評論
打印
It was when Vladimir Putin chided Washington for failing to ratify reforms to the International Monetary Fund that US officials realised their country’s international standing had sunk to a new low.
當(dāng)俄羅斯總統(tǒng)弗拉基米爾渠京(Vladimir Putin)指責(zé)華盛頓未能批準(zhǔn)國際貨幣基金組織(IMF)改革方案的時候，美國官員認(rèn)識到，他們國家的國際聲譽降到了新的低點。
At the Group of 20 summit in Brisbane last year, the Russian president — virtually a pariah after his military incursions in Ukraine — won allies around the table when he rounded on President Barack Obama for failing to secure US congressional approval for an overhaul giving emerging economies a greater voice in the fund.
在去年召開的20國集團(tuán)(G20)布里斯班峰會上，在軍事介入烏克蘭沖突后幾乎已淪為國際社會棄兒的俄羅斯總統(tǒng)，因為抨擊美國總統(tǒng)巴拉克攠巴馬(Barack Obama)未能推動美國國會批準(zhǔn)IMF賦予新興經(jīng)濟(jì)體更多話語權(quán)的改革方案而贏得一些盟友。
The Russian leader was hardly the first to criticise. For years, many of the world’s finance ministers have asked how the US could pretend to lead global economic policymaking when an overhaul to the fund, agreed in 2010, remained gridlocked in Washington. And when could big emerging economies get the voice at the fund they deserved?
普京不是首個提出批評的。全球許多國家的財長多年來一直在質(zhì)問，在2010年達(dá)成的IMF改革方案依然在華盛頓受阻之際，美國如何還能妄稱引領(lǐng)全球經(jīng)濟(jì)政策制定？大型新興經(jīng)濟(jì)體何時才能在IMF得到他們應(yīng)得的話語權(quán)？
The US Congress answered those questions on Friday when, after a five-year wait, it finally gave its approval to reforms that will double the fund’s firepower and give those emerging economies a bigger quota and say in IMF affairs.
美國國會在上周五回應(yīng)了這些問題——在5年的等待之后，它最終批準(zhǔn)了IMF的改革方案。按照改革方案，IMF的實力將增加一倍，新興經(jīng)濟(jì)體將獲得更大的份額，并在IMF事務(wù)中擁有更大的話語權(quán)。
Jack Lew, the US Treasury secretary and butt of much of the international criticism, told the Financial Times: “I don’t think it is an exaggeration to say it is a central issue in terms of our national and economic security.”
美國財政部長、國際社會很大一部分抨擊的對象杰克戠(Jack Lew)向英國《金融時報》表示：“我認(rèn)為可以不夸大地說，這是關(guān)系到我國國家和經(jīng)濟(jì)安全的一個核心問題。”
Friday’s vote was the culmination of a long campaign waged by Mr Lew and his officials and Christine Lagarde, IMF managing director. Republicans give Ms Lagarde much of the credit for their eventual support.
上周五的投票是盧及其官員以及IMF總裁克里斯蒂娜拉加德(Christine Lagarde)長期說服工作的成果。共和黨人將他們最終支持改革方案歸功于拉加德。
“She has been up here articulating better than [her predecessor] Dominique Strauss-Kahn and even our own administration,” said one senior Republican aide.
一位共和黨高級助理表示：“她進(jìn)行了比（其前任）多米尼克斯特勞斯-卡恩(Dominique Strauss-Kahn)、甚至比我國的行政當(dāng)局更有說服力的陳述。”
Some also credit the economist John Taylor for pushing a trade-off provision that won over conservatives. It will force the US to campaign for the IMF to remove a 2010 “systemic exemption” to its rules that has allowed it to lend more than $38.5bn at today’s exchange rates to Greece.
一些人還贊揚了經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家約翰泰勒(John Taylor)提出的把保守派爭取過來的一條折衷條款。該條款將迫使美國推動IMF廢除2010年出臺的“系統(tǒng)性豁免”，當(dāng)時引入這項豁免的目的是讓IMF向希臘發(fā)放（按如今匯率計算的）逾385億美元貸款。
But Mr Lew said in an interview that two recent developments had also shifted minds on Capitol Hill. The first was the economic crisis in Ukraine, where the US worked with the EU and IMF to come up with a rescue package in response to the conflict that Moscow has fuelled in the industrial east.
但盧在一次采訪中表示，近期的兩起事態(tài)也讓國會山改變了主意。第一起是烏克蘭的經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)。美國與歐盟和IMF合作提出了紓困烏克蘭的方案，以應(yīng)對莫斯科在該國工業(yè)化的東部推波助瀾的沖突。
Pulling that together proved a challenge “against the backdrop of having the world constantly complaining that the United States didn’t keep its word [because of the stalled IMF reforms]”, said Mr Lew. “You could talk to members of Congress and they understood that.”
盧表示，“在全球持續(xù)抱怨美國沒有履行承諾（因為IMF改革停滯）的背景下，”擬定紓困烏克蘭的方案被證明是一項挑戰(zhàn)，“你可以與美國國會議員聊一聊，他們明白這點。”
The second development was China’s launch of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the decision of European allies to join it despite Washington’s objections — a move some analysts attributed to the lack of progress on the IMF reforms.
第二起事態(tài)是中國發(fā)起亞洲基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施投資銀行（Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank，簡稱“亞投行”）以及歐洲盟友不顧美國反對決定加入，一些分析人士將此歸因于IMF改革缺乏進(jìn)展。
China is a big beneficiary of the reforms and will see its quota — and broadly its voting power — rise from 3.8 to 6 per cent.
中國是這些改革的巨大受益者，中國的配額（大致上也就是其投票權(quán)）將從3.8%升至6%。
The creation of the AIIB is seen as a challenge to the pre-eminence of US-backed institutions such as the IMF. In response, Mr Lew said: “it was critical to demonstrate that the role that the US plays in the international financial architecture will remain at the forefront of our tools to participate as a leader in the world”.
亞投行的創(chuàng)建被視為向IMF等由美國支持的機(jī)構(gòu)的主導(dǎo)地位發(fā)起挑戰(zhàn)。作為回應(yīng)，盧表示：“關(guān)鍵是要證明這樣一點，即美國在國際金融架構(gòu)中發(fā)揮的作用，仍將處于我們作為世界領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者參與的各種工具的前沿”。
Some analysts see lasting damage from US foot-dragging. The delay in the US approval of the IMF reforms has “hurt US credibility, eroded the IMF’s legitimacy among emerging markets, and provided momentum for China’s efforts to shape a world monetary order more to its liking”, says Eswar Prasad, author of The Dollar Trap, a book on the US currency’s hold on the global economy.
一些分析人士認(rèn)為美國的拖延將帶來永久性損害。論述美元在全球經(jīng)濟(jì)主導(dǎo)地位的著作《美元陷阱》(The Dollar trap)的作者埃斯瓦爾渠拉薩德(Eswar Prasad)表示，美國推遲批準(zhǔn)IMF改革“損害了美國的可信度、破壞了IMF在新興市場中的正當(dāng)性，并為中國塑造一個它更喜歡的世界貨幣秩序的努力提供了動力”。
“Some of the damage caused by the delay in sealing the deal on governance reforms will not be easily reversed.”
“推遲批準(zhǔn)治理改革所造成的一些損害不會輕易扭轉(zhuǎn)。”
Others are more sanguine.
其他人則較為樂觀。
“It is five years too late. But it shows at least that we can get things done, even if it is too late,” said Matthew Goodman, a former Obama administration official now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think-tank. “It shows the old order is not only still pretty durable, but also that it is adaptable.”
“這件事晚了5年。不過這至少表明，盡管時間遲了，但我們?nèi)阅茏龀梢恍┦虑椋眾W巴馬政府前任官員、如今任職于華盛頓智庫——國際戰(zhàn)略研究中心(Center for Strategic and International Studies)的馬修古德曼(Matthew Goodman)表示，“這表明，舊秩序不僅仍相當(dāng)耐用，還具備很強(qiáng)的適應(yīng)能力。”
