为什么减少贸易赤字解决不了美国经济的根本问题
2018年中美贸易大战不会出现了，至少现在不会。周一，在特朗普政府至少暂时放弃对中国进口商品征收关税的威胁之后，全球股市上涨。
But as negotiations proceed, a big question for the administration remains. Is the goal to make some supporters in farm states and energy extraction industries happy, and shrink the trade deficit temporarily?
但随着谈判的进行，特朗普政府依然面临着一个大问题。我们的目标是取悦农业州和能源开采行业的一些支持者，以及暂时减少贸易赤字吗?
Or is it to reset a dysfunctional economic relationship between the world’s two biggest economies, in hope of ensuring that the United States maintains competitive footing in the industries of the future — even if dividends aren’t immediate?
还是重置世界上最大的两个经济体之间失调的经济关系，以期确保美国在未来的产业中占据有竞争力的地位——尽管我们不能马上获得回报?
Over the weekend, Mr. Trump’s team de-escalated the trade war while seemingly choosing Option A.
上周末，特朗普的团队似乎选择了前者，降级了贸易战。
The problem with this strategy is not just that the trade peace might prove less than durable. It creates a risk that after all the bluster and threats of the last few months, there will be no payoff in terms of solutions to bigger, longer-term problems.
这一战略的问题不仅在于，这种贸易和平可能会被证明无法长久存在。它还造成了一种风险，那就是，经过过去几个月所有的恫吓与威胁，我们在解决更大、更长期的问题方面不会获得任何回报。
The president has made reducing trade deficits a primary goal of international economic policy, ignoring the views of mainstream economists who view trade deficits as more a consequence of investment and savings decisions than a scorecard of national success. To that end he has demanded that the Chinese work to reduce the $335 billion trade deficit by $200 billion.
特朗普总统将减少贸易赤字作为国际经济政策的首要目标，忽视了主流经济学家的观点，他们认为，贸易赤字更多是投资和储蓄决策的结果，而非国家成功的计分卡。因此，特朗普要求中国减少3350亿美元的贸易赤字中的2000亿美元。
A joint statement from American and Chinese negotiators emphasized “meaningful increases in United States agriculture and energy exports.” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Monday emphasized the potential for China to buy liquefied natural gas. And the president tweeted that under a potential deal, China would buy “practically as much as our Farmers can produce.”
美国和中国谈判代表发表的联合声明强调了“美国农业和能源出口的有意义增长”。周一，美国财政部长史蒂文·努钦(Steven Mnuchin)强调了中国购买液化天然气的潜力。特朗普总统在Twitter上表示，根据一项潜在协议，“我们的农民能生产多少，中国就将购买多少”。
If those purchases materialize, there could be political dividends for the president. American farmers have much to lose from a potential Chinese trade war, and stepped-up Chinese purchases of American soybeans and other commodities could be a boon. If those purchases are large enough to move the dial on the overall trade deficit with China, it would create an easy-to-measure win for the president on his pet issue.
如果这些购买成为现实，那么总统可能会获得政治上的好处。如果与中国发生贸易战，那么，美国农民会损失惨重，而中国增加购买美国的大豆等商品可能对他们有利。如果购买量足够大，能够改变与中国的整体贸易逆差，那么它将为总统创造他最看重的胜利。
“This is the stuff you can count and measure,” said Gary Clyde Hufbauer, a trade scholar with the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “It’s short-term, and instantaneous.”
“这个是可以计算和衡量的，”彼得森国际经济研究所(Peterson Institute for International Economics)的贸易学者加里·克莱德·赫夫鲍尔(Gary Clyde Hufbauer)说，“这是短期的、临时的。”
The administration’s approach might quickly reduce the headline level of the trade deficit, but it largely ignores the frustrations of American sectors that are the most promising sources for creating future good export-related jobs.
美国政府的做法可能会迅速降低贸易赤字的总体水平，但是对于美国那些最有望创造未来良好出口相关工作岗位的行业，它们的挫败感在很大程度上被忽略了。
American companies that make automobiles, semiconductors and other complex products bemoan Chinese government requirements that force American firms to form joint ventures with Chinese companies, sharing their technology. They accuse those partners of widespread theft of intellectual property as they try to catch up in advanced technologies. Many American firms face Chinese competition that receives heavy state subsidies.
制造汽车和半导体等复杂产品的美国企业抱怨中国政府迫使它们与中国企业建立合资企业，并分享技术。他们指责这些合作伙伴在努力追赶先进技术的过程中，普遍采取窃取知识产权的行为。许多美国企业面对着获得高额政府补贴的中国竞争对手。
These are some of the most stubborn, longstanding issues in American-Chinese economic relations. But they aren’t likely to be fixed overnight, and even if the United States wins concessions, it won’t necessarily affect the trade deficit — especially in the next couple of years.
这些属于美中经济关系中最棘手、存在时间最长的问题。但它们不太可能在一夜之间得到解决，并且即使美国赢得让步，也不一定会影响贸易逆差——尤其是在接下来几年里。
This helps explain why some prominent advocates of a tougher stance toward China — who applauded President Trump’s tariff threats — are critical of the turn the negotiations have taken. 一些主张对中国采取更强硬立场的著名人士曾经称赞特朗普总统的关税威胁，这有助于解释他们为何对谈判发生的转变持批评态度。
The tariffs the president threatened “are designed to address China’s technology theft and their plans to dominate advanced and high technology manufacturing,” said Dan DiMicco, chairman of the Coalition for a Prosperous America, which advocates for a hard-line stance, in a statement. By contrast, “an agreement to sell agricultural and energy commodities is the result of bad negotiating and bad economic strategy.”
总统威胁要征收的关税“是用来解决中国的技术窃取和他们主导先进高科技制造业的计划”，支持采取强硬立场的团体“繁荣美国联盟”(Coalition for a Prosperous America)的主席丹尼尔·迪米科(Daniel DiMicco)在一份声明中说。相比之下，“出售农业和能源商品的协议是谈判不力和经济战略不佳的结果。”
Exports of agriculture were directly or indirectly responsible for 524,000 jobs in 2014, according to analysis by the International Trade Administration; petroleum and coal products were responsible for an additional 255,000. But combined that is less than 7 percent of the jobs tied to exports that year.
从国际贸易局(International Trade Administration)的分析来看，2014年农业出口直接或间接创造了52.4万个就业岗位，石油和煤炭产品又创造了25.5万个。但它们加起来不到当年和出口相关的工作岗位的7%。
Sectors like computers and electronic products and machinery were responsible for substantially more export-related jobs.
计算机、电子产品和机械等领域创造的出口相关工作岗位要多得多。
Mr. Hufbauer notes similarities with a strategy that American trade negotiators pursued with Japan in the 1980s, of “voluntary import agreements” in which the Japanese agreed to import more American semiconductors and other products.
赫夫鲍尔指出，目前的情况与80年代美国贸易谈判代表同日本谈判时采取的“自愿进口协议”策略之间有相似之处。在“自愿进口协议”中，日本同意从美国进口更多半导体和其他产品。
Whatever the near-term benefits for particular American exporters, Japanese trade surpluses kept rising. 无论美国特定的出口商获得了什么短期利益，日本的贸易顺差持续增加。
In some ways the back-and-forth with China in recent days fits a common Trump negotiating pattern: Threaten bold, potentially disruptive action while making major demands, then seek a deal that is considerably more incremental.
在某些方面，最近几天与中国的交锋符合一种常见的特朗普谈判模式：威胁采取可能会引起混乱的大胆行动，同时提出主要的要求，然后争取达成一项更为渐进的协议。
Even some who are critical of the administration see value in more systemic rethinking of the relationship between the United States and China.
甚至一些对特朗普政府持批评态度的人，也看到对美中关系进行更系统的反思是有价值的。
“Trade is not stuff of immovable structural forces of globalization,” said Jennifer Harris, a fellow at the Roosevelt Institute and former State Department official. “These are political choices that were made, and they could be unmade. So I disagree with a lot of the specific policy choices, but I at least appreciate the space Trump is opening up for us to remind ourselves how much agency we have.”
“贸易并不是全球化不可动摇的结构性力量，”罗斯福研究所(Roosevelt Institute)研究员、前国务院官员珍妮弗·哈里斯(Jennifer Harris)说。“这些都是人们做出的政治选择，它们可以取消。因此，我不认同很多具体的政策选择，但我至少感谢特朗普为我们开辟的空间，提醒我们认识到自己有多大的作用。”
But, she added, in this round of negotiations “it’s not clear what we’re getting for a lot of the concessions that have been made.”
但她接着说，在这一轮谈判中，“不清楚我们在做出大量让步后会得到什么。”
The Trump administration negotiating team has deep internal fissures, and this is an area where the hard-liners, including U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, are advocating the path that includes the highest risk of near-term economic disruption but also the greater likelihood of shifting the Chinese-American economic relationship in the longer run.
特朗普政府的谈判团队存在严重的内部分歧。其中，美国贸易代表罗伯特·莱特希泽(Robert Lighthizer)等强硬派主张的路线在近期扰乱经济的风险最高，但从长远来看改变中美经济关系的可能性也更大。
The thing to watch in the weeks ahead is whether the administration faction seeking short-term wins and trade peace continues to prevail.
未来几周要关注的是，政府内部寻求短期获胜与贸易和平的派系是否继续占上风。
