These meetings are often technical and the discussions are usually among ambassadors.	这些会议通常是技术性的，而且讨论往往也仅限于大使级别。


But sometimes their preparatory work requires decisions to be taken at the ministerial level, or even by heads of state or government. This was the case in Kyoto in 1997, and again in Copenhagen at COP15.	但这些外交人员的会议准备工作有时也需要得到部长级官员甚至是政府最高首脑的拍板，正如 1997 年的京都会议以及去年的哥本哈根 COP15 峰会。


One might recall that many delegations arrived in Kyoto resignedly willing to accept the idea of a tax on greenhouse-gas emissions, or at least on carbon dioxide, the most commonly encountered greenhouse gas.	曾记得当年许多国家代表团启程奔赴日本京都之时，都是准备好了要接受对温室气体排放征税，至少是对二氧化碳这种最常见的温室气体征税这一理念的。


The US delegation, dispatched by a government intent on reducing state intervention in the economy, declared itself vehemently opposed to the idea.	然而美国当时却是由一个希望减少国家干涉经济的政府主政，因此它派出的代表团则强烈反对这一理念。


The US delegation suggested a totally different scheme from the one being discussed.	在会上美国代表团提出了一个与原讨论方案截然不同的新方案。


In the US scheme, the volume of emissions would be subject to permits or quotas, which could be traded in a market established for that purpose.	在这套方案中，温室气体的排放量将由许可和配额所控制，而这些许可和配额则可以放到一个专门设立的市场上进行交易。


In the end, that scheme was chosen in Kyoto with the hope that the US, which had proposed it, would then ratify it.	与会各国最终选择了新方案，因为所有人都希望美国作为这一方案的发起国，也最终能够批准议定书。


China and India were absent at the time, and Russia was hostile to the idea.	中国和印度当时都未列席会议，而俄罗斯则对此满怀敌意。


But the US refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.	然而最终美国却还是不愿意在《京都议定书》上签字。


The European Union was the only group of nations that seriously considered implementing it.	而在众多国家集团中，欧盟是唯一一个认真执行了该方案的。


A European quota system, limited to electricity producers and materials manufacturers, the two major sources of emissions, has been in place since 2005.	自 2005 年起，一个约束发电企业和原料生产企业这两大温室气体排放源的欧洲配额系统已经开始投入运作了。


The COP15 conference in Copenhagen was supposed to forge a successor treaty that would take effect when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.	在哥本哈根召开的 COP15 会议本应为即将在 2012 年失效的《京都议定书》达成一个后续协议。


But four days of discussion among world leaders resulted in a fiasco.	但全世界领导人讨论了整整 4 天，结果却是一场彻底的失败。


A four-page document was vaguely approved by acclamation but not submitted to a vote.	一份 4 页纸的文件只是由口头表决通过而没有提交投票表决。


It expressed the hope that international action will aim at limiting global warming to two degrees Celsius in the course of the twenty-first century, but it says nothing about how to achieve this – no commitments on the quantity of emissions, and no system for global measurement or supervision.	会议表达了人们希望采取国际行动，实现在 21 世纪以内将全球气温升幅限制在 2 摄氏度以内的美好愿望，却没告诉大家应该如何去实现 —— 既没有对减排规模的承诺，也未能建立一个衡量以及监察全球减排效果的系统。


Such a failure is extremely harmful.	这么一场失败的后果危害性极大。


With no government commitments, there can be no attempt to limit carbon emissions effectively, which implies that when the world does begin to take action, it will be that much more difficult to slow the pace of climate change and mitigate its effects.	没有了政府承诺，就没有可以有效限制碳排放的尝试，这意味着当全世界都下定决心都去有所行动之时，想要延缓气候变化速度及缓和其负面影响就更加困难了。


Moreover, Europe has been left uncertain about its own system of quotas, which has not functioned particularly well in the first place.	此外，欧洲对自己的配额系统心里也没底，而该系统自运行之初就一直不太顺利。


More than half of the 43 members of the Association of Small Island States believe that the decision to do nothing, to let ocean waters rise, can be considered tantamount to approval of murder.	而在小型岛国联合体的 43 个成员国中，有超过一半相信上述决议根本毫无作用，坐视海平面上升，实际就上就是赞成谋杀。


The smallest among them, Tuvalu, with 11,000 inhabitants, is already searching for a place to evacuate its citizens when their island is submerged.	其中最小的国家图瓦卢已经在为���己的 1. 1 万名居民寻找一个当全国被浸没时的疏散点。


More than half of Bangladesh’s territory, home to 100 million inhabitants, is threatened by flooding, as is the Netherlands, with 16 million people, for a quarter of its territory.	而孟加拉国则有一半的区域以及 1 亿居民遭受着洪水的威胁，拥有 1600 万人口的荷兰有 1/4 国土也面临着同样的命运。


Most of the potential climate refugees will end up in huge zones of increasing dryness – the Middle East, the Mediterranean region, central China, and the US.	大多数潜在的气候难民都将最终出现在大片正在面临干涸的地域 —— 中东，地中海沿岸，中国中部以及美国。


Some predict that this migration will take place as soon as the second half of this century.	有人预计这场浩大的移民行动将在本世纪下半叶正式展开。


Given the scale of the looming catastrophe, the world cannot afford to leave things as they are.	考虑到这场不断逼近的灾难的波及范围，全世界都不能任由其发展下去了。


Of course, the process has not stopped. Conferences on climate change will still be held.	当然，整个会议进程尚未停滞，有关气候变化的会议仍将不断召开。


But the next one will probably lead to a serious settling of scores. Indeed, people and governments need to express their anger at the fact that no binding agreement was reached in Copenhagen, despite the willingness of many of those who were present.	而下一场会议很可能将引发对一系列问题的认真处理和解决，事实上，除了那些哥本哈根峰会的与会者所表达的愿望之外，人们和各国政府都应当表达出自己对于在哥本哈根未能达成一个有约束力条约的愤怒。


Fortunately, enough was accomplished in Copenhagen to re-boot the process.	然而幸运的是，许多事务都在哥本哈根得到了解决，足以重新启动整个进程。


But that re-boot must start now, and the UN, specifically the General Assembly, is the place to begin.	但启动必须现在就开始，而联合国，特别是联合国大会则应该是始发地。


Many commentators have condemned the UN for the failure in Copenhagen.	许多评论家因为哥本哈根会议的失败而指责联合国。


But that is a misreading of what happened.   The UN was only the tour operator in Copenhagen.	但这只是他们错误解读了目前所发生的一切。


It supplied logistics, interpreters, and an address book.	因为联合国只是整场哥本哈根峰会的承办者，只负责提供后勤支援，翻译和一本住址名册。


Its steering bodies did not function, because they were not called upon during the talks.	联合国的决策机构并没有发挥作用，因为这些机构根本就没被召唤到会谈中来。


It is thus time to make real use of the UN, to call upon the General Assembly to take the lead.	因此现在正是真正借助联合国力量的时候了，也是时候号召联合国大会站出来，发挥带头的作用。


The UN was not responsible for the failure in Copenhagen, and it should not act as if it was.	联合国不应为哥本哈根的失败负责，但也不能沿着从前的旧路重蹈覆辙。


It must now use its power as the world’s parliament to overcome the obstructions of the few.	它必须发挥自己作为“世界议会”的力量，才能克服那几个国家所设置的障碍。


Pakistan’s Tipping Point	巴基斯坦的临界点


LAHORE – Pakistan’s moment of political truth is fast approaching.	拉合尔—巴基斯坦的政坛真相时刻正在快速临近。


On May 11, some 40-50 million voters will elect a new national assembly.	5月11日，4000—5000万选民将选出新一届国民大会。


The outcome, preceded by a spike in extremist violence, is likely to reverberate far and wide.	其结果——在一系列极端暴力事件之后——可能产生深远而广泛的影响。


Pakistan’s homegrown terrorist groups know that the country is at a tipping point, and are attacking candidates and voters who favor a secular state.	巴基斯坦本土恐怖组织明白，该国正处在临界点上，并大肆袭击支持世俗国家的候选人和选民。


Hundreds of people have already been killed, and more will undoubtedly die before Election Day, targeted because, if these groups prevail, they would push what is sometimes called the “idea of Pakistan” to its logical – and extreme – conclusion.	目前已有数百人被杀，选举日之前必然还有更多的人丧命，他们之所以成为目标，是因为如果这些组织横行，它们会推行有时被称为“巴基斯坦思维”的东西作为其逻辑——也是极端——结论。


Some 70 years ago, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Pakistan’s founding father, launched the movement to create an independent state for the Muslims of British India.	70多年前，巴基斯坦国父阿里·真纳（Muhammad Ali Jinnah）发动了为英属印度穆斯林建立独立国家的运动。


The British colonial administration finally acquiesced, creating a country out of Muslim-majority areas.	英国殖民当局最终默许了这一运动，在穆斯林占多数地区成立了一个国家。


The population of what is now Pakistan was about two-thirds Muslim; the remainder were mostly Hindus and Sikhs.	现在的巴基斯坦地区人口中约有三分之二是穆斯林； 其他大多是印度教徒和锡克教徒。


That composition changed dramatically with the partition of the new states of India and Pakistan in 1947, when 14 million people moved across the newly drawn border.	随着印度和巴基斯坦分裂为新的国家，人口组成发生了极大的改变——1400万人穿越了新划定的边界。


Eight million Muslim refugees fled India and entered Pakistan, and six million Hindus and Sikhs moved in the opposite direction.	800万穆斯林难民逃离印度，进入巴基斯坦，600万印度教徒和锡克教徒反其道而行之。


By the time this “ethnic cleansing” was over, Pakistan’s population was 95% Muslim.	“种族清洗”完成时，巴基斯坦人口的穆斯林比例已达95%。


Over time, an increasing proportion of this population began to demand the creation of an Islamic state in the areas that were now Pakistan.	随着时间的推移，越来越多的人口比例开始要求在今天的巴基斯坦地区建立伊斯兰国家。


The upcoming election will determine how far the country will go along this route.	即将到来的选举将决定巴基斯坦会在这条道路上走多远。


Pakistan is not the only Muslim country seeking to redefine its political and economic future.	巴基斯坦并非唯一一个寻求重新定义期政治和经济未来的穆斯林国家。


Similar processes are playing out in other large countries in the western part of the Islamic world.	类似的过程正在伊斯兰西部其他诸大国上演。


By contrast, other large Muslim countries like Indonesia and Malaysia have succeeded in establishing political orders that serve all segments of highly diverse populations reasonably well.	相反，印尼和马来西亚等其他穆斯林国家已经成功地建立了非常适合高度多元化人口所有部分的政治秩序。


That may eventually happen in the western Islamic world as well, but only after a struggle of the type occurring now in Pakistan.	这可能也会最终发生于西方伊斯兰国家，但在此之前必须经过类似目前巴基斯坦发生的挣扎过程。


The large countries in this part of the Islamic world – most notably Egypt, Pakistan, and Turkey – are attempting to address four problems, the most challenging of which is to define Islam’s role in the political system.	这部分伊斯兰大国——最显著的是埃及、巴基斯坦和土耳其——在尝试解决四个问题，其中最具挑战性的问题是定义伊斯兰教在政治制度中的角色。


Turkey seems to have found an answer, prodded in part by its wish to join the European Union.	土耳其似乎已经找到了答案，其加入欧盟的愿望就是某种程度的证明。


A conservative ruling party with deep religious roots is content to leave religion to private observance, with no direct influence on public policy.	有着深刻宗教根基的保守的执政党对于把宗教留给私人惯例、不对公共政策产生直接影响颇为满意。


The issue remains less settled in Egypt, while in Pakistan a small but highly motivated part of the population has embraced extreme violence as a form of political expression.	埃及的这一问题就没有那么简单，而在巴基斯坦，一小部分相当热情的国人将极端暴力作为政治压迫的一种形式。


The role of the military in politics also needs to be resolved.	军队在政治中的角色问题也需要解决。


Once again, Turkey has taken the lead; in both Egypt and Pakistan, the men in uniform have returned to their barracks, but they have not lost influence over public policy.	在这方面，土耳其再次领先； 在埃及和巴基斯坦，军方人士虽然已经回归军营，但从未失去对公共政策的影响力。


Then there is sectarianism, particularly the growing strife between Sunni and Shia Muslims.	接着是宗派主义问题，特别是日益激烈的逊尼派和什叶派穆斯林之争。


This conflict may be exacerbated by the outcome in Syria.	该冲突可能因叙利亚的结果而放大。


If Sunnis triumph there, they may become more assertive in countries that have large Shia populations.	如果逊尼派在叙利亚获胜，那么他们可能会在什叶派人口众多的国家更加强硬。


It is not often recognized that Pakistan has the world’s second-largest Shia population, after Iran, with roughly 50 million adherents.	不多的人注意到，巴基斯坦有着世界第二大什叶派人口，仅次于伊朗，多达约5000万人。


They have been mercilessly attacked in Karachi and Quetta in recent years, with more than 400 killed.	近几年来，他们在卡拉奇和奎塔饱受残酷打击，超过400人被杀。


Finally, there is the question of the Muslim world’s relations with the West, particular the United States.	最后还有穆斯林世界与西方特别是美国的关系问题。


The old post-Ottoman “grand bargain” – Western acceptance of authoritarianism in exchange for the secure flow of oil, use of sensitive sea-lanes, and some tolerance for the existence of Israel – has broken down.	旧的后奥斯曼帝国时代“大妥协”——西方接受独裁换取安全的石油流动、敏感海路的使用和接受以色列的存在——已经崩溃。


What replaces it will be determined by the shape of the new political order that finally emerges in the western Islamic world.	取而代之的将是什么，取决于西方伊斯兰世界最后出现什么政治秩序。


In other words, more is at stake in Pakistan’s upcoming election than just the future of Pakistan.	换句话说，巴基斯坦即将到来的选举不仅仅事关巴基斯坦的未来。


There is growing recognition, some of it grudging, that the coalition led by the Pakistan People’s Party has managed to create a political structure built on fairly stable foundations.	越来越多的人意识到——有一些颇为勉强——巴基斯坦人民党领导的联盟已经设法建立了一个基于相当稳定的基础的政治结构。


This is a real accomplishment in a country that was on a political roller-coaster for most of its history.	对于一个历史上政局波诡云谲的国家来说实属不易的成就。


But the coalition proved unable to translate political success into strong economic performance.	但该联盟也无法将政治成功转化为强劲的经济表现。


For the last five years, Pakistan’s annual GDP growth has averaged just 3% – half the rate needed to absorb two million new labor-force entrants every year.	过去五年来，巴基斯坦年均GDP增长只有3%，需要翻番才能吸收每年200万新劳动大军。


If growth does not pick up, the ranks of the unemployed and underemployed will swell, increasing the size of the pool from which extremist groups find fresh recruits.	如果增长无法获得提高，无业和半就业人口就会膨胀，扩大极端组织发展对象规模。


The upcoming election has both nurtured hope and generated anxiety among Pakistanis.	即将到来的选举既孕育着希望，也产生了焦虑。


It could go either way.	非此即彼。


And, for good or bad, where Pakistan goes other Muslim countries could follow.	不管好坏，巴基斯坦的去向都将有其他穆斯林国家亦步亦趋。


Civilizing the City	城市文明化


BANGALORE – Half of humanity – 3.5 billion people – live in urban areas today.	班加罗尔—如今，一半人类——35亿人——生活在城市。


Our metropolises are the engines of growth for a global economy emerging from the shadow of financial crisis.	我们的大都市是全球经济走出金融危机阴影的增长引擎。


In Bangalore, my home, investment is pouring into a city at the forefront of the Indian economy’s transformation – home to companies like Infosys and Wipro, and named by Forbes Magazine as one of the “Fastest Growing Cities of the Next Decade.”	在我的家乡班加罗尔，投资正在涌入Infosys、Wipro等公司的大本营，被《福布斯》杂志称为“未来十年增长最快城市”之一的印度经济转型前沿城市。


But, as Bangalore’s citizens prepare to go to the polls in state elections, their concerns are not merely economic.	但是，准备邦选举的班加罗尔市民担心的可不仅仅是经济问题。


The city’s financial success stories mask a darker reality – quality of life for many city-dwellers has deteriorated over recent years.	金融成功掩盖了黑暗的现实——许多城市居民的生活质量在近几年有所恶化。


The movement of the rural poor to large cities is one of the exemplary narratives of the modern era.	贫困农村人口向大城市的运动时现时代的一大显著特征。


And governments, which typically focus on crude measures of economic performance, encourage rapid urbanization.	而通常紧盯经济表现粗放指标的政府也鼓励快速城市化。


In China, for example, the relaxation of migration controls in the 1980’s and the opening of the economy led to the spectacular growth of the country’s eastern cities.	比如，在中国，20世纪80年代对人口迁移管制的放松以及改革开放使其东部城市迎来了壮观的增长。


More than 50% of Chinese live in urban areas today, up from 25% in 1990, and the proportion is expected to reach 70% by 2035.	如今，超过一半的中国人居住在城市，而1990年只有四分之一，到2035年，城市人口比例预计将达七成。


While the majority of Indians still live in rural areas, this, too, is changing fast.	大部分印度人仍生活在农村地区，但情况也在快速变化。


From 1970 to 2010, India’s urban population grew by 250 million.	从1997到2010年，印度城市人口增长了2. 5亿。


The next quarter-billion will be added in half that time.	再增长2. 5亿人只需要一半时间。


By 2030, 70% of India’s GDP will come from its cities.	到2030年，七成的印度GDP讲来自城市。


But cities are simply unable to cope with the influx of migrants on the current scale.	但城市根本无法应对以当前移民涌入规模。


The fast-growing metropolises of India, China, Brazil, and other major emerging economies offer plenty of jobs, but basic amenities are lacking; as a result, many of the urban poor live in slums, without adequate health care, water supplies, or electricity.	印度、中国、巴西和其他主要新兴经济体快速增加的大都市提供了足够的工作岗位，但基本设施仍然不足； 因此，许多城市穷人生活在贫民区，得不到充足的卫生服务和水电供应。


The problems are legion.	问题大量存在。


Municipalities, often owing to corruption or poor management, are unable or unwilling to impose rigorous planning regulations.	自治市通常无法或不愿实施严厉的规划监管，这往往是因腐败或治理不善所致。


Infrastructure spending is either inadequate or poorly targeted.	基础设施支出要么不足，要么用不到刀刃上。


Workers come home from their jobs to homes that are dark, dank, and depressing.	下班回家的工人居所阴暗、透水而压抑。


They feel unsafe on poorly-lit streets, and have little access to parks or recreational facilities.	他们居住的街道照明不足，缺乏安全感，也没有公园或锻炼设施。


Mornings and evenings are lost to long commutes on polluted highways.	早晨和傍晚的时间往往浪费在污染严重的高速公路通勤途中。


The novelty of the rapid economic improvements seen by many city-dwellers in India, China, and elsewhere over the past ten years has insulated governments from the repercussions of poor urban planning.	印度、中国和其他地方的许多城市居民在过去十年中经历了令人瞩目的快速经济改善，这让政府看不见拙劣城市规划的恶果。


As I take my morning strolls through Bangalore, though, I sense growing resentment of the inadequacies, and frustration at insufficient improvements in citizens’ quality of life.	但是，早晨我穿过班加罗尔街头时，我感到短缺正在造成日益严重的不满，而市民生活质量改善不充分则带来来沮丧感。


Democracy exists precisely to remedy the kinds of injustices I hear from the hardworking Bangaloreans I encounter on the street and online.	民主存在的意义恰恰在于纠正我在街头和网上所遇到的努力工作的班加罗尔人所感到的不公平。


Bangalore is a modern city, and its citizens are expressing their displeasure in modern ways – on Facebook, in chat rooms, and on Twitter.	班加罗尔是一座现代都市，其市民以现代方式表达不满——通过Facebook、聊天室和Twitter。


Governments would do well to heed these complaints (indeed, to engage with them in these hi-tech incarnations of a town-hall meeting), because civil unrest could disrupt the positive momentum, not only in cities, but in the entire global economy.	政府留心这些抱怨大有裨益（事实上，可以和它们在市政厅的网上化身互动），因为公民骚乱可能破坏积极势头——不仅仅对于城市，也对于整个全球经济。


That threat might seem far-off while growth continues at relatively high rates; but, unless workers see the benefit of their labors in the form of improved living conditions, protests could ensue.	这一威胁在增长相对较快是或许相当遥远，但是，除非工人看到他们的劳动的好处以生活条件的方式体现出来，否则很可能引发抗议。


Already, there have been major strikes at factories across China – Motorola, Honda, and Foxconn, among others.	中国各大工厂已经出现了大规模罢工——摩托罗拉、本田、富士康等。


That would have been unheard of several years ago, as would today’s growing trend among China’s urban middle classes for de-urbanization – a brain drain whereby educated city dwellers give up on the rat race and return to the countryside in pursuit of cleaner air, open spaces, and better accommodation.	这放在几年前是前所未闻的事，与此类似的事中国城市中产阶级越来越流行的去城市化倾向——一种人才流失，受过良好教育的城市居民逃离激烈竞争，回归乡村追求更清洁的空气、更开阔的空间和更舒适的生活。


Our cities risk becoming literally uninhabitable.	我们的城市面临着名副其实的不适居风险。


Of the world’s ten most densely populated cities, seven are in India.	在世界十大人口密集城市中，有七个位于印度。


The urban sprawl of Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, and Bangalore has continued unchecked, unplanned, and with under-investment in infrastructure for far too long.	德里、孟买、金奈和班加罗尔的城市扩张依然粗放、欠规划、基础设施长期不足。


Urban pollution contributed to 620,000 needless deaths in India last year, mainly among the very poor.	城市污染去年导致620 000印度人无端丧命，其中大部分是赤贫者。


The number of people living in our slums has doubled over the past decade, and is now greater than the population of the United Kingdom.	生活在我们的贫民窟的人数在过去十年中翻了一番，如今已经超过了英国的人口。


The consultancy McKinsey argues in a recent report that India needs to invest at least $1.2 trillion in its urban infrastructure over the next two decades, or $134 per capita annually.	咨询公司麦肯锡在最新报告中指出，未来20年，印度需要投资至少1. 2万亿美元或每年每人134美元于其城市基础设施。


It currently invests only $17 per capita, compared to $116 in China and $292 in the United States.	目前每人每年投资规模只有17美元，而中国为116美元，美国为292美元。


India spends less on health care and education per capita than China, Brazil, South Africa, or Mexico.	印度的人均卫生和教育花费也少于中国、巴西、南非和墨西哥。


If India is to maintain its competitiveness, a focus on dramatically improving the nation’s urban areas is imperative.	如果印度要维持其竞争力，那么专注于答复改善其城市区是必不可少的。


McKinsey calculates that the country requires between 700-900 million square meters of new residential and commercial space each year; 350-400 kilometers (217-248 miles) of metros and subways (20 times what has been achieved in the past decade); and 19,000-25,000 kilometers of annual road construction (equivalent to all the roads built over the past ten years).	麦肯锡认为，印度每年需要700—900万平方米的新增居住和商业空间，350—400公里的新增地铁和城铁长度（比过去10年的成就高20倍）和19000—25000公里的公路建设（相当于过去10年建成公里长度总和）。


The task is daunting.	任务是艰巨的。


But, despite the grumbling, India’s city dwellers – like those elsewhere – do not want to sacrifice the enormous gains of the past few decades to ineffective or corrupt governance.	但是，尽管心怀不满，印度的城市居民——和其他国家一样——并不愿意因低效和腐败的治理而拱手让出过去几十年得到的好处。


They want to work toward a future in which their quality of life is among the best in the world, with green spaces, sustainable public transport, clean air, well-built houses, and safe streets.	他们渴望用工作创造一个未来，让他们的生活称为世界最佳，有绿色的空间、可持续的公共交通、清洁的空气、漂亮的房子和安全的街道。


This is why I have set up the Nammu Bengaluru (“Our Bangalore”) Awards.	这就是我设置Nammu Bangaluru（“我们的班加罗尔”）奖的原因。


It is important to recognize those who are contributing to the vision of a city that is feted not just for its economic successes, but also for its quality of life.	承认为一座城市作出既关注经济成功，也关注生活质量的愿景规划的贡献者是至关重要的。


Their example is one that emerging-country urbanites everywhere should seek to emulate.	他们的榜样所有是新兴国家城市人应该效仿的。


Globalizing the Security Council	全球化安理会


BRASILIA – The 1945 United Nations Charter represented a historic breakthrough in the pursuit of peace on a multilateral basis.	巴西利亚—1945年联合国宪章代表着在追求基于多边基础的和平的道路上的历史性突破。


At the end of a global war that claimed more than 50 million lives, the United States and the Soviet Union emerged as the world’s two major powers.	在夺走5000多万人生命的世界大战结束时，美国和苏联成为世界两大超级大国。


The UN Charter, initially negotiated by the US, the Soviet Union, and the United Kingdom during World War II, established a Security Council containing five permanent members, including France and the Republic of China.	联合国宪章最初由美国、苏联和英国在二战期间谈判确定，成立了包括五个常任理事国的安理会，其他两个是法国和中华民国。


At its inception, the UN brought together 51 countries; it now has 193 member states.	成立之初，联合国总共包括51个成员国； 如今有193个。


But, although the Security Council was enlarged in 1965 by increasing the number of non-permanent seats from six to ten, its permanent members have not changed since 1945.	但是，尽管安理会在1965年做了扩充，将非常任理事国的数量从六个增加到十个，但常任理事国数量自1945年以来从未改变。


The world has gone through extraordinary transformations since then.	世界则发生了天翻地覆的变化。


In addition to interstate conflict and the proliferation of weapons – particularly weapons of mass destruction – new challenges have emerged, such as terrorism and the involvement of non-state actors in internal conflicts.	除了国际冲突和武器扩散——特别是大规模杀伤性武器的扩散——还出现了其他新挑战，比如恐怖主义以及非国家行东方参与国内冲突。


Meanwhile, the global distribution of economic and political power has undergone a radical reconfiguration, setting the stage for the emergence of a multipolar international order.	与此同时，全球经济和政治实力分布也发生了彻底的改变，为多极国际秩序设立了舞台。


In this environment, the Security Council’s frozen composition is imposing significant limits on the international community’s capacity to address global challenges.	在这样的环境下，安理会冻结成分变化不啻严重限制了国际社会处理全球挑战的能力。


Conflicts drag on without proper action from the body created to resolve them.	如果被成立用于解决冲突的机构无法合理地采取行动，冲突就会拖延下去。


Thousands of civilians die, are displaced, or are subjected to appalling human-rights abuses, while the Security Council proves unable or unwilling to act.	千百万平民死去、流离失所或经受惨无人道的虐待，而安理会无能也无意行动。


Reform of the Council is thus urgent and indispensable.	因此，改革安理会十分紧迫，而且不可或缺。


A majority of UN member states are in favor of creating a new Council with an expanded roster of both permanent and non-permanent members.	大多数联合国成员国支持成立新的安理会，扩大常任和非常任理事国数量。


This majority reflects a growing perception that the world would be more stable and more secure with a strengthened and updated multilateral system.	这表明人们越来越觉得新的增强了的多边体系能让世界更稳定、更安全。


That means adding new voices to reflect the world in which we now live.	这意味着增加反映我们选在所生活的世界的新的声音。


Only then will the Security Council have the legitimacy to act on today’s manifold conflicts.	惟其如此，安理会才能拥有对当今世界层出不穷的冲突采取行动的合法性。


A reformed Security Council would reflect the emergence of new powers and their readiness to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security.	改革后的安理会将反映新强国的崛起以及它们为维持国际和平与安全做出贡献的准备。


In the financial and economic arena, this new multipolarity has already led to quota reforms at the International Monetary Fund and resulted in the consolidation of the G-20 as the premier venue for multilateral economic-policy coordination.	在金融和经济领域，新的多极状态已经引发了IMF的配额改革，也使G20的整合成为多边经济政策合作的主会场。


The contrast with matters of peace and security is stark.	和平和安全事务的对比是鲜明的。


Entire regions of the world, such as Africa and Latin America, are excluded from the nucleus of decision-making.	世界整个地区，比如非洲和拉美，被排除在决策核心之外。


A governing body that is not representative fuels uncertainty and frustration among those subject to its decisions, undermining the legitimacy – and thus the effectiveness – of its actions.	不具代表性的治理机构会增加不确定性和受其决策影响群体的沮丧感，破坏其行动合法性——从而降低效率。


The greatest risk that we run is erosion of the Security Council’s credibility, and, with it, a diminishing capacity to confront grave threats to peace.	我们所面临的最大风险是安理会信誉的损失以及随之出现的应对和平的致命威胁的能力的下降。


We all stand to lose if new international crises end up being addressed by coalitions of countries at the margins of the Security Council and in a manner that flouts international law.	我们都会遭遇损失，如果新的国际危机最后通过安理会边缘国的联盟解决或通过藐视国际法的方式解决的话。


The lessons of the recent past are clear.	最近的教训是明确的。


In any conflict, neighboring countries’ participation and commitment are indispensable to the achievement of peace.	不管什么冲突，邻国的参与承诺是和平不可或缺的保证。


Only an expanded Security Council can enable effective conflict resolution worldwide.	唯有扩大了的安理会能推进世界范围的有效冲突解决方案。


The international community cannot afford to postpone reform.	国际社会不能接受改革中断。


It is our duty to preserve the multilateral system of peace and security – an achievement of the international community that, despite its shortcomings, has helped save the planet from another war on a global scale.	我们的责任是保护多边和平和安全体系——尽管国际社会有这样那样的不足，但它有助于拯救地球免受又一场世界大战。


Only an increase in the number of permanent and non-permanent seats can remedy the representation deficit within the Security Council and adapt it to the realities of the twenty-first century.	只有增加安理会常任和非常任理事国席位可以纠正安理会中的代表赤字，让安理会适应21世纪的现实。


If new members and regions are not offered a seat at the table, the Council will face increasing irrelevance – and the world, more than ever in need of effective conflict resolution, will be far worse off.	如果新成员和地区得不到席位，安理会将面临日益增加的枝节问题——而比以前更需要有效冲突解决方案的世界境况会差很多。


America’s Health-Care Divide	美国的医疗分歧


BERKELEY – In 1883, the authoritarian imperial government of Prince Otto von Bismarck – who famously declared, “It is not by speeches and majority votes that the great issues of our time will be decided…but by blood and iron” – established national health insurance for Germany.	伯克利—俾斯麦曾经有句名言：“我们时代的大问题不是通过演讲和多数票解决的……而是通过铁与血解决的。 ”就是这个俾斯麦，他的独裁帝国政府在1883年建立了德国的国民健康保险。


The rationale for national health insurance is as clear now as it was to Bismarck 130 years ago.	建立国民健康保险的理由130年来从未改变。


A country’s success – whether measured by the glory of its Kaiser, the expansion of its territory, the security of its borders, or the well-being of its population – rests on the health of its people.	一国的成功——不论用其皇帝的荣光、其领土的扩大、其边界的安全，还是其人口的福利来衡量——都取决于其人民的健康。


Serious illness can strike anyone, and seriously ill people, as a rule, do not earn much money.	重病可能降临到任何人头上，重症患者自然无法赚到很多钱。


The longer the seriously ill are untreated, the more costly their eventual treatment and maintenance become.	重症得不到治疗的时间越长，最终治愈和维持的成本就越高。


Private savings, as a rule, can pay the costs of treatment only for the thrifty and the well-off.	自然，只有勤俭节约的小康之家才能靠私人储蓄负担治疗。


So, unless we adopt the view that those without ample savings who fall seriously ill should quickly die (and so decrease the surplus population), a country with national health insurance will be a wealthier and more successful country.	因此，除非我们持有如果没有足够的储蓄，患重病就该活该速死（从而减少人口盈余）的观点，否则有国民健康保险的国家将变得更富有、更成功。


These arguments were entirely convincing to Bismarck.	这些观点让俾斯麦深信不疑。


They are equally convincing today.	如今也一样。


On January 1, 2014, the United States will partly implement a law – the Affordable Care Act (ACA) – that will not establish national health insurance, but that will, according to projections by the Congressional Budget Office, reduce by almost one-half the number of people in the US without health insurance.	2014年1月1日，美国将部分完成一项法律——平价医疗法（Affordable Care Act，ACA），该法不建立国民健康保险，但据国会预算办公室测算，将会让美国没有健康保险的人数下降近一半。


Back in 2009, President Barack Obama could have proposed a program as comprehensive as the one initiated by Bismarck.	若是在2009年，总统奥巴马本可以提出完整如俾斯麦的计划。


Such a program could have allowed, encouraged, and made it affordable for uninsured Americans to obtain health insurance similar to what members of Congress have; or it simply could have expanded the existing Medicare system for those over 65 to cover all Americans.	这一计划或能让无保险美国人获得与国会议员同等水平的健康保险，并将鼓励他们以可承受的负担得到这一福利； 也有可能只是把现有覆盖65岁以上人口的医疗保险（Medicare）制度推广到全体美国人。


Instead, Obama put his weight behind the complicated ACA.	事实上，奥巴马在背后大力推进了复杂的ACA。


The reason, as it was explained to me back in 2009, was that the core of the ACA was identical to the plan that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney had proposed and signed into law in that state in 2006: “ObamaCare” would be “RomneyCare” with a new coat of paint.	我在2009年得到的原因解释是，ACA的核心与前马萨诸塞州州长罗姆尼所提议、并于2006年写入州法律的内容别无二致：“奥巴马医保”只不过是在“罗姆尼医保”的外面披上一张画皮罢了。


With Romney the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee for the 2012 presidential election, few Republicans would be able to vote against what was their candidate’s signature legislative initiative as governor.	当时罗姆尼是共和党推定的2012年总统选举候选人，因此共和党无法投票反对本方候选人在州长任上签署的立法中的内容。


Thus, the US Congress, it was supposed, would enact the ACA with healthy and bipartisan majorities, and Obama would demonstrate that he could transcend Washington’s partisan gridlock.	因此，不出所料的话，美国国会将以稳健的两党多数通过ACA，奥巴马将证明他可以克服华盛顿的党派藩篱。


We know how that worked out.	结果我们都知道了。


Not a single Republican voted for the Affordable Care Act in the House of Representatives.	在众议院，没有一个共和党投票赞成平价医疗法案。


One Republican senator – Olympia Snowe of Maine – voted for it in committee, but then switched sides, threatened to kill it via filibuster, and voted against its final passage.	一位共和党参议员——缅因州的斯诺威（Olympia Snowe）在委员会中投票赞成，但随后反悔，威胁要以冗长演说扼杀这一法案，并投票反对它的最后通过。


As for Romney, he refused to recognize any kinship between his bill and the ACA – sort of like when he refused to recognize details surrounding the participation in the 2012 Olympics of a Dressage horse that he owned,	至于罗姆尼，他拒绝承认他的法案和ACA之间有任何关系——正如他拒绝承认关于他是一匹2012年奥运会马术盛装舞步比赛参赛马匹主人的细节。


But now January 1, 2014 is looming, and the Affordable Care Act is about to be implemented – but perhaps not everywhere.	但如今，2014年1月1日日益临近，平价医疗法案也即将实施——但可能并非全国各地。


In the south and other Republican-controlled regions, legislators have refused to answer constituents’ questions about how to negotiate the new, changed bureaucracy.	在南方和其他共和党控制的地区，立法者拒绝回答选民关于如何绕过新的改变了的官僚主义的问题。


They have also refused the federal dollars earmarked to expand their state-level Medicaid programs.	他们也拒绝了可用于扩大其州级医疗补助（Medicaid）计划的联邦资金。


And they have refused to lift a finger to establish the “exchanges” that are supposed to give individuals and small businesses the same access to health insurance at competitive prices that employees of large businesses get via their companies’ benefits departments.	他们��拒绝花费举手之劳建立可以让个人和小企业通过公司福利部门以极具竞争力的价格获得大企业雇员同样的健康保险的“交换”。


In the Democratic-controlled “blue” states, where 60% of the US population lives – and which account for 70% of national income and 80% of its wealth – implementation of the ACA is likely to be like that of RomneyCare in Massachusetts: a somewhat bumpy ride, but a clear success that nobody will wish to repeal after the fact.	在民主党控制的“蓝”州——60%的美国人口（以及70%的国民收入和80%的财富）来自这些地区——ACA的实施可能类似于马萨诸塞州的罗姆尼医保：道路是曲折的，但事实证明这是个巨大的成功，并且没人愿意废除它。


But no one knows what will happen in the “red states,” where the Republican political infrastructure is digging in its heels.	但没人知道在“红州”会发生什么，在这些州，共和党的政治基础设施牢不可破。


What will doctors and hospital administrators in Phoenix, Kansas City, Houston, and Atlanta do after they talk to their colleagues in Los Angeles, Seattle, Minneapolis, Chicago, Baltimore, and New York, where state governments and political structures are trying to make ACA implementation a success?	凤凰城、堪萨斯城、休斯顿和亚特兰大的医生和医院管理者在与洛杉矶、西雅图、明尼阿波利斯、芝加哥、巴尔的摩和纽约的同行交流后会怎么做？ 后者的州政府和政治结构正在试图推动ACA的成功实施。


Will they compare and contrast the conditions under which they are working?	他们会比较和对比他们工作的条件吗？


Which candidates will they support with donations and votes in the 2014 and 2016 elections?	在2014和2016年选举中，他们会用献金和选票支持谁？


What will nurses and patients denied the benefits of the ACA do?	否认ACA好处的护士和患者会怎么做？


America’s partisan heat is about to be turned up over the next several election cycles, as the blame game begins.	随着相互指责的开始，美国的党派热将会在未来几个选举周期内升温。


Bismarck would know who is at fault.	俾斯麦知道谁错了。


The Sino-American Mirror	中美镜像


HONG KONG – November was a month of major leadership changes around the world, including Xi Jinping’s confirmation as China’s top official and US President Barack Obama’s re-election.	发自香港——11月是世界大国权力交接的月份，其中包括习近平当选中国最高领导人以及美国总统奥巴马连任。


The changes highlighted the sharp differences between the two countries’ political systems.	中美权力交接的方式显示出了两国政治体制之间的极大差异。


Yet the two countries share similar national development goals:increasing their citizens’ prosperity, narrowing social inequities, and addressing environmental sustainability.	然而，两国也有相同之处，即类似的国家发展目标：增加民众福祉，缩小贫富不均，以及应对环境可持续性问题。


The fact is that rapid social, technological, and environmental change is challenging both the Western and Chinese models of governance and development, with both requiring significant reform.	问题是当前社会、科技和环境的急剧变革正在挑战中国与西方的治理和发展模式。 两种模式都亟待变革。


And both countries’ leaders must deliver reforms within a limited tenure, with limited resources, and within a global context of trade rivalry and interdependence.	两国领导都必须在全球经济既相互依存又充斥着贸易摩擦的大背景下，在一个有限的任期内，利用有限的资源，推行改革。


In the United States, where markets, the judiciary, and regulation are highly developed, the imperative is not institutional reform, but policy reform – addressing the weak fiscal position, income and wealth inequities, unemployment, health care, and deteriorating physical infrastructure.	在美国这种市场、司法制度和监管都已经高度发达的国家，迫切需要的并不是体制改革，而是政策改革——应对弱势财政状况、收入和财富分配不均、失业、医疗卫生问题以及不断老化的基础设施。


For China, the issue largely concerns the design and implementation of the next stage of institutional reforms to sustain economic growth and efficiency, reduce social inequality, remove market distortions, address environmental deterioration, and combat corruption.	而对中国来说，问题主要集中在设计并实施进一步的体制改革，以保持经济高效发展，减少社会不均，消除市场扭曲，应对环境恶化和打击腐败。


As China becomes a more urban and elderly middle-income society, the challenge for the new leadership is not only to meet the population’s need for employment, health care, and social security, but also to improve governance and state effectiveness by establishing checks and balances on political power.	随着中国逐步步入中等收入阶段，城市化不断推进，人口开始老龄化，新领导层所面临的挑战不仅���于满足民众对就业、医疗和社会保障的需求，还要通过政治权力的内部制衡来提升政府治理和行政效率。


Both countries face formidable resistance to reform from formidable vested interests and lobby groups.	与此同时，两国的改革都面临着来自强势的既得利益集团和游说团体的巨大阻力。


Both also face major price distortions, owing to quantitative easing by monetary policymakers, which has led to negative real interest rates.	而且，由于货币政策制定者的量化宽松措施导致了实际上的负利率，双方也都面临着严重的价格扭曲现象。


To some extent, the two countries’ problems are mirror images of each other.	在某种程度上，两国的问题几乎就如镜像一般形成鲜明对比 。


The US lacks investment in infrastructure and has excess investment in financial derivatives – the result of opaque leverage from over-consumption.	一边是美国缺乏基础设施投资同时却在金融衍生品上投资过度——这是过度消费所导致的隐性高杠杆所结下的恶果。


China suffers from under-consumption and possible over-investment, and needs to strike a balance between the state-owned sector and private enterprise.	而另一边中国则苦于消费不足投资过度，同时还必须在国有部门和私人企业之间取得平衡。


American democracy’s emphasis on short time horizons is costly, with tax cuts and increased welfare benefits giving rise to chronic fiscal deficits, with future generations forced to foot the bill for years of excessive consumption.	美国的民主制度为其重视短期成果的习惯付出了沉重的代价：减税与不断增加的福利支出带来了长期财政赤字，以致未来几代人都必须为过去几十年的过度消费买单。


In China, the one-party system has been effective in delivering strong growth, but it must now address the rampant corruption and excessive bureaucracy that has crowded out the private sector and limited creativity and innovation.	中国的一党领导的政治体制在实现强劲增长方面非常高效，但如今则必须应对日益蔓延的腐败和官僚主义，因为这些不但排挤了私人部门，还遏制了创新。


China and the US can draw important lessons from the strengths and weaknesses inherent in both systems.	中美两国都可以从两国体制固有的优缺点中吸取经验教训。


First, in both countries, the challenge is not one of state versus market, but about finding complementarities between the two.	首先，两国面临的挑战不是政府与市场之争，而是要实现两者之间互补。


The state performs best when it delineates, protects, and adjudicates property rights, while the market works best when it allocates property rights and aligns people’s incentives.	政府的职责在于界定、保护和裁决产权，而市场的优势则在于配置产权并协调人们各自的经济动机使其一致。


Second, both countries must find the right metric to balance short-term and long-term interests.	其二，两国都必须找到平衡短期和长期利益的合适尺度。


Given inter-generational demands, large spillover effects between different communities, and interdependence with the rest of the world, any governance system must weigh the interests of ruling elites and lobbyists against those of weaker groups without voice, and popular demands against long-term planning.	考虑到不同社区之间的跨代际需求和溢出效应，以及与世界各地区的互相依存关系，任何治理机制都必须权衡统治精英、游说者和那些人微言轻的弱势群体之间的利益关系，以及短期需求和长期计划之间的取舍。


Finally, the issue for both countries is not corruption or inequality – which are universal – but equal opportunity and, in China’s case, respect for property rights.	最后，两国的问题不是表面的腐败和不平衡，全球任何国家都存在这些现象，而是需要机会平等。 对中国而言，还需对产权的尊重。


Opaque and unfair delineation and allocation of land rights in China, together with state monopolies and burdensome bureaucracies, create distortions that give rise to corruption and inequities.	中国缺乏透明公平的土地权益划定和分配，再加上一党领导的政治体制和臃肿的政府机构，导致了扭曲，进而滋生腐败和不公。


China’s main priority should be to strengthen its legal institutions to protect property rights, while reducing state ownership and control of resources and large enterprises.	中国的首要任务就是加强司法制度来保护产权，同时减少国有企业比重以及政府对资源和大企业的掌控。


So far, Xi’s down-to-earth approach has raised hopes that China will enter a new phase of reform that will address economic imbalances, increase social inclusion, and tackle endemic corruption.	目前为止，习近平的务实举动令人们充满希望，期待中国即将进入新一阶段的改革，包括纠正经济失衡、增加社会包容性并打击腐败。


In the US, Obama’s re-election has led some to believe that much-needed policy reforms will bring the country back from the brink of the “fiscal cliff” and ignite a new era of growth.	在美国，奥巴马的连任则让人们相信他将启动实施一系列迫切需要的政策改革，将国家从“财政悬崖”边缘拉回正轨，并开启一个新的增长时期。


Yet the two leaders and their administrations must overcome monumental challenges as their countries strive to reach the next stage of their development.	随着两国向着下一个发展阶段奋力迈进，两位领导人及其政府都必须克服巨大挑战。


How they use monetary, fiscal, structural, institutional, and regulatory policies may differ, but each will ultimately be judged by how close he comes to achieving that goal.	他们运用货币、财政、结构、制度和监管政策的方式或许有所不同，但其成功与否都终将取决于他们究竟能够在多大程度上实现其目标。


The Sino-American Test in North Korea	朝鲜局势考验中美关系


MADRID – Repeated threats from North Korea have turned the Korean Peninsula into one of the world’s most dangerous hotspots.	马德里——朝鲜一而再、再而三的威胁已经让朝鲜半岛成为全世界最危险的热点之一。


But the situation also offers an important opportunity: a gain in strategic trust between China and the United States, the two countries with the capacity to resolve the tensions once and for all.	但朝鲜局势同样面临着重要机遇：中美两个能永久化解半岛紧张局势的国家可以藉此增强战略互信。


If they manage to cooperate constructively in order to shape a peace acceptable to all sides, this would make not only Korea, but also the region and the world, a safer place.	如果两国建设性合作实现各方能共同接受的和平，就可以巩固半岛、地区乃至整个世界的安全局势。


Ten years after opting out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, North Korea clearly possesses nuclear weapons.	退出核不扩散条约十年后，朝鲜显然已经掌握了核武器。


The regime’s nuclear test in February – its third since 2006 – was likely a miniaturized device, which makes the situation even more worrying, given that successful miniaturization is critical for using nuclear weapons in ballistic missiles.	朝鲜政权2月举行的2006年以来第三次核试验很可能涉及小型装置，鉴于小型化对弹道导弹运载核武器的重要意义，此次核试让整个局势变得更加扑朔迷离。


February’s test provoked another round of United Nations sanctions, drafted by the US and China, triggering an escalation of threats and provocations from the North.	2月核试招致了由美中两国起草的又一轮联合国制裁，并由此引发朝鲜的威胁和挑衅进一步升级。


The tension on the peninsula increased further with the annual joint military exercises conducted by the US and South Korea – especially when American nuclear-capable B-52 and B-2 bombers were added to the drills.	一年一度的美韩联合军演进一步恶化了半岛紧张局势，美国能发射核武器的B-52和B-2轰炸机参与演习则更是如此。


Nobody wants war on the Korean Peninsula.	没有人希望朝鲜半岛爆发战争。


For the North, it would be suicide; for the South, with its vibrant economy and widening free-trade agreements, the opportunity cost would be particularly high.	这对朝鲜而言无异于自寻死路； 而对经济快速发展、自由贸易协定不断扩大的韩国，机会成本同样高得不可思议。


Likewise, regional stability is a prerequisite of China’s stellar economic growth, and military conflict would be a setback for US economic rebirth as well.	同样，地区稳定是中国保持举世瞩目经济增长的先决条件，而军事冲突无疑会对美国的经济复苏构成打击。


Indeed, with US defense spending finally set to decline after a decade of debt-financed war in Iraq and Afghanistan, America has little fiscal room for an unforeseen military entanglement.	事实上，在举债进行了十年伊拉克和阿富汗战争后，美国的国防开支终于下降，美国已经没有财政余力陷入不可预见的军事冲突。


The US “pivot” to Asia is built on economic opportunities there; a conflict with unpredictable fallout does not fit the scheme.	美国以亚洲为“支点”源于那里的经济机会； 无法预测最终结果的冲突不符合美国外交计划的精神。


China is the key geostrategic player in resolving the conflict, because it provides North Korea with 90% of its energy, 80% of its consumer goods, and 40% of its food.	为朝鲜提供90%能源、80%消费品和40%粮食的中国是化解冲突的重要地缘政治势力。


But it is unclear how much influence China’s government holds over Kim Jong-un’s regime.	但中国政府对金正恩政权能产生多大影响目前尚不明确。


Sino-North Korean relations have borne a significant scar since 1991, when China recognized South Korea without insisting that the US formally recognize the North.	1991年后中朝关系已经产生重大裂痕，因为中国没有坚持要求美国正式承认朝鲜就正式承认了韩国。


The North Koreans believe that China sacrificed them for commercial interests, and bilateral relations have yet to recover.	朝鲜人认为中国牺牲他们来换取商业利益，中朝的双边关系仍有待恢复。


Nonetheless, China continues to regard North Korea as an important strategic asset, because it serves as a buffer state shielding China’s border from American troops on the peninsula – which has historically been used as an entry point by invading troops.	尽管如此，中国仍将朝鲜视为重要的战略资产，因为朝鲜是防止中国边境遭受美军入侵的缓冲国——过去美军曾利用朝鲜半岛来入侵中国。


China’s ideal solution would therefore be to maintain the status quo while persuading the North to open up – a path of gradual change that avoids open conflict or the regime’s collapse.	因此中国的理想做法是在说服朝鲜开放的同时力争保持现状，开放能让朝鲜逐步改革，同时避免政权崩溃和公开冲突。


Either of these traumatic outcomes would spell disaster, for both the region and the world.	无论哪种结果都将给地区和世界造成创伤。


First, the regime’s implosion would unleash a massive refugee flow, implying enormous social and economic costs.	首先，朝鲜政权内爆将引发大规模难民潮，并造成巨大的经济社会冲击。


Moreover, Asia remains a continent defined by balance-of-power diplomacy, border conflicts, and historic mistrust, with no multilateral security structures to soften regional tensions.	此外，亚洲仍然是一块充斥着权力平衡外交、边界冲突和历史不信任的大陆，软化地区冲突的多边安全构架尚未建立。


Given these conditions, even a small spark could ignite a wildfire.	在这种情况下，即使一点小小的火花也会引发严重的后果。


In this environment, mistrust of China’s rise as a regional hegemon in much of East Asia only intensifies the need for active Chinese participation in promoting regional stability and peace – a peace framework with Asian roots, acceptable to all parties.	在这种情况下，东亚多国对中国作为地区霸主的不信任使中国更有必要积极推进区域的和平与稳定——上述和平架构植根于亚洲，并为所有相关利益方所接受。


Only through such efforts will China be able to increase its international legitimacy, thereby minimizing the risk of future conflict.	只有这样中国才能巩固其国际合法性，从而尽可能控制未来的地区冲突。


It is essential that China and the US work together to resolve the current crisis.	中美两国齐心协力化解目前的危机至关重要。


The US must reiterate clearly that indefinitely prolonging the status quo on the Korean Peninsula would imply a strategic loss for China, and that China must join the international community in its efforts to halt North Korea’s nuclear program.	美国必须明确重申无限期拖延朝鲜半岛现状将使中国蒙受战略损失，中国必须与国际社会合作努力制止朝鲜的核计划。


This cooperation is the only way to force the North’s hand and put an end to the incessant cycle of crisis and mounting risk.	合作是逼迫朝鲜就范、结束危机和风险的唯一可能性。


The current crisis offers a unique test case for joint handling of international affairs – or, in this case, regional affairs with global consequences – by the world’s two biggest powers.	当前危机让世界两个超级大国尝试共同处理国际事务，或者能造成全球影响的地区事务。


During US Secretary of State John Kerry’s trip to China this month, the two countries pronounced their shared goals: denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and durable peace in the region.	在美国国务��约翰·克里本月的访华之行中，两国宣布了他们实现朝鲜半岛无核化及地区持久和平的共同目标。


This is a good starting point.	这是个不错的起点。


Sino-US cooperation on this flashpoint could be a huge step forward in building much-needed bilateral strategic trust.	中美合作可以为建设迫切需要的双边战略互信迈出重要的一步。


But the two countries’ markedly different foreign-policy approaches will not facilitate matters.	但两国截然不同的外交政策理念可能起到阻碍作用。


While the US tends to segment problems in order to find solutions to each part within a finite period of time, China relies on broad, long-term perspective and views issues as extended, relative processes.	美国倾向于将问题细分并在有限时间内找到各部分的解决方案，而中国则从长远、广义的角度将问题视作长期的相对过程。


That is why, in dealing with impoverished, isolated, nuclearized North Korea, where Sino-US cooperation is the only option, the US and China face both a challenge and an opportunity.	因此中美两国机遇与挑战并存，必须在处理贫困、孤立的朝鲜核问题时实现通力合作。


To make the most of it requires a significant boost in mutual strategic trust.	必须显著提升战略互信才能充分实现中美合作。


American Presidential Beauty	美国总统选美


NEW YORK – What is the point of a presidential debate?	纽约—总统竞选辩论的要点是什么？


In the context of American presidential elections, “debate” is something of a misnomer.	在美国总统大选中，“辩论”其实有用词不当的嫌疑。


When former French President Nicolas Sarkozy faced his Socialist challenger, François Hollande, that was a debate – addressing substantive issues and lasting more than two hours.	法国前总统萨科齐面对其社会党挑战者奥朗德，这叫辩论——辩实质性问题，论超过两小时。


By contrast, presidential debates in the United States are more like staged performances, where the answers to every possible question have been rehearsed endlessly with teams of coaches and advisers.	相反，美国总统竞选辩论更像是舞台演出，对于每一个可能出现的问题，指导和顾问团队都早已经演练过无数次了。


The candidates in US debates address carefully selected journalists who rarely follow up on a question.	美国总统辩论会精心挑选与会记者，他们都不会在一个问题上刨根问底。


And the candidates’ performances are scrutinized less on the substance of their arguments than on their presentation, body language, facial tics, unguarded sighs, smiles, sneers, and inadvertent eye rolling.	候选人表现如何，也不会根据其观点是否具有实质内容决定，而是根据其演说、其肢体语言、其面部表情、其不经意的叹息、微笑、冷嘲和无意中的眼部动作决定。


Does the candidate come across as a snob, or a friendly guy whom one can trust?	候选人看起来像是势利小人还是可以信赖的朋友？


Do the smiles look real or fake?	他的微笑是真诚的还是虚伪的？


These “optics” can be of great importance.	这些“现象”可以具有极大的重要性。


After all, Richard Nixon’s race against John Kennedy in 1960 is said to have been lost on television: Kennedy looked cool and handsome, while Nixon scowled into the camera, with sweat trickling down his five o’clock shadow.	毕竟，据说尼克松在1960年输给肯尼迪的原因就是败在了电视上：肯尼迪看起来又酷又帅，而尼克松在镜头前摆出一副苦瓜脸，胡渣满脸，不停地流汗。


In his debates with Ronald Reagan in 1980, Jimmy Carter came across as smug and humorless, and Reagan as a friendly old uncle.	在1980年的竞选辩论中，卡特一副缺少幽默感的书呆子相，而里根看起来像是位面善大叔。


Carter lost.	结果卡特败下阵来。


In 2000, Al Gore, was unable to make up his mind about which role he wished to play in his debates with George W. Bush, so he looked shifty and inauthentic, changing from arrogant to patronizing and back again.	2000年，戈尔没有打定主意在与小布什的辩论中扮演怎样的角色，他看起来诡诈而不可靠，一会儿高傲，一会儿屈尊，如此反复。


He had the better arguments, but he lost the “debates” (and the election) nonetheless.	他的论点强于布什，但还是输掉了“辩论”（以及大选）。


We are told that the debates this month between President Barack Obama and the Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, might decide the election.	我们都认为，本月的辩论决定了总统奥巴马及其共和党挑战者罗姆尼谁能够最后胜出。


It is, according to the pundits, Romney’s last chance.	根据权威人士的看法，这是罗姆尼最后的机会了。


If Obama comes across as an elitist professor, he might lose.	如果奥巴马以精英教授的形象示人，他就可能输。


If Romney gets angry, or makes a bad joke, his chances could be blown.	如果罗姆尼被激怒，或是讲了拙劣的笑话，他就没机会问鼎总统宝座了。


Again, this is not a question of who has the best policies, or the soundest ideas; it is all about presentation.	这一回，问题仍不在于谁抛出了更好的政策或是更靠谱的想法，而在于演讲的表现。


More than 67 million Americans watched the first of this year’s three debates.	6700多万美国人收看了今年三场辩论的第一场。


According to public-opinion polls, only about 17% of eligible voters have not yet made up their minds about which candidate to support.	据民意调查显示，只有17%的合格选民还没有确定会把票投给谁。


That is surprising, given the widening political gap between America’s two main political parties.	这一数字有些令人吃惊，因为美国两大政党的政治差异极大。


In private, Obama and Romney may be able to agree on many things.	私下里，奥巴马和罗姆尼或许能在诸多方面达成一致。


But the Republican Party has moved far to the right of Obama’s moderate liberalism, and Romney has been pulled along with it.	但相对于奥巴马的温和自由主义，共和党走的太右，而罗姆尼不得不随波逐流。


Then there is the great unspoken factor of racial prejudice, something even hard-core right-wing Republicans try not to express openly.	还有不可言说的种族偏见因素，即使是最顽固的共和党右翼也会尽力掩饰不让这一点公开亮相。


A certain percentage of American voters will not vote for a black man, whatever he says, or however good he looks in a debate.	一部分美国选民不会投票支持黑人，不管他睡什么，也不管他在辩论中表现如何。


If policies or prejudices have not persuaded that undecided 17% of voters, they must be looking for something else.	如果政策和辩论不能说服那尚未作出决定的17%选民，那么他们就必须寻找其他东西。


They want to see whether they like one man better than the other.	他们会看哪个候选人比另一个看起来顺眼。


To them, one can only assume, the debates are nothing more than a personality contest.	你只能假设，对他们来说，辩论无非是个人魅力比拼。


In past elections, when there sometimes really was not much political difference between Democrats and Republicans, this made a certain sense.	在过去的大选中——那时民主党和共和党的政治分歧还没有那么大——这有点用。


Broadly speaking, on economics and foreign policy, the candidates often would be in accord, with Republicans more inclined to favor the interests of big business and Democrats defending the interests of labor.	大体而言，在经济和外交政策方面，候选人通常按常规出牌，共和党更支持大企业的利益，而民主党是劳工利益的捍卫者。


So voters could not always be blamed for finding it hard to make up their minds.	因此，选民不会抱怨难以决定自己的选票。


Since they could not make a rational choice, they followed their instincts and voted for the candidate they found most sympathetic.	既然他们无法做出理性选择，那么不妨跟着感觉走，把票投给看起来最面善的就是了。


This time, there seems to be much less justification for such arbitrary choices.	这一回，如此随意的选择看起来比以前不靠谱多了。


The political differences are too stark.	政治分歧实在太大了。


And yet there is a reason not to dismiss the personality contest entirely.	但仍有理由相信，个人魅力竞争不会完全失去意义。


After all, the US presidency is a quasi-monarchical institution, as well as a political one.	毕竟，美国总统不但是政治职位，也是无冕之王。


The president and First Lady are the king and queen of the American republic – the official faces that the US presents to the outside world.	总统和第一夫人就是美利坚共和国的国王和王后，向外部世界展示的美国官方面孔。


It is not utterly absurd, therefore, that voters want to like the look of their presidents, quite apart from the merit of their policies.	因此，选民看重总统的相貌而不看���其政策的价值也不能说荒谬可笑。


Choosing the country’s most powerful politician on the basis of his presentability on television might seem arbitrary, even frivolous.	凭借在电视上的形象选择美国最有权力的政客或许有些武断，甚至称得上轻率。


But it is no more arbitrary than the accident of birth, which determines the right of kings and queens to reign over their countries.	但这总比生而为统治万民的国王和王后强多了。


The difference is, of course, that most modern kings and queens are constitutional monarchs with no political power.	当然，区别在于现代国王和王后只是宪法中的君主，而没有政治权力。


And the man whom US voters choose to lead their country will affect the lives of everyone, not just Americans.	而美国选民选出的国家领导人将影响每个人的生活——不只是美国人。


Because non-Americans cannot vote in US elections for him (a pity for Obama, who would probably win a global vote by a landslide), we have to depend on the judgment of that 17% of undecided voters watching television this month.	由于非美国人不能选举美国总统（这对奥巴马来说是个不幸的消息，要是全球投票，他大概会以压倒优势获胜），我们得靠这17%的未确定选民在这个月通过看电视决定谁是美国总统。


That is not exactly reassuring.	这并不十分靠谱。


But the American republic has one merit that monarchies lack.	但美利坚共和国拥有一项君主制所没有的优势。


Good or bad, the quasi-king can be booted out every four years.	不管好坏，准国王可以每四年被罢免一次。


Then the competition – part ideological, part beauty contest – can start all over again.	然后，竞争——部分靠意识形态，部分靠比美——会再度上演。


The US Candidates’ Non-Debate	美国候选辩论禁区


DENVER – For the uninitiated, especially foreign observers, the United States’ presidential election campaign can seem like an epic narrative in which the protagonists pass through various trials en route to salvation, with the US media’s nonstop coverage resounding like a Greek chorus.	丹佛—对于不知情的观察者，特别是外国观察者来说，美国总统大选看起来就像是一出史诗剧，主人公需要经历重重考验，而美国媒体就像是希腊合唱队，不断地唱着和声。


Now that the made-for-television Republican and Democratic conventions are over, the odyssey of President Barack Obama and his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, continues with three face-to-face encounters in October.	如今，共和党和民主党之间的电视辩论已经结束，总统奥巴马及其共和党挑战者罗姆尼仍要在10月份经历三次面对面交锋，才能决出输赢。


The first debate is scheduled to take place here at the University of Denver on October 3.	第一次辩论将于10月3日发生在这里——丹佛大学。


Both candidates received some (well-deserved) criticism during the conventions for appealing to peoples’ emotions instead of addressing facts and policies.	两位候选人都受到了一些批评（一点都不冤枉），他们只顾着迎合选民情绪，根本不顾纠正事实和政策。


In the debates, that should change as they confront each other directly while making their case to voters.	在这次辩论中，这应该会有所改变，因为他们将直接对话，而且在选民面前亮出观点。


But October 3 is only the beginning.	但10月3日的辩论只是开场。


The vice-presidential candidates will square off on October 11, while Obama and Romney will meet again on October 16 and then for the last debate, on October 22.	副总统候选人将在10月11日登场对决，而奥巴马和罗姆尼将在10月16日再度碰面，并在22日做最后对决。


Foreign policy has made few appearances in the campaign, but the final debate is supposed to be devoted to the subject, thereby giving voters a sustained view of how the candidates view the world.	外交政策在这次大选中还很少露脸，但据估计最后一次辩论将以此为主题，从而向选民们展示两位候选人是如何看待世界的。


Obama has spoken periodically over the course of his presidency about foreign policy (albeit before the current campaign), whereas Romney has said far less.	在总统任期内，奥巴马反复阐述了他的外交政策（当然都是在此次大选之前），而罗姆尼的话要少得多。


Anxious to distance himself from the legacy of the previous Republican administration, he never mentions former President George W. Bush and avoids mention of the two wars of the last decade.	他急于和前任共和党政府划清界限，从来不提前总统小布什，对过去十年中的两场战争也从来是无可奉告。


Indeed, when Romney formally accepted the Republican nomination at the party’s convention, he went so far as not to mention US troops in the field, an omission that the Democrats pounced upon when their convention met a week later.	而当罗姆尼正式在共和党大会上正式接受该党总统候选人提名时，他也绝口不提美军战事，结果被民主党在一周后的党大会上抓住这一点大做文章。


Ironically, it is the Republicans who have prided themselves in recent years as the party that took up President John F. Kennedy’s call to “pay any price” and “bear any burden” in defense of liberty.	讽刺的是，在近几年中贯彻肯尼迪总统“不惜一切代价”、“战胜一切负担”捍卫自由的口号最力、并以此为荣的正是共和党。


But both Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, display little or no interest in foreign affairs, apart from assuring voters that Israel’s interests will be safeguarded, Iran’s will not be, and whatever the US does must be tough and strident.	但不管是罗姆尼还是其竞选搭档莱恩似乎都不对外交事务感兴趣，除了向选民保证以色列的利益将得到保证、伊朗的图谋将不可能实现、美国不论做什么都将面临艰巨而困难的局面之外。


Though the third debate will address foreign-policy issues, viewers will probably remain starved for signs of what might follow in terms of statecraft.	尽管第三次辩论将针对外交政策问题，但论者可能仍无法从中寻找治国方针。


Foreign policy in US politics is often an exercise in demonstrating strength rather than wisdom.	在美国政坛，外交政策通常是用来展示实力而不是智慧的。


On Iran, the debate will, at best, address how to “solve” (no one will dare say manage) the nuclear threat by using sanctions and military action.	在伊朗问题上，竞选辩论充其量只能决定怎样通过制裁和军事手段“解决”（没人敢把它说成是应对）核威胁的问题。


A serious discussion of how to sustain fledgling multinational negotiations between Iran and the world’s six most powerful countries (the so-called P5 + 1) – a process denounced by many American pundits as a waste of time – is unlikely.	怎样维持伊朗核世界六大强国（即所谓的P5+1）之间刚刚形成的谈判局面——许多美国专家认为这纯属浪费时间——的问题是不可能出现在辩论中的。


Indeed, Iran’s nuclear aspirations, one of the most pressing issues of our time, may well be reduced to whether the US should support Israel in the event that its government takes military action.	事实上，伊朗的核野心——现时代最紧迫的问题之一——很可能会降级成美国是否应该在以色列政府动武的情况下支持以色列的问题。


One is hard pressed to find any analyst who believes that Israeli air strikes could do more than set back Iran’s program for a few months while unifying fractured Iranian opinion around support for nuclear weapons.	基本上没有分析家相信以色列的空袭能够产生什么效果，除了让伊朗的核计划收敛几个月以及让伊朗国内各分歧观点团建起来支持核计划。


Another fundamental question, China’s standing in the world order, is unlikely to be discussed in any meaningful way.	另一个基本问题是中国在世界秩序中的地位，该问题也不可能在辩论中做有意义的讨论。


Indeed, one can expect the debate to center on how to confront China in the short term, rather than on how to nurture long-term cooperative ties.	事实上，可以预见辩论将集中在如何在短期内对付中国，而不是如何加强长期合作关系。


Most Americans have not yet embraced the idea that the US-China relationship is too big to fail.	大部分美国人并不认为中美关系已经到了太大而不能断的地步。


Today’s China seems to recall Winston Churchill’s description of Russia as a “riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma” – a new, great power rival that is difficult for US policymakers to understand.	如今的中国似乎让人们想起了丘吉尔对描述俄罗斯的描述：“隐藏在谜团中的神秘的谜”——美国决策者难以理解的新超级大国对手。


Likewise, Obama and Romney may have tacitly agreed not to discuss the policy choices surrounding the tragedy in Syria, because neither has any interest in addressing its internal complexities, mastery of which will be essential to galvanize international support for an eventual political solution.	类似地，奥巴马和罗姆尼可能会策略性地同意不讨论关于叙利亚悲剧的政策选择问题，因为两人都没有兴趣解决其内在复杂性，而这正是促成最终政治解决方案的国际支持的关键。


In the meantime, Syria and its daily carnage have become the dreariest and most numbing foreign-policy issue in American public opinion, despite the danger that the violence could spread across the Middle East (particularly to neighboring Iraq and Lebanon).	与此同时，叙利亚以及天天发生在那里的大屠杀最无聊的外交政策问题，美国民意对此已经麻木了，尽管叙利亚暴力很有可能蔓延到��个中东地区（特别是相邻的伊拉克和黎巴嫩）。


The export of Syria’s civil war is likely to consume far more time in the coming months than either candidate wants to admit.	叙利亚内战的输出可能在未来几个月中耗费大量时间，这是两位候选人都不愿意承认的。


Other foreign-policy issues cry out for serious discussion and debate: addressing absolute poverty and pandemics in the global South; strengthening global governance, including undermanned and outmoded United Nations structures; international cooperation on the rising number of natural disasters; and rethinking Afghanistan/Pakistan with the understanding that Pakistan is far larger and one angry mob away from a loose nuke – and therefore should not be reduced to the role of a supporting actor in Afghanistan’s travails.	其他需要认证讨论和争辩的外交政策问题有：解决南方国家的贫困和流行病问题、加强全球治理，包括人手不足又过时的联合国结构、应对越来越普遍的自然灾害的全球合作、以及重新认识阿富汗/巴基斯坦问题，明白巴基斯坦要大得多，巴基斯坦人更加愤怒，而且他们拥有核武器，因此不能把它降格为阿富汗问题的支持性因素。


Finally, North Korea’s nuclear aspirations are a hearty perennial for any US president.	最后，朝鲜的核野心一直以来都是美国总统的心腹大患。


Joint US-Chinese effort on this issue could potentially provide the elusive key to an improved relationship.	在该问题上，中美联合行动可以称为改善关系的神秘钥匙。


Yet this issue, too, is unlikely to receive the attention from the candidates that it deserves.	但该问题也不可能获得总统候选人应有的关注。


Whether Americans like it or not, with Europe, China, and India largely consumed by domestic politics, international leadership and stewardship of the world’s problems will remain firmly in US hands.	不管美国人喜不喜欢，在欧洲、中国和印度仍主要关注内政的情况下，全球问题的领导和治理角色仍然紧紧地握在美国手里。


And yet the US election campaign, even the upcoming October debates, will leave most observers wondering whether any country is in charge.	而美国大选——即使是即将到来的10月份电视辩论——将让大部分观察者感到困惑，找不出领袖国家。


China and the American Dream	中国和美国梦


PARIS – China may be just a few years away from becoming the world’s leading economic power, and America’s strategic centrality may be on the wane (certainly, no one speaks of the United States today as the world’s “hyperpower”).	巴黎—也许不出几年，中国就将成为世界第一大经济强国，而美国的战略核心地位可能正在丢失（显然，没人再把如今的美国称为世界“超级大国”了）。


But America still makes people dream, and its emotional hold on the world remains unique.	但美国仍将是人们的梦想，其对世界的情感拥有依然会是独一无二的。


In this sense, last week brought two victories: not just Barack Obama’s over Republican challenger Mitt Romney in the presidential election, but also the victory of America’s democratic system over China’s one-party authoritarianism.	从这个意义上说，上周美国迎来了两场胜利：不仅仅是奥巴马击败共和党挑战者罗姆尼赢得总统大选，同时美国民主制度也战胜了中国的一党专政。


In a few sentences of his victory speech – the space of a magic moment – Obama celebrated “the mystery of democracy” in a very concrete, but also nearly religious manner.	在简短的获胜演讲中——堪称魔法时刻——奥巴马以实实在在但又近乎虔诚的方式庆祝了“民主的魔力”。


Obama found the right words with which to pay tribute to the multitude of anonymous citizens going door to door to convince their fellow Americans to vote for their preferred candidates.	奥巴马用这样的字眼歌颂大批挨家挨户敲门、说服其美国同胞将选票投给自己中意的候选人的不知名的美国公民可谓恰当。


He was describing democracy at its best, its most noble, as it should be, but not always is: freely mobilized men and women able and willing to change the course of their destiny.	他用最好、做高尚的方式描述了民主，民主应该如此，但并不总是如此：自动发动起来的人们能够也愿意改变自己的命运。


At this moment, however brief, America’s soft power defeated by a knockout that of China, which less than one day later solemnly – and in the most opaque manner – opened the 18th Congress of the Chinese Communist Party.	此时此刻，不管多么短暂，美国的软实力被中国的淘汰机制击败了，美国大选结束不到一天，严重不透明的中共十八大开幕了。


Millions of people around the world would rather experience for themselves an election night like America’s than become a part of China’s long-term plans.	全世界千百万人民宁愿经历美国式的选举之夜，也不愿变成美国长期计划的一部分。


Of course, America is no longer what it used to be.	当然，美国已经不是从前的美国。


It is far too indebted to be the ultimate strategic and economic insurance policy for its allies, as it was in the past.	美国身上背负的像从前那样成为盟友的终极战略和经济保险政策的重任太过沉重。


But, if America’s protective power has receded, its power to inspire remains unique and can still redound to its benefit in the most spectacular way.	但是，虽然美国的保护力量有所削弱，但其鼓舞士气的力量仍是独一无二的，仍然能够以最壮观的方式迸发出能量。


Obama’s victory was not only that of democracy, but also of a certain vision and message of America.	奥巴马的胜利不仅是民主的胜利，也是美国愿景和消息的胜利。


By keeping an open stance on immigration, maintaining a respectful discourse toward all who want to live out their differences freely, and considering women in a modern and dignified manner, Obama was able to mobilize the strength of America’s exceptionalism, which rests on one key word: diversity.	对移民采取开放态度，对所有渴望自由地以不同方式生活的人们保持尊重，以及以现代的、庄重的态度对待妇女，这让奥巴马得以动员美国例外主义的优势——它们的关键词是：多样化。


In deliberately ignoring this diversity and embracing nostalgia for a long-gone past, the Republican Party – led astray by its ultra-conservative lunatics – was far more responsible than its decent candidate for the defeat.	共和党故意忽略这一多样化，而大谈对过去的乡愁。 他们被极端保守的疯子引上了歧路，对于其体面的候选人的败选，共和党要承担多得多的责任。


Romney’s mistake was to align himself for too long with ideas that were too radical for him – and for America.	罗姆尼的错误是将自己与对他（以及对美国）来说太过激进的观点捆绑在一起太长时间。


The fate of Romney’s candidacy contains a universal message for all democratic regimes: One wins nothing by cultivating the extremes or by becoming their captive.	罗姆尼作为候选人的命运体现了所有民主制度的永恒含义：培养极端主义或被极端主义俘虏是不可能让你胜出的。


In fact, one runs the risk of losing not only one’s soul, but also elections.	事实上，这样做不但会让你失去灵魂，也会让你失去选民。


That was Nicolas Sarkozy’s fate in France: he was defeated after losing the support of the center of the electorate.	这就是萨科齐在法国的命运：在失去了中坚选民的支持后，他败掉了大选。


Obama was reelected because the Republican Party lost sight of the center in America.	奥巴马之所以连任，是因为共和党没有认清什么是美国的中坚。


Of course, the greatness of America’s democracy should not hide its deep flaws and current dysfunction.	当然，美国民主的伟大不能掩盖其严重的缺陷和最近的乱象。


The cost of this election cycle surpassed $2 billion – all to reproduce the status quo: the same president, and the same balance of power in the US Congress.	此次大选周期的成本超过了20亿美元——所有这些只是为了复制现状：同样的总统、同样的国会权力平衡。


Money has become a corrosive agent that is eroding and redefining the democratic process, with the mobilization of personal energies giving way to the enlargement of campaign budgets.	金钱成了腐蚀剂，侵蚀并重写着民主进程，个人能量的动员让位给了竞选预算的扩张。


Beyond the issue of money, there is the problem of a system of checks and balances run amok, leading to governmental paralysis.	除了钱的问题，另一个问题是制衡制度的混乱导致政府瘫痪。


“Vetocracy” – reflected in the Republicans’ routine Congressional obstructionism in Obama’s first term – is a threat to democracy.	“民主否决”（Vetocracy）——共和党在奥巴马的第一个任期内总是在国会中阻挠他——是民主的威胁。


Will the party, chastened by its electoral defeat, recognize that its responsibility is to the American people, and not only to its members and followers?	共和党为此受到了大选落败的教训，但它会认识到其责任在于美国人民，而不在于其党员和支持者吗？


Obama’s reelection sends a message, but one that will resonate widely – including at home – only if rhetoric does not depart from reality, as was too often the case during Obama’s first term.	奥巴马的连任给出了一个信号，一个只有在言论不脱离实际的情况下才会引起广泛共鸣（包括在过美国国内）的信号，这在奥巴马的第一个任期中屡试不爽。


America cannot continue to live with the injustices of its health-care system or with crumbling and obsolete infrastructure. Nor can it remain indifferent to the increasingly unacceptable indebtedness of its university students.	美国不能再容忍其医疗卫生��度不公和基础设施陈旧破败的状况继续下去了，也不能再对其大学生日益不可承受的债务重担无动于衷了。


At the same time, while America may no longer be the international actor that it once was, domestic production of shale oil and gas appears set to re-write the US energy equation – as it could for France and other Western countries, which may one day be able to do without the energy supplied by the Middle East.	与此同时，尽管美国也许不再能够像以前那样在国际舞台上一言九鼎，但页岩油气的国内产量也许能够重写美国的能源方程——对法国和其他西方国家也是如此，有朝一日它们或许能够彻底告别能源由中东供应的历史。


America’s main challenge globally is to accept that it will no longer be alone at the top.	美国的主要全球挑战是接受其不再独孤求败的事实。


It has never had to deal with others as equals, unlike traditional European powers, which have done so for centuries.	在历史上，从来没有对手可以和美国等量齐观，这与几百年来争锋相对的传统欧洲大国不同。


China’s challenge, however, may be more difficult.	不过，中国的挑战也许更加困难一些。


It not only has to live with the reality of US power; it must also take into account the American ideal.	它不仅要在美国强大的实力现实面前生存，还得抗衡美国理想。


In 1989, large numbers of Chinese students took over Tiananmen Square to demand more rights, adopting a symbol resembling the Statue of Liberty.	1989年，大批中国学生聚集在天安门广场，要求更多权利，还做了一件类似自由女神的象征物。


Today, too, it is not America’s military strength that threatens or challenges China, but rather the enduring attraction of “the American dream.”	今天也一样，威胁和挑战中国的不是美国的军事优势，而是“美国梦”经久不衰的吸引力。


America’s Third-World Politics	美国式的第三世界政治


CAMBRIDGE – With its presidential election over, the United States can finally take a breather from campaign politics, at least for a while.	发自剑桥——随着总统大选落下帷幕，美国终于（至少有一段时间）可以从选举政治中伸出头来透一口气了。


But an uncomfortable question lingers: How is it possible for the world’s most powerful country and its oldest continuous democracy to exhibit a state of political discourse that is more reminiscent of a failed African state?	但一个令人不快的问题依然萦绕不散：这个世界上最强大的国家，同时也是存续时间最长的民主政体，为何会展现出类似于一个失败非洲国家的政治话语？


Maybe that is too harsh an assessment of Africa’s nascent democracies.	或许这个评价对于非洲那些新生民主国家来说有点太过苛刻了。


If you think I exaggerate, you have not been paying close attention.	但如果你觉得我夸大其辞，那你显然没有认真观察整个事件。


The pandering to extremist groups, the rejection of science, the outright lies and distortions, and the evasion of the real issues that characterized the most recent election cycle set a new low for democratic politics.	本轮选举中那种对极端组织的迎合，对科学的抵制，那些彻头彻尾的谎言和歪论，还有对真实议题的故意回避都堪称民主政治的一个新低点。


Without question, the worst offenders are America’s Republicans, whose leaders have somehow become enraptured by ideas that are beyond the pale in other advanced countries.	毫无疑问，行为最恶劣的要数美国共和党人，其领导人在某种程度上已经被一些其他发达国家无法存在的理念所迷惑。


Of the party’s dozen presidential candidates, only two (Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman) declined to reject scientific evidence concerning global warming and its human causes.	在该党的十余位总统候选者中，只有两位——米特·罗姆尼（Mitt Romney）和乔恩·亨茨曼（Jon Huntsman，又名洪博培）——没有否定与全球变暖及其人类影响因素有关的科学证据。


But, when pressed on it, Romney was sufficiently uncomfortable about his position that he wobbled on the issue.	但在面临压力时，罗姆尼又会对自己所持的立场感到相当不舒服，以致他经常摇摆不定。


The Darwinian theory of evolution has long been a dirty word among Republicans as well.	对于共和党人来说，达尔文进化论一直以来都堪称一句粗口。


Rick Perry, the governor of Texas and an early frontrunner in the Republican primary, called it just a “theory out there,” while Romney himself has had to argue that it is consistent with creationism – the idea that an intelligent force designed the universe and brought it into being.	曾在共和党党内初选中一度领先的德州州长里克·佩里（Rick Perry）说它“不过是一种理论而已”，罗姆尼自己则辩称该理论是与神创论（creationism）——认定是某种智慧力量创造了宇宙并使其存在的理论——相一致的。


Likewise, if there is an archaic idea in economics, it is that the US should return to the Gold Standard.	同样，如果还有什么陈旧经济学理念的话，就废美国应当回归金本位莫属了。


Yet, this idea, too, has strong support within the Republican Party – led by Ron Paul, another contender for the party’s presidential nomination.	但这一理念依然在共和党内部大受欢迎——带头的就是另一位总统提名人罗恩·保罗（Ron Paul）。


No one was surprised when the party’s platform gave a nod to the Gold Standard in its convention in August.	因此当该党在8月党内大会上宣扬金本位的时候，就没有人感到奇怪了。


Most non-Americans would find it crazy that neither Romney nor Barack Obama supported stricter gun-control laws (with Obama making an exception only for assault weapons such as AK-47s), in a country where it is sometimes easier to buy guns than it is to vote.	大部分非美国人都会吃惊地发现在这个买枪有时比投票更容易的国度，无论是罗姆尼和奥巴马都不支持制定更严格的枪支管制条令（奥巴马只说要加强对AK-47这类进攻性武器的监管）。


Most Europeans cannot understand how, in a civilized country, both candidates can favor the death penalty.	大多数欧洲人无法明白为什么在一个文明国家，两个总统候选人都会赞成死刑。


And I won’t even get into the abortion debate.	而我甚至不愿意谈那些关于堕胎的辩论。


Candidate Romney was so cowed by his party’s obsession with low taxes that he never put forth a budget that added up.	总统候选人罗姆尼是如此畏惧本党对低税率的痴迷以致他从未拿出过任何一个增加预算的提案。


It was left to his spinners to explain, as The Economist put it, that this was “necessary rubbish, concocted to persuade the fanatics who vote in the Republican primaries.”	正如《经济学人》评论说：这要留给他背后的写手智囊团去解释，这是一个“试图去说服那些在共和党内初选中投票的狂热分子的‘必要的废话’”。


Obama, for his part, catered to economic nationalists by attacking Romney as an “outsourcing pioneer” and calling him an “outsourcer in chief” – as if outsourcing were evil, could be stopped, or Obama himself had done much to discourage it.	而奥巴马则通过攻击罗姆尼的“业务外包先锋”形象来迎合经济民族主义者，并将对手称之为“首席业务外包官”——似乎业务外包就是洪水猛兽，应该被禁止，或是奥巴马在阻止外包方面作了许多努力似的。


So rampant were the equivocations, untruths, and outright lies from both camps that many media outlets and non-partisan groups maintained running lists of factual distortions.	而那些模棱两可，不实言论以及彻底的谎言在两大竞选阵营中是如此泛滥，以致许多媒体和无党派团体都开始制作一个记录扭曲事实言论的列表。


One of the best known, FactCheck.org, an initiative of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, confessed that this campaign had kept them exceptionally busy.	其中一个最为著名的就是由宾夕法尼亚大学安嫩伯格公共政策中心创立的FactCheck. org，其工作人员承认是大选让他们的工作变得极端忙碌。


Some of the most egregious examples included Obama’s claims that Romney was planning to raise taxes by $2,000 on middle-income taxpayers and/or cut taxes by $5 trillion, and that Romney backed a law that would outlaw “all abortions, even in cases of rape and incest.”	其中一些最恶劣的例子包括奥巴马宣称罗姆尼计划对中等收入纳税人增加人均2000美元税负并/或同时减税5万亿美元，还说罗姆尼支持一项将宣布“所有堕胎，包括由强奸或者乱伦导致”为非法的法律。


Romney went even further, claiming that Obama planned to raise taxes by $4,000 on middle-income taxpayers; that Obama planned “to gut welfare reform by dropping work requirements”; and that Chrysler, bailed out by the Obama administration, was moving all of its Jeep production to China.	而罗姆尼则有过之而无不及，他说奥巴马想向每个中等收入纳税人额外征4000美元的税； 说奥巴马试图“通过降低工作要求来破坏福利改革”而奥巴马政府援助的克莱斯勒车厂正把全套吉普车生产线转移到中国。


None of these claims was true. 	上面这些话没一句是真的。


“It’s been that sort of campaign,” FactCheck.org’s analysts wrote, “filled from beginning to end with deceptive attacks and counterattacks, and dubious claims.” 	FactCheck. org的分析师写到：“这就是那种从头到尾都充斥着不实攻击/反击以及含糊声明的选举。


Meanwhile, over the course of three televised presidential debates and one vice-presidential debate, climate change, the signature issue of our time and the most serious problem confronting our planet, was not mentioned even once.	与此同时，在三场总统候选人和一场副总统候选人电视辩论的全过程中，气候变化——这个我们这个时代的标志性事件以及我们这个星球所面临的最严重问题——甚至一次都没被提到过。


One can draw two possible conclusions from America’s election.	你可以从美国大选中得出两个可能的结论。


One is that the US will ultimately be undone by the poor quality of its democratic discourse, and that it is merely at the start of an inevitable decline.	一是美国最终将被这种低质量的民主华语毁掉，现在仅仅是这个不可逆转下坠过程的开始而已。


The symptoms are there, even if the disease has not yet infected the entire body.	即便这一恶疾尚未感染整个肌体，但症状已然存在了。


The other possibility is that what is said and done during an election makes little difference to a polity’s health.	另外一个可能性则是大选中的言论和行为只会对一个政体的健康产生很小影响。


Campaigns are always a time for cheap populism and kowtowing to single-issue fundamentalists.	选举往往是迎合一个低俗民粹主义以及对单一事务极端主义者拍马屁的时期。


Perhaps what really matters is what happens after a candidate takes office: the quality of the checks and balances within which he or she operates, the advice offered, the decisions taken, and, ultimately, the policies pursued.	或许真正重要的是一位候选人当选总统的所作所为：他执政下的政府权力制衡，所给出的建议，所做的决策，最终则是所追求的政策。


But, if American elections are nothing other than entertainment, why is so much money spent on them, and why do so many people get so exercised over them?	但如果美国大选只是一场娱乐秀的话，又为何要花费那么多钱，为何那么多人付出如此多的心血？


Can the answer be that the outcome would be even worse otherwise?	是否可以得出结论说如果不这样做的话后果将更为严重？


To paraphrase Winston Churchill, elections are the worst way to select a political leader, save for all other methods that have been tried – and nowhere more so than in America.	在此请让我略为修改一下温斯顿·丘吉尔的一句名言：除了其他方式之外，选举是甄选一个政治领导人的最糟糕方式——而这一点在美国显得尤为突出。


America’s Unconfirmed Hostages	美国尚待确认的人质


DENVER – The United States Constitution, which turned 225 years old last summer, is a remarkable document: the provisions of a text written in the eighteenth century continue to guide twenty-first-century governance.	丹佛—去年迎来225岁生日的美国宪法是一份举世瞩目的文件：这份写于18世纪的文档在21世纪仍在指导治国。


We will be reminded of the implications of that in the coming weeks, as President Barack Obama fills senior positions in his second-term administration.	在未来几周，我们将再次听到它的影响——奥巴马将任命其第二任期的政府官员。


In many cases, the process will not be pretty.	在很多方面，这一过程不会漂亮。


Article II of the Constitution stipulates presidential powers that require the “advice and consent of the Senate,” including the nomination of senior officials.	宪法第二条规定了总统权力，该权力——包括任命政府高官——须有“参议院的意见和同意”。


Probably nobody, 225 years ago, had any idea that the number of officials deemed to require Senate confirmation would eventually exceed 1,400, or that Senate confirmation would involve a vetting process that often takes years to complete.	或许225年前不会有人想到需要参议院确认的官员人数最后会超过1 400人，也不会想到参议院的审核过程会常常需要多年才能完成。


Indeed, many people believe that the Senate confirmation process is broken.	事实上，很多人认为参议院的确认程序被破坏了。


They have only to point to the failed attempt to nominate Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the United Nations, to be Hillary Clinton’s successor as Secretary of State, or to the similarly gut-wrenching nomination of former Senator Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense.	他们只消提一下提名美国驻联合国大使苏珊·赖斯（Susan Rice）继希拉里·克林顿之任为国务卿的失败尝试，或令人痛心疾首的提名前参议员查克·哈格尔（Chuck Hagel）为国防部长。


Because of the sheer volume of nominations, most have traditionally sailed through the Senate with so-called unanimous consent, a process by which nominations are placed on the day’s calendar and the calendar is approved in a single voice vote.	由于提名数量庞大，传统上，大部分都会在参议院获得一致通过，即这些提名会卸载日程表上，而日程表被全体无异议地通过。


But that expedited process is becoming rarer nowadays.	但这一快速程序现在越来越罕见了。


A senator may place a “hold” on a nomination for any reason – including personal animus toward the nominee, or, more often, to gain something in exchange.	参议员可以以任何理由“搁置”一项提名——包括对被提名人的个人敌意，或者（也是更常见的原因）以此要求交换条件。


And, increasingly, nominations have become a kind of public circus, attracting all kinds of players to the ring: non-governmental organizations, pundits, local politicians, and virtually anyone with an opinion and a way to express it.	此外，提名日渐成为一桩公共事务，吸引着社会各界的眼球：非政府组织、权威专家、地方政客以及几乎所有抱有观点并有机会表达的人士。


These types of spectacles used to be reserved for the nomination of Supreme Court justices – a lifetime appointment to a nine-member body that can overturn laws passed by Congress and signed by the president.	往常，这些意见通常在最高法院法官任命中才会冒出来。 最高法院法官共九人，为终身制，可以推翻国会通过、总统签字的法案。


But those full-throttle battles have now spilled over to other nominations.	但这一全力以赴的斗争如今已蔓延到其他提名上。


As a result, an individual’s agreement to serve the president for two or three years has become a life-altering – and mind-numbing – experience.	结果，某人愿意为总统效力两三年的决定将成为改变他一生的噩梦般的体验。


Today, any nominee to a position requiring Senate confirmation can expect to spend many hours listing past places of residence, attaching tax returns, detailing family members’ campaign contributions, and answering questions about the employment of domestic help or gardening services and whether such employees were legal, tax-paying US residents.	如今，任何职位的被提名人都要遭受参议院长达数小时的确认程序，交代曾在定居、上交纳税单、上报家族成员的竞选献金情况，并回答雇用仆人和园丁服务以及所雇佣者是否为合法的纳税美国居民等问题。


The vetting process will even go back to one’s teenage years – all to ensure that anything that the Senate’s own investigators can find is known before the nomination is formally submitted.	审查程序甚至要回溯到当事人十几岁的孩提时代，所有这些都是为了确保参议院本身的调查员所能找的发现的东西在提名正式提交前便已众人皆知。


During my career, the Senate confirmed me five times.	在我的职业生涯中，我曾遭遇过五次参议院确认程序。


Each time, the vetting essentially started from scratch.	每一次，审查都会从头开始。


In addition to the countless forms, lengthy questionnaires, and background investigations, there was an interview with a paralegal whose job was to ferret out any information that might conceivably bear on the nomination.	除了数不清的表格、冗长的问卷调查和背景调查，你还需接受法律助理的面试，他的职责是挖掘所有可以从提名中获得的信息。


These interviews included such cheerfully delivered questions as, “Have you ever been arrested for growing marijuana?”	面试中的一些问题令人哭笑不得，比如“你曾经因种植大麻而被捕过吗？


Or, more directly: “Do you take drugs?”  Or, probing further into past activities or behavior, “Have you ever been arrested for public drunkenness?”	”，或者更直接地问“你嗑药吗？ ”或者深度挖掘你过去的行动和行为：“你曾经因在公共场所醉酒而被逮捕过吗？


(“I cannot recall” is probably not a good reply.)	”（或许“我记不清了”可不是好答案。 ）


In the past, a nomination was officially announced before the nominee moved on to the next phase and met with senators to discuss the appointment.	在过去，提名会在被提名人进入下一阶段、由参议院讨论任命事项前正式宣布。


Now, as the process has become more fraught, the Obama administration has introduced a still further preliminary stage in which the nominee engages in a sort of do-it-yourself consultation with senators, after which the administration gauges the reaction and decides whether or not to go through with the nomination.	如今，随着程序越来越复杂，奥巴马政府引入了一个新的提前步骤，被提名人将参与参议院的自助式（do-it-yourself）咨询，然后由政府评估反应，决定是否进入提名程序。


In the case of Susan Rice, the answer was no.	苏珊·赖斯就倒在了这一步骤上。


In the case of Hagel, the administration decided to proceed.	而对于哈格尔，政府决定让他过关。


Once the nomination goes to the Senate, the real fun begins.	任命进入参议院后，真正有趣的阶段才开始。


Some senators issue press announcements: “A fine candidate…” or “I have concerns....”	一些参议员会对媒体说“这是个很好的候选者……”或“我有些担心……”。


In the latter case, the nominee, already beginning to wonder whether the job is worth the aggravation, meets with the senator to clear up “misunderstandings.”	对于后者，被提名人——他已开始迷惑这个职位值不值得如此大动干戈——将与该参议员会面，以打消“误会”。


Unfortunately, there may not be any misunderstanding; the senator is simply angry at the administration about something, or dislikes the nominee for something supposedly said or done previously.	不幸的是，也许根本就没有误会； 参议员仅仅是不忿于政府的某些做法，或不喜欢被提名人此前的某些言行。


In the meantime, various NGOs, sometimes working with hostile senate staff, will be parsing the public record to find some utterance by the nominee – context is often irrelevant – that suggests bad judgment or values.	与此同时，许多非政府组织——有时他们是敌意参议员的同伙——会去挖掘公开记录，寻找被提名人的某些判断失准或价值观不正确的言论（丝毫不顾这些话是在什么情况下说的）。


When I was nominated to be US Ambassador in Iraq, a newspaper article was dug up to insinuate that I had compared North Korea’s human-rights record favorably to that of the US – clear proof that I must be a North Korean sympathizer or a lunatic.	当我被提名为美国驻伊拉克大使时，有人翻出一篇报纸文章暗示我将朝鲜的人权纪录和美国的相提并论，作为我显然是朝���同情者或脑子有问题的明证。


(What I had actually said, to a reporter at a reception, was that all countries need to work on their human-rights record, “even the United States, but North Korea’s is arguably the worst in the world.”)	（事实上，我是在一次招待会上对记者说这句话的，我说的是所有国家都需要改善其人权纪录，“即便是美国也不例外，但朝鲜大概是世界最差。 ”


Allies of the nominee are recruited and pressed into service.	被提名人的盟友也会被找出，并迫使他们就烦。


Doubting senators can be subjected to telephone campaigns by the nominee’s supporters (often to counter similar campaigns from the nominee’s opponents), and even to threats from Senate leaders.	质疑参议员可能会受到被提名人支持者的电话游说（通常是为了与被提名人反对者的类似举动对抗），甚至受到来自参议院领袖的威胁。


Sometimes, opponents of a nominee merely want to make a point, or to cultivate donors (an activity that can seep into any issue in Washington).	有时，被提名人的反对者仅仅是为了表明立场，或者争取献金（在华盛顿，任何问题都会有这种行为渗透）。


When the point is made – or the fundraising goals are achieved – the nominee gets the happy phone call: “It’s done.	在立场已经表明，或者筹资目的已经达到后，被提名人就会接到愉快的电话：“事成了。


The nomination will go through this afternoon.	提名今天下午就能通过。


We’ll call you when the vote takes place.	投票开始时我们会打电话给你。


Congratulations!”	祝贺你！


At that point, the nominee hangs up and says: “What was I thinking?”	”此时，被提名人会边挂电话边说：“我在想什么？ ”


The Usual Suspect	非常嫌疑


BERKELEY – Across the Euro-Atlantic world, recovery from the recession of 2008-2009 remains sluggish and halting, turning what was readily curable cyclical unemployment into structural unemployment.	伯克利—在整个欧洲-大西洋地区，2008—2009年衰退后的复苏一直步履蹒跚，将本可治愈的周期性失业拖成了结构性失业。


And what was a brief hiccup in the process of capital accumulation has turned into a prolonged investment shortfall, which means a lower capital stock and a lower level of real GDP not just today, while the recovery is incomplete, but possibly for decades.	而资本积累过程中的小趔趄也演变成了旷日持久的投资短缺，也就是说，不光是在复苏不力的当下存在资本存量和真实GDP下降的问题，未来数十年可能都将如此。


One legacy of Western Europe’s experience in the 1980’s is a rule of thumb: each year that lower labor-force attachment and reduced capital stock as a result of declining investment depresses production $100 billion below normal implies that productive potential at full employment in future years will be $10 billion below what would otherwise have been forecast.	西欧20世纪80年代的经验留给我们一条拇指规则：在任何一年，只要劳动力工作时间和资本存量因投资的下降而下降，从而导致产出比正常水平低了1 000亿美元，那么在未来年份中，充分就业的生产潜能就会比正常情况的预计值低100亿美元。


The fiscal implications of this are striking.	这条拇指规则的财政效应相当令人吃惊。


Suppose that the United States or the Western European core economies boost their government purchases for next year by $100 billion.	试想一下，美国或西欧核心经济体明年增加1 000亿美元政府购买。


Suppose further that their central banks, while unwilling to extend themselves further in unconventional monetary policy, are also unwilling to stymie elected governments’ policies by offsetting their efforts to stimulate their economies.	再进一步试想一下，它们的中央银行尽管不愿意继续采取非常规货币政策进一步扩大规模，但也不愿意妨碍当选政府的经济刺激措施，让它们难堪。


In that case, a simple constant-monetary-conditions multiplier indicates that we can expect roughly $150 billion of extra GDP.	果真如此的话，简单的恒定货币条件乘数表明，我们将能看到GDP增加大约1 500亿美元。


That boost, in turn, generates $50 billion of extra tax revenue, implying a net addition to the national debt of only $50 billion.	如此规模的提振反过来会带来500亿美元的税收增量，而国民财富水平将仅增加500亿美元。


What is the real (inflation-adjusted) interest rate that the US or Western European core economies will have to pay on that extra $50 billion of debt?	美国或西欧核心经济体需要为这笔500亿美元的新增债务付出怎样的真实（经通胀调整的）利率？


If it is 1%, boosting demand and production by $150 billion next year means that $500 million must be raised each year in the future to keep the debt from growing in real terms.	如果利率为1%，那么在明年提振1 500亿美元的需求和生产意味着在未来需要每年拿出5亿美元来保证这笔债务的真实价值不会增加。


If it is 3%, the required increase in annual tax revenues rises to $1.5 billion a year.	如果利率为3%，那么年税收额必须增加15亿美元。


If it is 5%, the government will need an additional $2.5 billion per year.	如果利率为5%，政府每年需要拿出25亿美元的额外开支。


Assuming that continued subnormal output casts a 10% shadow on future potential output levels, that extra $150 billion of production means that in the future, when the economy has recovered, there will be an extra $15 billion of output – and an extra $5 billion of tax revenue.	假设持续低于正常水平的产出会导致未来潜在产出水平下降10%，那么这1 500亿美元新增产量意味着在未来经济实现复苏时，产出会增加150亿美元，税收会增加50亿美元。


Governments will not have to raise taxes to finance extra debt taken on to fund fiscal boosts.	政府将不必通过增税来为财政刺激所造成的债务融资。


Instead, the supply-side boost to potential output over the long run from expansionary fiscal policy would be highly likely not only to pay for the additional debt needed to finance the spending boost, but also to allow for additional future tax cuts while still balancing the budget.	相反，在长期，扩张性财政政策带来的供给端潜在产出的提振很可能不但能够偿还因提振支出而产生的额外债务，而且能够在不影响预算平衡的前提下创造未来减税空间。


Now this is, to say the least, a highly unusual situation.	让我们再退一步：这是相当反常的情形。


Normally, the multipliers applied to expansions in government purchases are much less than 1.5, because the central bank does not maintain constant monetary conditions as government spending expands, but rather acts to keep the economy on track to meet the monetary authority’s inflation target.	在正常情况下，政府购买扩张乘数要远小于1. 5，这是因为中央银行不会在政府支出扩张的同时维持货币条件不变，而是会采取行动纠正经济运行，使之与货币当局的通胀目标相协调。


A more usual multiplier is the monetary-policy offset multiplier of 0.5 or zero.	更常见的乘数应该是货币政策抵消乘数，大小为0. 5或0。


Moreover, in a normal situation, governments – even the US government and those in Western Europe – cannot run up the national debt and still pay a real interest rate of 1%, or even 3%.	此外，在正常情况下，政府——即使是美国和西欧政府——不可能在国民债务高涨的同时还能享受1%的真实利率，甚至3%也难以达到。


Normally, the math of increasing government purchases tells us that a small or dubious boost to output today brings a heavier financing burden in the future, which makes debt-financed fiscal expansion a bad idea.	常规政府支出增加算术告诉我们，当下产出的微小或可疑提振会增加未来融资负担，照这么说来，债务融资的财政扩征绝不是好主意。


But the situation today is not usual at all.	但当下的状态并不是正常状态。


Today the global economy is, as Ricardo Cabellero of MIT stresses, still desperately short of safe assets.	用麻省理工学院的卡比列罗（Robert Cabellero）的话说，如今，全球经济仍然极度缺乏安全资产。


Investors worldwide are willing to pay extraordinarily high prices for, and accept extraordinarily low interest rates on, core-economy debt, for they value as an extraordinary benefit having a safe asset that they can use as collateral.	全世界的投资者都愿意出极高的价格、接受极低的利率以获得核心经济体债券，因为他们把获得可用于抵押品的安全资产视为无上的好处。


Right now, investors’ preference for safety makes financing additional government debt abnormally cheap, while the long-run shadows cast by prolonged subnormal production and employment make the current sluggish recovery predictably costly.	在当下，投资者对安全的偏好使得增加政府债务的成本不同寻常地低，而产出和���业持续低于正常水平所造成的长期前景阴影会使目前陷入停顿的复苏变得代价高昂。


Given the need to mobilize idle resources in the short run in order to maintain productive potential in the long run, a larger national debt would be, as Alexander Hamilton, the first US treasury secretary, put it, a national blessing.	我们需要在短期动员闲置资源，以保持长期生产潜力，因此，正如美国首任财政部长亚历山大·汉密尔顿所言，增加国民债务利国利民。


The Value of a Pale Blue Dot	“暗淡蓝点”的 价值


Melbourne – The eighteenth-century German philosopher Immanuel Kant wrote: “Two things fill the heart with ever renewed and increasing awe and reverence, the more often and more steadily we meditate upon them: the starry firmament above and the moral law within.”	墨尔本—19世纪的德国哲学家伊曼努尔·康德说过：“有两种东西，我对它们的思考越是深沉和持久，它们在我心灵中唤起的惊奇和敬畏就会日新月异，不断增长，这就是我头上的星空和心中的道德定律。 ”


This year, the 400th anniversary of Galileo’s first use of a telescope, has been declared the International Year of Astronomy, so this seems a good time to ponder Kant’s first source of “awe and reverence.”	今年，是伽利略首次使用望远镜的400周年，同时被宣布为“国际天文年”。 看来正是让我们温故康德老先生“惊奇和敬畏”这句话的恰当时候。


Indeed, the goal of the commemoration – to help the world’s citizens “rediscover their place in the universe” – now has the incidental benefit of distracting us from nasty things nearer to home, like swine flu and the global financial crisis.	在这个富有纪念意义的时刻——让世界公民重新定位自己在宇宙中的位置——让我们可以避开困扰我们当前生活中的事情，例如猪流感和金融危机，将我们的眼光投向星空。


What does astronomy tell us about “the starry firmament above”?	那么，在天文学家眼中的“头顶的星空”是什么呢？


By expanding our grasp of the vastness of the universe, science has, if anything, increased the awe and reverence we feel when we look up on a starry night (assuming, that is, that we have got far enough away from air pollution and excessive street lighting to see the stars properly).	为了帮助我们更加深入地了解宇宙的广博，当我们抬头仰望繁星点点的星空时，（当然，前提是我们的天空没有污染和避开过多的街灯的干扰）科学的发现更增加了我们“惊奇和敬畏”之心。


But, at the same time, our greater knowledge surely forces us to acknowledge that our place in the universe is not particularly significant.	但是，同时，我们越多地了解星空，就越发感觉到我们自身在宇宙中的地位并不是那么特别。


In his essay “Dreams and Facts,” the philosopher Bertrand Russell wrote that our entire Milky Way galaxy is a tiny fragment of the universe, and within this fragment our solar system is “an infinitesimal speck,” and within this speck “our planet is a microscopic dot.”	在他的散文《梦想和现实》一文中，哲学家伯特兰·罗素写道，我们整个银河系在宇宙中就是一个微小的部分，而在这个微小的部分中，我们生存的太阳系就是一个“无穷小的微粒”。 而在这个微粒中，“我们的星球就是显微镜中的一个点”


Today, we don’t need to rely on such verbal descriptions of our planet’s insignificance against the background of our galaxy.	现在，我们不再使用如此的语言来描述我们的星球的微不足道。


The astronomer Carl Sagan suggested that the Voyager space probe capture an image of earth as it reached the outer reaches of our solar system.	宇航员卡尔·萨根说旅行者号宇宙飞船曾经在太阳系的外层拍摄到我们地球的照片。


It did so, in 1990, and Earth shows up in a grainy image as a pale blue dot.	在1990年的拍摄的照片中，地球就像在灰色背景中的一个暗淡蓝点。


If you go to YouTube and search for “Carl Sagan – Pale Blue Dot,” you can see it, and hear Sagan himself telling us that we must cherish our world because everything humans have ever valued exists only on that pale blue dot.	你可以在YouTube的网站上搜索“Carl Sagan – Pale Blue Dot”时，你会看到这段，并能听到萨根亲口告诉我们，我们必须珍惜我们的世界，因为我们人类所生活的前提就是我们拥有这个“暗淡蓝点”


That is a moving experience, but what should we learn from it?	这是一个激动人心的经历，我们从中能得到些什么呢？


Russell sometimes wrote as if the fact that we are a mere speck in a vast universe showed that we don’t really matter all that much: “On this dot, tiny lumps of impure carbon and water, of complicated structure, with somewhat unusual physical and chemical properties, crawl about for a few years, until they are dissolved again into the elements of which they are compounded.”	罗素曾经写道，作为宇宙中的一个微不足道的一个点，我们其实什么都算不上：“在这个点上，这个微小的碳水化合物，一个所谓不寻常的物理化学的复杂体，它慢慢在宇宙中爬行，直到慢慢解体成当初组合成的各种元素。 ”


But no such nihilistic view of our existence follows from the size of our planetary home, and Russell himself was no nihilist.	虽然我们微不足道，但并不证明我们是无政府主义者，罗素自己也不是。


He thought that it was important to confront the fact of our insignificant place in the universe, because he did not want us to live under the illusory comfort of a belief that somehow the world had been created for our sake, and that we are under the benevolent care of an all-powerful creator.	他认为我们要认识到自身在宇宙中的位置，因为我们不能自以为是地认为自己是多么的重要，以为自己是全能的创造者。


“Dreams and Facts” concludes with these stirring words: “No man is liberated from fear who dare not see his place in the world as it is; no man can achieve the greatness of which he is capable until he has allowed himself to see his own littleness.”	《梦想和现实》一书中，他总结到：“当我们没有 意识到自己在世界的位置时候 ，我们就不会没有敬畏。 只有我们意识到自身的渺小，我们才能发挥自身的最大潜能。


After World War II, when the world was divided into nuclear-armed camps threatening each other with mutual destruction, Russell did not take the view that our insignificance, when considered against the vastness of the universe, meant that the end of life on Earth did not matter.  On the contrary, he made nuclear disarmament the chief focus of his political activity for the remainder of his life.	二战之后的世界被两个核阵营分割开来，相互之间都有摧毁对方的能力。 罗素并没有因为我们在宇宙中的渺小而认为地球的毁灭无足轻重。


Sagan took a similar view.	萨根也持有相似的观点。


While seeing the Earth as a whole diminishes the importance of things like national boundaries that divide us, he said, it also “underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.”	当看到我们的地球只是一个微小的一点时，有关谈论到国家界限此类重要问题的时候，他说，“不用太过于关注我们国与国之间的关系，我们应该珍惜我们这个 暗淡蓝点 ，这是我们唯一可以生存的家园。


Al Gore used the “pale blue dot” image at the end of his film, An Inconvenient Truth, suggesting that if we wreck this planet, we have nowhere else to go.	”戈尔在他的电影《难以忽视的真相》的结尾以“ 暗淡蓝点 ”来结束时说道，如果我们破坏了星球，我们就无立足之地。


That’s probably true, even though scientists are now discovering other planets outside our solar system.	或许他们是对的，现在我们的科学家正在太阳系之外寻找其他星球。


Perhaps one day we will find that we are not the only intelligent beings in the universe, and perhaps we will be able to discuss issues of interspecies ethics with such beings.	也许有一天，我们会发现我们并不是宇宙中唯一存在的智能生物。 或许我们会讨论和这些不同物种之间的关系问题。


This brings us back to Kant’s other object of reverence and awe, the moral law within.  What would beings with a completely different evolutionary origin from us – perhaps not even carbon-based life forms – think of our moral law?	这把我们又带回了康德的另一个“惊奇和敬畏”：我们心中的道德。 当我们想到我们内心道德法则的时候，当我们不再是以碳为基础的生命形式时，我们进化的方式会不会又根本的改变呢？


The Value of Being Undervalued	估值偏低的价值


The paramount policy dilemma that emerging markets face nowadays is this: on the one hand, sustained economic growth requires a competitive (read “undervalued”) currency.	新兴市场现今所面临的首要政策困境是：一方面，持续的经济增长需要一种具有竞争力（即“估值偏低”）的货币。


On the other hand, any good news is immediately followed by currency appreciation, making the task of remaining competitive that much harder.	另一方面，在任何的好消息之后接踵而至的就是货币升值，这使得保持竞争力的任务更为艰巨。


So, you finally passed that crucial piece of legislation?	你终于通过了一项至关重要的法律？


Your fiscally responsible political party just won the election?	你的具有财政责任心的政党刚刚赢得了选举？


Or your commodity exports hit the jackpot?	抑或的你商品出口大赚其钱？


Good for you!	那你真行！


But the currency appreciation that follows will likely set off an unsustainable consumption boom, wreak havoc with your export sector, create unemployment, and sap your growth potential.	但随之而来货币升值很可能会引发一股不可持续的消费热潮，损害你所在的出口行业、导致失业并侵蚀你的增长潜力。


Success brings its reward in the form of immediate punishment!	成功以惩罚的形式给予我们回报。


In response, central banks may intervene in currency markets to prevent appreciation, at the cost of accumulating low-yield foreign reserves and diverting themselves from their primary goal of price stability.	作为回应手段，各国央行可能干预货币市场以防止升值发生。 其代价是吃进低回报的外汇储备并使自己偏离价格稳定性这一首要目标。


This is the strategy followed by countries such as China and Argentina.	这是中国和阿根廷这样的国家所遵循的战略。


Or the central bank lets the markets go where they will, at the cost of drawing the ire of business, labor, the rest of the government, and, in fact, practically everyone except financial types.	或者央行让市场顺其自然地发展，其代价是引发商界、劳工、政府其他部门和实际上除了金融界以外所有人的不满。


This is the strategy pursued by countries such as Turkey and South Africa, which have adopted more conventional “inflation targeting” regimes.	这是土耳其和南非等国所实施的战略，他们所遵循的是更传统的“通货膨胀目标制”体制。


The first strategy is problematic because it is unsustainable.	第一种战略是有问题的，因为它是不可持续的。


The second is undesirable because it buys stability at the cost of growth.	第二种则是情非得已，因为它是以增长为代价来获得稳定。


The importance of a competitive currency for economic growth is undeniable.	有竞争力的货币对于经济增长的重要性毋庸置疑。


Virtually every instance of sustained high growth has been accompanied by a significantly depreciated real exchange rate.	几乎每一个持续高增长的先例都有大幅贬值的实际汇率相伴。


This is as true of South Korea and Taiwan in the 1960’s and 1970’s, as it is of Argentina today.	南韩和台湾在1960年代和1970年代是如此，就像当今的阿根廷一样。


Chile made its transition to high growth in the 1980’s on the back of a large depreciation.	智利在货币大幅贬值的背景下于1980年代实现了向高经济增长的过渡。


Since the 1990’s, both China and India have received a huge boost from their undervalued currencies.	自1990年代以来，中国和印度都从其估值偏低的货币中获益良多。


These are just some of the better-known examples.	这还只是一些广为人知的例子。


Looking at the experience of more than 100 countries, I have found in my research that each 10% undervaluation adds 0.3 percentage points to growth.	通过对100多个国家的经验的考察，我在研究中发现（货币）价值每低估百分之十，就会为经济增长率增添0. 3个百分点。


Currency undervaluation is such a potent instrument for growth for the simple reason that it creates incentives for the economy’s growth-promoting sectors.	由于能够激励经济增长促进性产业的发展这一简单的理由，货币估值偏低成为推动经济增长的如此强大的工具。


It increases the profitability of manufacturing and non-traditional agricultural sectors, which are the activities with both the highest level of labor productivity and with the most rapid rates of productivity increase.	它提升了制造和非传统农业部门的盈利性。 而这两个产业部门的活动具有最高水平的劳动生产力和最快的生产力增速。


An undervalued currency enables an economy to integrate into the world economy on the basis of strong export performance.	一种估值偏低的货币使得一个经济体能够以强势的出口表现为基础融入世界经济之中。


It stimulates production (and hence employment), unlike overvaluation, which stimulates consumption.	它刺激生产（继而就业），而不像（货币）估值偏高那样刺激消费。


So what should policymakers do?	那么政策制定者们应该怎么做呢？


First, it is important to realize that a strong and overly volatile currency is not just the central bank’s problem to fix.	首先，非常重要的一点是认识到一种强势且波动性过大的货币不光是央行要解决的问题。


While the central bank bears a good part of the responsibility, it needs support from other parts of the government, most notably from the finance ministry.	尽管央行要负起其中的大部分责任，但它也需要政府其他部门的支持，特别是财政部的支持。


Maintaining a competitive currency requires a rise in domestic saving relative to investment, or a reduction in national expenditure relative to income.	维持一种具有竞争力的货币需要国内的储蓄相对投资有所增长，或是国民支出相对于国民收入有所下降。


Otherwise, the competitiveness gains would be offset by rising inflation.	否则，竞争力的收益会被渐高的通胀抵销。


This means that the fiscal authorities have a big responsibility: to target a structural fiscal surplus that is high enough to generate the space needed for real exchange rate depreciation.	这就意味着财政部门责任重大：要实现一个高得足以为实际的汇率贬值提供空间的结构性财政���余的目标。


This may not be popular, especially in an economic downturn.	这种做法可能不受欢迎，特别是在经济低迷的时期。


But no one has the right to complain about the central bank’s “high-interest rate, appreciated currency” policy when fiscal policy remains too lax for interest rates to be reduced without risking price stability.	但在财政政策过于宽松，不能不冒着损伤价格稳定性的风险来降低利率的情况下，人们就无权抱怨央行的“高利率、升值的货币”政策。


There are other instruments available for increasing domestic saving and reducing consumption besides the fiscal balance.	除了财政平衡，还有其他一些可用于提高国内储蓄并降低消费水平的工具。


Government policies can target private saving directly, by creating incentives for saving through appropriate tax and pension policies.	通过适当的税收和养老金政策鼓励储蓄，政府的政策可以直接以私人储蓄为目标。


Even more importantly, policies can discourage foreign-borrowing-led consumption booms by taxing capital inflows (Chilean-style) or increasing financial intermediaries’ liquidity requirements.	更为重要的是，政策工具可以通过对资本流入征税（智利式的）或提高金融中介的流动性要求来阻碍国外借贷引导型消费潮。


There is little to be gained from letting hot money flow into an economy freely.	任凭热钱向一个经济体自由流入没有什么好处。


With such policies in place, the comfort zone for central banks is enlarged sufficiently to loosen monetary policy.	有了这样一些到位的政策，各央行放松货币政策的适宜空间就有了足够的扩大。


Equally important, the central bank needs to signal to the public that it now cares about the real exchange rate, because it is important to exports, jobs, and sustainable growth.	同样重要的是，央行需要向公众发出这样的讯号，即它现在关注实际汇率，因其对于出口、就业和可持续增长都很重要。


This can be done without announcing a specific target level for the exchange rate.	这样做还无需宣布一个具体的目标汇率水平。


There is huge room to maneuver between the extremes of targeting a specific level of the real exchange rate and disowning any interest in the real exchange rate.	在锁定一个具体的目标汇率水平和否认实际汇率中的任何利益的两个极端之间有极大的发挥余地。