FT社评：特朗普或毁掉世界贸易规则

The framework of rules for global trade has withstood some fearsome ructions over the past few years. The rise of China, which aroused resentment about job losses across the world; the global financial crisis and the threat of renewed global protectionism; mounting inequality within some rich countries frequently blamed on trade: all have strained the World Trade Organisation’s ability to keep the peace.

全球贸易规则的整体框架近年来经受了数番可怕的风浪：中国崛起，引发了世界各国对本国就业流失的愤怒;全球金融危机，以及全球保护主义复苏的威胁;部分富裕国家不平等状况日益加剧，其根源常被归咎于贸易。这一切都使世界贸易组织(WTO)不得不拼尽全力去维持和平。

Happily, even though the WTO’s rulemaking function has more or less ground to a halt, the laws set down in previous agreements have largely restrained destructive protectionist impulses. All that, however, could end with the US administration of Donald Trump, who regards trade deficits as prima facie evidence of rule-breaking by the counterpart country and holds institutions like the WTO in contempt.

幸运的是，尽管WTO制定规则的职能或多或少陷入了停滞，但此前协议中订立的法规在很大程度上抑制了保护主义的破坏性冲动。然而，这种局面可能在唐纳德•特朗普(Donald Trump)领导的新一届美国政府手上终结。特朗普把贸易逆差视为贸易伙伴国破坏规则的初步证据，并且蔑视WTO之类的机构。

The revelation that administration officials have asked the Office of the US Trade Representative to draft a list of unilateral measures to go after countries such as China is disturbing if not surprising. The US already has some of the world’s more far-reaching forms of “trade defence” — antidumping and antisubsidy duties — in its arsenal. To go further towards unilateralism, rather than bringing cases to the WTO, threatens to irreparably harm the multilateral trading system as it currently exists.

据爆料，特朗普政府官员已要求美国贸易代表办公室(Office of the US Trade Representative)拟定一份对付中国等国家的单边措施清单。这一举动虽说并不出人意料，却令人不安。美国已经拥有一些影响较广的“贸易防御”工具，即反倾销和反补贴关税。进一步走向单边主义、而不愿诉诸WTO，可能对现行多边贸易体系造成不可挽回的伤害。

There is little doubt that Mr Trump could inflict serious damage with the tools he inherits. Congress has seen fit to give the presidency far more destructive than constructive power. It requires special “trade promotion authority” for the White House to put a trade deal to Congress for an up-or-down vote. But the president on his own can use a variety of pieces of legislation to impose emergency import tariffs based on ill-defined concepts of national security, a “large and serious” balance of payments deficit, a national emergency or retaliation against “unjustifiable” restrictive practices.

毫无疑问，特朗普可以利用他继承的工具来制造严重损害。美国国会觉得赋予总统破坏性远大于建设性的权力是合适的。白宫要将一项贸易协议提交国会表决，需要获得特别“贸易促进授权”。但总统本人可以利用各种各样的法律，依据国家安全、“庞大、严重的”收支逆差、国家紧急状态或对“不正当”限制措施予以报复等定义模糊的概念来征收紧急进口关税。

Of course, these measures will be subject to challenge in US courts or the WTO’s dispute settlement process. But there is always the possibility that Mr Trump will simply ignore a WTO ruling and treat any punitive tariffs imposed on US exports by the litigant trading partner as a hostile act.

当然，这些措施会受到美国法院或WTO争端解决机制的挑战。但始终存在这样的可能性，特朗普可能干脆忽视WTO的裁决，把发生诉讼的贸易伙伴国对美国出口征收惩罚性关税视作敌对行为。

This will do far more harm than good, within the US and without. The system has, more or less, worked. Under Barack Obama, the USTR became much more aggressive about taking China to the WTO, and won a string of cases including on rare earths, autos and auto parts and windpower equipment. The Chinese economy remains heavily distorted by state intervention, but by and large it has complied with the rulings of the dispute settlement process since it joined the WTO in 2001. Beijing has come to recognise WTO litigation is not an intrinsically hostile act but a way to defuse conflict.

这样做的危害将大于好处，对美国国内和美国以外的地区都是如此。全球贸易体系或多或少发挥了作用。在巴拉克•奥巴马(Barack Obama)治下，美国贸易代表办公室在将中国诉诸WTO方面变得激进得多，并在稀土、汽车与汽车零部件以及风力发电设备等领域打赢了一系列官司。中国经济仍被政府干预严重扭曲，但自2001年加入WTO以来，中国大体上服从WTO争端解决机制的裁决。北京方面已经意识到，在WTO框架内提起诉讼并非本质上敌对的行为，而是解决冲突的途径。

Integrating a vast trading economy the size and dynamism of China’s into the global trading system has not been easy. But it would surely have been more confrontational and disruptive had many of those disputes not been mediated by the WTO.

让一个拥有中国这般规模和活力的巨大贸易经济体融入全球贸易体系并未易事。但是，假如许多争端不是通过WTO调解，中国肯定会表现出更强的对抗性和破坏性。

Given the time it will take to bring a case to the WTO against unilateral American protectionism, there will be a danger that trading partners will react to US measures with emergency defensive tariffs of their own.

考虑到把一个控诉美国单方面采取保护主义措施的案件提交至WTO所需的时间，贸易伙伴国有可能也通过实施紧急防御性关税去回击美国的做法。

The threat of a modern repeat of the disastrous Smoot-Hawley tariff, which kicked off the tit-for-tat trade protectionism of the Great Depression, has often been cited in recent decades. If these indications from Mr Trump’s administration are followed through, it is closer than ever to coming true.

近几十年来，人们经常提到在现代社会重启灾难性的“司莫特-郝利关税”(Smoot-Hawley Tariff)的威胁——这种关税开启了大萧条(Great Depression)时期针锋相对的贸易保护主义。如果特朗普政府的这些迹象延续下去，那么这种关税与现实之间的距离会比以往任何时候都要近。