本帖最后由 lilyma06 于 2011-10-27 10:52 编辑
【中文标题】美国是否应该少借点，然后要中国多捐点？
【登载媒体】CNN
【来源地址】http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/19/should-the-u-s-borrow-less-and-tell-china-to-donate-more-aid/ 【译 者】yangfuguang
【声 明】本翻译供Anti-CNN使用，未经AC或译者许可，不得转载。
【译 文】 在一个共和党的主要面向国内问题辩论会上，他们的结论是一边倒的，但是，前任马萨诸塞州长Mitt Romney的一个建议，即美国少从中国借点，人道主义援助支出少点，把中国推向前台，承担更多责任，引起关注。 这是周二晚在内华达州举办的一个总统辩论上的场景，这次辩论由CNN和西部共和党领导会议资助，此次讨论相当热烈。
“我碰巧想到，我们从中国借钱再以人道主义援助之名捐给其它国家，这很没意义。我们应该让中国照顾那些人”，Romney对那些欢呼的西部州的共和党员们说到。
Romney的发言人Ryan Williams周二告诉CNN，总统候选人不是暗示“美国应该坚守所有对外援助开销，而把它们交给其它国家来处理”。他只是表明，我们应该把钱花在那些财政困难的州上，这才是优先要考虑的。
但Williams说，Romney确信“如果计划不利于提高我们的战略目标，那么我们应该消除它”。 “Romney州长支持把我们援助资金优先用在战略方向上。援助计划的目的应该是加强美国以及盟国的安全和繁荣，而且它也一定要是行之有效的”，Williams在一份发给CNN的邮件中写道。“这意味着专注于我们的援助，特别是在混乱的中东，在那里我们的计划要最大可能支持基于自由市场、有代表性的政府和人权前提下的国际体系。而且援助计划要反对那些试图破坏这个体系的势力”。
对此，卡内基国际和平基金会亚洲部的主管Douglas Paul 评论到，Romney在推动中国做得更多这点上，说到了重点。
Paal说，美国应当要中国变成更大的股东，去做几十年来我们一直在做的事情，援助就在其中。中国对非洲、拉丁美洲和东南亚的投资在最近“急剧升高”。这些花销可不像美国的对外援助。更多的是一种策略，比如为了得到石油而援建基础设施。
Paal观察到，受援助国也很乐意这样——尽管有传言说，双方都涉嫌腐败——甚至超过对西方援助的喜欢，因为中国较少对这些援助提要求。
John Norris是美国进步中心这家智库的自由研究院，他认为Romney把美国领导地位很奇怪地放弃了。他说，把索马里的难民送到肯尼亚的想法，抱歉，我们没办法。也许中国可以，但这和美国帮助在危机中的人们的一贯作风不一致吗？
Norris进一步说道，我们援助的另一方面就是帮助那些国家进行变革或民主化，这不是中国愿意做的，他和Paal的看法一致，认为中国更加重视利益。
Paal说，中国不关心这个国家是民主的还是怎么样。中国人把最多的投资投向那些可以获得自然资源的国家。
Patrick Cronin注意到，在中国发表评论前，Romney对于维护美国安全利益和人道主义以及发展的援助分得很清。
Romney说，对外援助有几个要素，其中一个就是防卫，确保我们在世界的特定角落有防卫资源。这些应该归于国防部的预算，而不是对外援助预算。
新美国安全中心亚洲部的Cronin说，他没有错。因为国家安全利益要求一些对外援助金，而其它援助则是一种好心的救助。
Cronin说，Romney州长明显是想在美国预算大幅减少的情形下保存对外援助金，因为，就像他说的，其中一些资金是为了支持那些我们有驻军的地区。他采用明智的折中，或至少含蓄的，我们可以削减一些，但不能取消全部对外援助。
Cronin只是看了辩论的节选，并没有全部看，他说，想听到更多Romney对中国的想法。我认为，他在这种即兴演说中会有所指，对于美国，这个世界上最大的债主，以及中国，这个世界上最大的债权国，在帮助世界上其它国家上应该合作一些。中国的援助更多的应该是帮助别国发展以及扶贫，而不是只是自己的实用主义政策。
Cronin认为，Romney应该建议，美国援助应该减少中间商，直接把资金送到受助国。 美国企业研究所的Danielle Pletka认为Romney的建议是个并不严肃的提议。她说，Romney是认为美国从中国借了多少，作为一个节约资金的措施。
Pletka作为保守派智库的外交和防务学者，她说，对Romney公平点来说，我认为他实际上不是在建议中国应该给予人道主义援助，他只是在搬弄辞藻。他不傻。他明白，我们不会把我们的政策重点转向中国。 人道主义援助并不是候选人竞选时的一个重要议题，而且，因为外交政策预算和其它预算比起来，在竞选中，占得地位很低。
Pletka说，尽管如此，对外援助永远不是一个成为候选人的赢家应该向美国民众不断讲述的。 【原文】 Should the U.S. borrow less and tell China to donate more aid? By CNN's Adam Levine
It was a single line in a Republican debate focused mostly on domestic issues, but former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's suggestion that the U.S. borrow less from China, pull back some on humanitarian aid and push China to give more instead got the attention of the audience in the hall.
The comment came during a heated discussion about spending cuts at Tuesday's night's presidential debate in Nevada sponsored by CNN and the Western Republican Leadership Conference.
"I happen to think it doesn't make a lot of sense for us to borrow money from the Chinese to go give to another country for humanitarian aid. We ought to get the Chinese to take care of the people," Romney said to applause from the assembled crowd of western state Republicans.
Romney spokesman Ryan Williams told CNN Wednesday the candidate "was not suggesting that the United States should eliminate all spending on foreign assistance and instead leave it to other governments to engage in that activity. Rather, he was making the point about the need to prioritize what we spend our federal dollars on given the state of our federal defect." But Williams said Romney does believe that "if programs are not effective in advancing our strategic goals, then they should be eliminated."
"Governor Romney supports targeting our scarce assistance resources in a strategic manner. The goal of assistance programs must be to enhance the security and prosperity of the United States and our allies, and the programs must be effective," Williams said in a statement e-mailed to CNN.
"This means focusing our assistance - particularly in the turbulent Middle East - on those programs that best support an international system based on free markets, representative government and human rights. And assistance programs must push back against forces that seek to destabilize that system."
Romney has a point about pushing China to do more, said Douglas Paul, Director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace's Asia program.
The United States should want China to be a bigger stakeholder "and do more of what we have been doing by ourselves for decades. Aid is among them," Paal said.
China has "vastly increased" its investments in Africa, Latin America and Southeast Asia recently, Paal noted. That spending is not necessarily aid in the way the United States does it. Instead, some see what China does as more of a transaction, like getting oil in exchange for building infrastructure.
"The recipients seem to like it - although there have been allegations of corruption on both sides of some transactions - even better than Western aid, because China imposes fewer "strings" on its aid," Paal observed. John Norris at the liberal think tank Center for American Progress called it a "curious abdication" of U.S. leadership by Romney. "The idea that we would tell Somali refugees pouring into Kenya, 'Sorry, we can't help. Maybe the Chinese can,'" does not line up with the American tradition of helping people in crisis, Norris said.
And humanitarian aid is not only aligned with the U.S. desire to help those in need, but also with foreign policy and national security imperatives, Norris said.
"The other part is development to help countries committed to reform and democracy," and the Chinese are not committed to that, Norris observed. Norris, like Paal, said the Chinese approach is more mercantile.
"They don't really care if a country is committed to democracy or anything else," Paal said. "The Chinese put the biggest investment in countries where they are hoping to get natural resources out of the ground."
Patrick Cronin noted that before the China comment, Romney was making a "useful distinction" between aid that supports U.S. national security interests and humanitarian and development aid.
"Foreign aid has several elements," Romney said during the debate. "One of those elements is defense, is to make sure that we are able to have the defense resources we want in certain places of the world. That probably ought to fall under the Department of Defense budget rather than a foreign aid budget."
"He was not wrong to do this," said Cronin, the senior director of the Asia program at the Center for a New American Security, "because national security interests require some foreign aid, and all other aid is far more a discretionary act of goodwill."
"Governor Romney was obviously trying to protect foreign aid from deep cuts to balance the U.S. budget, because, as he said, some of this aid is supporting the regions where we have troops on the ground," Cronin said. "He took a sensible middle ground, or at least left it implicit, that we could cut some foreign aid, but should not cut it all."
Cronin, who only read the excerpts but did not watch the debate, said he would want to hear more about what Romney had in mind regarding China.
"I think he may have meant in this impromptu sound bite, is that the United States, as the world's largest debtor nation, and China, as the world's largest creditor nation, should be redistributing some of the burden for helping others around the world," Cronin said. "Its aid might actually help with economic development and poverty alleviation rather than simply support China's mercantilist policies."
Moreover, suggested Cronin, Romney could also be suggesting that U.S. aid "should increasingly cut out the middle man for delivering assistance and flow more directly to worthy developing nations."
American Enterprise Institute's Danielle Pletka did not take Romney's proposal as a serious one. She said that Romney was arguing about how much the United States borrows from China and was not truly suggesting the nation give up its foreign aid responsibilities to China as a cost-saving measure.
"To be fair to Romney, I don't think he was actually suggesting Chinese should give humanitarian aid, he was making a rhetorical point," said Pletka, the vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the conservative think tank. "He's not a fool. He understands we are not going to subcontract our foreign policy priorities to the Chinese."
Humanitarian aid is not something the candidates are making a big issue of in the campaign "and for good reason," because the foreign policy budget pales compared to other big ticket items in the campaign, Pletka noted.
Even so, foreign aid is never going to be a winner for candidates trying to appeal to the American public, Pletka said. | 
狗仔卡
楼主
提升卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2011-10-26 21:37
发表于 2011-10-27 10:52
