評論
打印
Furthermore, Mr Trump has yet to be tested by a crisis.
再者，特朗普尚未經受過一次危機的考驗。
Level-headed generals may advise him, but he is the commander-in-chief, with a temperament that alarms friend and foe alike.
頭腦冷靜的將軍們可能會給他出謀劃策。但是，他是三軍總司令，一位性情讓朋友和敵人都一樣提心吊膽的三軍總司令。
On trade, he remains wedded to a zero-sum view of the world, in which exporters “win” and importers “lose”. (Are the buyers of Ivanka Trump-branded clothes and handbags, which are made in Asia, losers? )
貿易方面，他仍舊固守著這個世界是出口“贏”、進口“輸”的零和觀點。（在亞洲生產的伊萬卡品牌的服飾和手包的購買者是輸家嗎？）
Mr Trump has made clear that he favours bilateral deals over multilateral ones, because that way a big country like America can bully small ones into making concessions.
特朗普已經表明，他偏愛雙邊協議甚于多邊協議，因為這能讓美國這樣的大國欺凌小國，讓他們作出讓步。
The trouble with this approach is twofold.
這種策略的問題是雙重的。
First, it is deeply unappealing to small countries, which by the way also have protectionist lobbies to overcome.
首先，它對也有保護主義說客需要擺平的小國特別沒有吸引力。
Second, it would reproduce the insanely complicated mishmash of rules that the multilateral trade system was created to simplify and trim.
其次，它會重現多邊貿易體系為了簡化并理順它們才被創造出來的復雜規則大雜燴。
The Trump team probably will not make a big push to disrupt global trade until tax reform has passed through Congress.
特朗普團隊在稅改通過國會之前可能不會大力推進摧毀全球貿易。
But when and if that happens, all bets are off—NAFTA is still in grave peril.
但是，一旦這種事發生，賭注就全都作廢了——NAFTA仍舊岌岌可危。
Perhaps the greatest damage that Mr Trump has done is to American soft power.
特朗普所造成的最大傷害，或許是美國的軟實力。
He openly scorns the notion that America should stand up for universal values such as democracy and human rights.
他公開嘲諷美國應當為民主和人權等的普世價值觀挺身而出的觀念。
Not only does he admire dictators; he explicitly praises thuggishness, such as the mass murder of criminal suspects in the Philippines.
他不僅敬仰獨裁者；還明確地褒獎殺戮，如發生在菲律賓的對疑犯的大規模屠殺。
He does so not out of diplomatic tact, but apparently out of conviction.
他這樣做不是出于外交策略，顯然是出于某種信念。
This is new.
這是全新的。
