【纽约时报111027】中国凭什么拯救欧洲

weater76

【中文标题】中国凭什么拯救欧洲

【原文标题】Why China Should Bail Out Europe

【登载媒体】纽约时报

【来源地址】http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/28/opinion/europe-should-look-to-china-for-financial-help.html

【译    者】 WilliamRUC

【翻译方式】   人工

【声    明】 欢迎转载，请务必注明译者和出处 bbs.m4.cn。

【译    文】
EUROPE is drowning and needs a lifeline. A series of marathon meetings this week yielded a new set of proposals, but what they depend on is cash — and lots of it, perhaps trillions of dollars — to save Greece and the European banking system and to prevent financial contagion from spreading to Spain, Italy and even France, which would destroy the euro zone as we know it. Where to turn for help? The answer is obvious: China.
Indeed, the call by President Nicolas Sarkozy of France this week to President Hu Jintao of China, seeking support for the European Financial Stability Facility, could represent a major change in the global landscape: the consolidation of China’s economic dominance at the expense of the status quo powers — the United States and Europe.
Despite the agreement among Europe’s leaders on Thursday to recapitalize banks on the Continent, the reality is that Europe cannot muster this cash on its own. In part, this is because most countries are fiscally stretched and even Germany, with a debt-to-gross domestic product ratio above 80 percent, is reaching the limits of its check-writing ability. But it is also because Germany seems reluctant to transfer resources, either directly through fiscal means or indirectly through the European Central Bank.
　　沉没的欧洲正需要一条救生筏。这星期召开了一系列提出新方案的马拉松式会议，不过他们依赖大量现金实现——也许会达到几万亿美元——来拯救希腊和欧洲的银行系统，并阻止金融危机蔓延到西班牙、意大利乃至法国，否则我们都明白欧元区将遭受灭顶之灾。找谁帮忙呢？答案很明显：中国。
　　法国总统萨科齐本周给中国国家主席胡锦涛打去电话以寻求欧洲财政稳定，在事实上标志着全球版图的重大改变：随着美国与欧洲经济地位的下降，中国经济地位实现了稳固。
　　尽管欧洲领导已在周四达成了向大陆银行注资的协议，现实问题是欧洲凭自身力量无力筹集如此多的现金。大多数国家在财政上捉襟见肘，哪怕国内生产总值达到债务80%以上的德国也达到了支付能力的极限。但是这也和德国不愿转化所有财政资源有关，他们既不愿意通过财政手段直接划转，也不愿意通过欧洲央行间接划转。

And with a United States essentially sidelined because of its own economic and fiscal weakness, it is even less of a surprise that the S O S is going out to China. Only China, with its $3 trillion in reserves, is now able to provide the magnitudes of relief that Europe desperately needs.
What should China do? So far, it has opted not to be an active financier of the European countries threatened by crisis. But that is increasingly becoming a less tenable position. China is the world’s major exporter, and averting economic collapse in the indebted importing countries of Europe will be very much in China’s interest.
But China has a choice. It can help Europe bilaterally by back-stopping the stability facility, as Europe has requested, or by guaranteeing to buy Italian and Spanish bonds at a rate that would keep these countries’ finances sustainable (much as the European Central Bank ought to be doing). Or it can help by providing the International Monetary Fund with additional money to, in turn, lend to Europe.
　　介于美国泥菩萨过河——自身难保，向中国发出求救信号也就不令人惊讶了。这个拥有三万亿储备的国家现在有能力为欧洲雪中送炭。
　　中国应该做什么？目前为止，它还不打算当受危机影响欧洲国家的积极注资人。不过这一立场正变得越来越站不住。中国是世界上最大的出口国，避免欧洲进口国经济崩溃将使中国的重要利益。
　　当然中国也有选择余地。它可以顺应欧洲的要求，帮助欧洲恢复双边稳定；也可以通过购买意大利与西班牙的债券，来维持两国财政可持续发展（这本是欧洲央行该做的事情）；或者它还可以为国际货币基金组织提供现金，后者将转借给欧洲。

From China’s perspective, the possible advantage would be to exert power to obtain direct and concrete benefits. For example, it could ask for market economy status in Europe, which would reduce the scope for protectionist action against Chinese goods entering the European market. It could also seek to buy companies in distressed countries on advantageous terms.
The risks in this bilateral approach are considerable. It would expose China to the charge of becoming enmeshed in European politics. Domestically, it would expose the government to the charge of privileging foreign investment at the expense of investing in what is still a poor country with great development needs and challenges.
Helping Europe by strengthening the I.M.F. and increasing its lending would avoid some of these political costs, especially since China would not be directly involved in European politics and problems. But China would have to receive something considerable in return for the extra resources that it would be providing.
　　从中国的视角看，最有可能利用现在的优势获取直接和具体的权益。比如它可以要求改变在欧洲的市场经济状况，减少针对中国商品进入欧洲市场的保护运动。它也可以寻求以优惠的条件在受困国家收购公司
　　如此双边行动的危险也值得考虑。这可能让中国暴露在欧洲政策的纠缠中。政府以投资外国为代价获得在国外的投资特权，而它实际上仍然是一个发展需求旺盛、充满各种挑战的发展中国家。
　　通过加强国际货币基金组织并提高它借贷能力来帮助欧洲能够避免一些政治代价，尤其在中国不会直接卷入欧洲政治纠纷的情况下。但是中国就不会从额外付出中获得收益了。

China should demand nothing less than a wholesale revamping of the governance of the I.M.F. to reflect the current economic realities. Governance reform can no longer be just about the nationality of the I.M.F.’s managing director but should fundamentally be about who will have the greatest voice and exercise the most power in the new world.
Today, the United States and Europe each have effective veto power in the I.M.F. because important decisions require an 85 percent share of the vote. If China were to become the I.M.F.’s major financier it should have veto power on terms equivalent to those of the United States. Europe’s power should be reduced commensurate with its transition from creditor to potential borrower status. Supplicants, China should insist, cannot have veto power in a financial institution.
The Chinese government could then trumpet a nationalist achievement — equal status as the United States, and a greater status than that of Europe, in running the world’s premier financial institution — as the return for investing its cash abroad.
　　基于现在的经济现实，中国无外乎要求国际货币基金组织进行全面的管理改革。管理改革不再局限于其总裁国籍问题，也会牵涉到谁在这个新世界中发出最重要声音并发挥最大力量的基本格局。
　　目前，介于重要决定要求达到85%的投票比例，美国和欧洲都对国际货币基金组织拥有决定性投票权。如果中国成为了国际货币基金组织的主要注资者，它应该要拥有和美国同等的投票权。因为从债权人变成潜在的借款者，欧洲的投票权应该减少。中国应该坚持求助者不应该在这个金融机构获得重要权力。
　　如此中国政府就可以鼓吹一番民族成就了——在世界最重要金融机构中与美国的同等地位和超过欧洲的地位——作为在外国注资的回报。

These demands would be legitimate and indeed be welcome for the world because they would tether China more firmly to, and create a stake for it in, the multilateral system. Those in the United States and Europe who would resist these changes should remember that the alternatives are worse. A China that uses its might bilaterally to gain narrow political advantages would be a worrying portent for the future when China becomes economically bigger and stronger. And a China that refuses to take the phone call at all could well push Europe off the cliff. Europeans are running out of options; debtors cannot be choosers.
　　以上要求完全合理，而且应该被世界欢迎，因为这将把中国完全纳入复杂的世界体系。那些反对这些改变的美国人和欧洲人应该记住如果不这样，情况会更糟糕。中国赢取狭隘政治优势的态度，将在其在经济更为强大后变成一个令人担忧的预兆。而一个拒绝接听求助电话的中国则会把欧洲推向深渊。但是欧洲别无选择：欠人家钱容不得挑三拣四。

lyycc

“欠人家钱容不得挑三拣四”看到这句笑死我了~

美国人居然还明白这个道理？

shfbh

欧盟，直到今天还对华武器出口封锁。现在经济出麻烦了。萨克奇这个东西居然舔着脸找中国。

in2out

赢取狭隘政治优势，崛起屁股让中国爆爆菊

jack_j11

我相信中国不会傻到去IMF玩别人的游戏，毕竟规则早就被别人制定好了，无论你出多少钱都很难改变规则。

勿近小人

谈条件，对欧洲色目人必须落井下石，为了中国的利益，水不到渠不成。中国利益高于一切，其他的都是假的。

祖0宗