悄通過。奧巴馬政府和共和黨內堅守該黨自由貿易傳統的越來越少的一部分人就是這樣說的。
All the evidence points the other way. Globalisation has gone out of fashion. Shrewd Washington observers have concluded that, as one puts it, “ there is not a chance in hell” of the next president or the next Congress — of whatever colour — backing the TPP. As for the mooted, and now being negotiated, Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) designed to integrate the US and European economies, dream on.
所有證據都顯示不是這樣。全球化已過時了。正如有人所指出，聰明的華盛頓觀察人士得出結論，下一位總統或下一屆國會——無論屬於哪個黨派——都“根本沒有可能”支持TPP。至於擬議的、目前正在協商中的旨在融合美歐經濟的《跨大西洋貿易與投資夥伴關係協定》(TTIP)——願意的話就繼續做美夢吧。
Mr Trump has struck a powerful chord among his core constituency in blaming foreigners for America’s economic ills. The backlash against free trade, though, runs deeper than cheap populism. The middle classes have seen scant evidence of the gains once promised for past deals. Republicans, fearful that they have already lost the presidency, do not want to risk handing Congress to fair-trade Democrats.
特朗普把美國的經濟弊病歸咎於外國人，這在他的核心選民陣營中引起了強烈共鳴。不過，對於自由貿易的抵制，有比廉價的民粹主義更爲深層次的原因。中產階層看到，美國政府過去達成一些協議時所承諾的好處，基本沒有落實。擔心已然無望獲得總統職位的共和黨人，不想冒險讓國會落入主張公平貿易的民主黨人之手。
Some problems are specific to the TPP. The prospective wins for the US are heavily tilted towards technology businesses on the west coast. Manufacturing America thinks it secures little in the way of better access to Asian markets and complains that the deal leaves US companies vulnerable to currency manipulation by overseas competitors.
有些問題是TPP所特有的。美國有望從TPP中獲得的好處，很多都將屬於西海岸的科技企業。製造企業則認爲，TPP並沒有爲它們更容易進入亞洲市場創造多少條件，並抱怨稱，TPP導致美國企業面對海外競爭對手的匯率操縱非常弱勢。
Many more Americans than would ever gift their votes to Mr Trump question whether they get anything out of trade deals. Free trade has always created losers, but now they seem to outnumber the winners. There is nothing populist about noticing that globalisation has seen the top 1 per cent grab an ever-larger share of national wealth.
除了願意把選票投給特朗普的美國人以外，還有多得多的美國人對自己是否能從貿易協議中獲得任何好處表示懷疑。自由貿易向來會造就輸家，但如今，輸家人數似乎超過了贏家。注意到最富有的那1%的人攫取國民財富的比例越來越高，這算不上民粹主義。
The nature of free trade deals has changed. They used to be about tariffs. Now they focus on regulatory standards and norms, intellectual property rights, data privacy and investment protection. These are issues that cut deep across national political and cultural preferences. Lowering import duties is one thing; persuading voters to relax the rules on data protection or accept new rules on food safely is another.
自由貿易協議的性質已發生了改變。過去，它們是爲了降低關稅。如今，自由貿易協議關注的是監管標準與規範、知識產權、數據隱私和投資保護。這些問題都深深地觸動全民的政治與文化偏好。降低進口關稅是一回事；說服選民放鬆數據保護規則、或者接受食品安全新規，是另一回事。
The geopolitical calculus has also shifted. For the world’s advanced democracies, postwar trade liberalisation was self-evidently win-win. Sure, it was self-interested on the part of the US, but it also served a wider good. Trade deals with Europe and America’s Asian allies at once promoted growth in those regions, provided markets for US industry and strengthened the fight against Soviet communism. China’s entry into the WTO in 2001 changed things. Beijing has become the biggest beneficiary of the open trading system.
地緣政治考量也發生了變化。對於世界的發達民主國家而言，戰後的貿易自由化是不言而喻的雙贏。沒錯，貿易自由化符合美國的自身利益，但它也造福整個世界。與歐洲和美國的亞洲盟友達成的貿易協議，立即推動了那些地區的增長，爲美國的工業提供了市場，併爲對抗蘇聯社會主義的鬥爭增添了力量。2001年中國加入WTO，這改變了局勢。中國已成爲這一開放貿易體系的最大受益者。
An obvious retort is that the TPP and the TTIP would reset the balance. They would solidify the economic integration of advanced democracies and frame the regulatory rules for everyone else. Failure would send a powerful message about waning US leadership and the incoherence of the west. China, already turning economic power into geopolitical punch by leading integration in Asia, would be the obvious winner.
明顯可以反駁上述觀點的是，TPP和TTIP將重置平衡。它們將鞏固發達民主國家之間的經濟一體化，併爲所有其他國家設定監管規則。如果失敗，這將對外發出美國領導能力下降和西方一盤散沙的強烈信號。中國已通過領導亞洲一體化，把經濟實力轉化爲地緣政治影響力。如果TPP和TTIP失敗，中國將成爲明顯的贏家。
Voters are not listening. Free trade is good for the world — for western consumers and for billions in emerging economies being hauled out of poverty. A US retreat will not signal the end to bilateral and smaller, regional, liberalisation agreements. China will do what it can to sign up its neighbours to regional alternatives to the TPP. But without the US, the basic momentum towards liberalisation will be lost. The danger then will be of a gradual slide backwards into outright protectionism.
選民們聽不到這些。自由貿易對全世界都有好處，受益者既包括西方消費者，又包括新興經濟體中正在擺脫貧困的數十億人。美國的後退，並不意味着雙邊和更小規模的地區性自由貿易協議將終結。中國將盡其所能，與鄰國簽訂可替代TPP的地區性協議。但若沒有美國的加入，貿易自由化將失去根本的勢頭。接着，世界將面臨開倒車的危險，逐漸退回徹底的保護主義。
There is no quick fix. A sustained period of growth and rising incomes would help. So, too, would proactive policies to cushion the impact of liberalisation on the losers. The US could start by reinvigorating the trade-adjustment assistance programme introduced in the wake of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993.
目前沒有見效快的修補辦法。持續的增長和收入的不斷增長，將有所助益。採取積極主動的政策、緩衝貿易自由化對輸家的衝擊，也會有所幫助。美國或許可以從這一條做起：重新啓動1993年《北美自由貿易協定》(NAFTA)之後引入的貿易調整援助計劃。
But the present politics of middle class discontent demands a response reaching well beyond better retraining schemes and jobs programmes. As long as globalisation is seen as a project of the political elites and the rich it will carry the seeds of its own destruction.
但是，當前中產階層感到不滿的政治狀況，要求拿出遠不止於更好的再培訓計劃和就業項目的對策。只要全球化被認爲是政界精英和富人的事情，它就將攜帶自我毀滅的種子。
