中国是巨人吗？还只不过是纸龙？ [美国媒体]

Is China a colossus, and will the 21st century belong to the Chinese, as many think?  Or is China a paper dragon?  Let's see.

像很多人认为的哪样，中国是巨人,21世纪属于中国吗？还只不过是纸龙？



The impressive economic growth China has experienced in the last 40 years started in 1972 with President Nixon's rapprochement meeting with Chairman Mao.

让人印象深刻的中国经济增长从1972年尼克松与中国行重建关系开始已经持续了40余年，

From that point, China's growth went into warp drive when President Bill Clinton signed a China Trade Bill in 2001, which gave China a permanent most favored trade status.  Also under Bill Clinton, the U.S. approved China's entry as a member into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. 

从那时开始到2001年克林顿与中国签订中国贸易法案，中国的增长便打开了曲速引擎，此法案给予了长期的最惠国待遇。同一年，克林顿政府同意中国进入世界贸易组织。

The thought behind granting China these trade privileges – and they are privileges – was that the totalitarian communist regime would mellow and move toward a more open, liberal type of democracy.  That did not prove to be the case.  As Steven Mosher, Asian expert and author of Bully of Asia: Why China's Dream is a Threat to World Order, says, instead, the U.S. "created a monster" in building up China.  To quote him: "I think allowing China into the World Trade Organization must rank as one of the greatest strategic blunders by any great power in human history."  This may be an overstatement, but not by much.

隐藏在同意给中国贸易特权-也确实是有特权后面的心思是，极权GC政权会变成温和，开放和民主的自由形式。但事与愿违，就像亚洲专家和《亚洲恶霸》的作者Steven Mosher所认为的：为什么中国的梦想是世界秩序的威胁，美国帮助中国是在养虎贻患。“我认为让中国进入世贸组织是人类历史上强权所犯的最大战略错误之一”，这也许有些夸张，便并不太多。

Looking at these events in retrospect, the Wall Street Journal called them a "transformational moment in the global economy – the beginning of a new era in globalization."

回顾这些事件，华尔街日报称之为“世界经济的分水岭--全球化新时代的开始”

And indeed it was, for no sooner was the ink dry on these moves than companies began relocating factories (i.e., jobs) and capital to China.  What Bill Clinton considered the last greatest legislative victory of his presidency was in fact the beginning of the hollowing out of much of America's industrial base and an explosion in U.S. trade deficits.

事实确认如此，协议墨水未干，美国公司便开始迁移工厂和资本到中国。克林顿认这是他总统任期的最后一大伟大立法胜利，事实上它是美国的工业基础空心化和贸易赤字膨胀的开端。

That's the history.  Today, China is the second largest economy in the world behind the U.S.  Some polls show that even Americans think China is already number one.  On top of that, China is building a modern military and seems anxious to replace the U.S. as the country that sets the norms for international trade. 

这是历史，今天，中国是排在美国之后的世界第二天经济体，有些调查甚至认为中国是第一。除此之外，中国正在打造现代军队，渴望取代设立世界贸易规则的美国，

As formidable as China may appear, some see it as a paper dragon.  Each step in China's rise was aided and abetted, and in some cases actually engineered, by the United States.  This happened by several means.  First, China's trade with the U.S., which was key to its growth, has been asymmetric from the start.  China got far more from the agreements than it ever gave.  Not only were the formalities skewed to China's favor, but U.S. leadership steadfastly turned a blind eye to copyright and patent infringements and blatant theft by China of American technology and trade secrets.  Bully of Asia cites our own FBI's accounting of these thefts to be worth $600 billion per year. 

尽管中国像以上数量所呈现出一般强大，有人却认为它不过是纸龙罢了。中国上升的每一步伴随着援助和怂恿，有些案例甚至是由美国代为设计。这有多重意义，首先，中国增长的关键--与美国的贸易从开始便不对称。中国所得到的远比付出的多，不止是条款向中国倾斜，还有美国领导层对于中国对版权和专利的侵犯，和美国科技和贸易机密的公开窃取无动于衷。《亚洲恶霸》引用FBI的调查认为这些盗窃值6000亿美金每年。

It is undeniable that for their own reasons, the U.S. financial, political, and foreign affairs elite each wanted China to succeed by means fair and foul, even if it was at America's expense. 

无法否认美国的财政，政治和外事精英都为了一已之私而希望中国利用一切规则成功，即使花的是美国的钱（去成功）

America also contributed to China's rise in other ways.  As Peter Zeihan points out in The Accidental Superpower, the China we see on maps today is an anomaly.  Geographically and historically, China is divided into three distinct regions – the north of the militaristic Han, the central part of the traders, and the southern area of secessionists.  These parts do not naturally hold together.  The different regions want different things and access to the world on different terms. 

美国也在其它方面对中国的上升作出贡献. Peter Zeihan在《偶然的超级大国》中指出，我们今天在地图上所看到的中国一个反常物。地理上和历史上来说，中国分成三个地区：军国主义汉族的北方，贸易商人的中部，以及分裂主者的南部。这三部份并未自然结合，不同的区域需求不同，进入世界的方式也不同。
译者：小伙子你怕是不知道秦始皇吧？

In addition to the wealth that came with  trade, there were other American factors that have allowed these regions to coalesce into a coherent whole.  It was America's victory in the Pacific in WWII that eliminated the main threat to China, which was Japan.  Prior to the war, Japan took whatever in wanted in China and left the hinterland scraps to the Chinese.  China gained true sovereignty only with Japan's unconditional surrender in 1945.  And it was not only the Japanese navy that historically hamstrung China, but also European ones as well.  These too were eliminated from the Pacific, directly by the Japanese in the war and indirectly by U.S. actions in Europe afterward.

除了贸易带来的财富，还有其它的美国因素使得这些区域得以统一。二战美国在太平洋的胜利消灭了中国的主要威胁--日本，在战争结束前，日本在中国夺取了其所需要的一切，只留下腹地残渣给中国人。中国在1945年日本无条件投降后才取得主权，而且不止是日本海军，还有欧洲也掠夺了中国。尽管他们在二战中被日本，战后被美国在欧洲的行动所赶出太平洋。

As Zeihan puts it, America "crafted the best of all worlds for the Chinese.  It eliminated the only significant military and economic rivals in East Asia.  It all but banned European influence east of India.  And it provided both the strategic freedom and economic means to attempt true Chinese unification." 

就像Zeihan所说的，美国为中国打造了最好的东西，不但帮其消灭了东亚的唯一军事和经济对手，阻挡了欧洲在东印度的影响力，还对其提供了战略自由和经济方法来完成统一

But that's all water under the bridge.  What about today?  The unvarnished fact is that China is still greatly dependent on America for its economic stability and even cohesion.  In the Brenton Woods world, which America implemented, the Chinese, like others, took advantage and designed their economy to be export-driven, basically aiming at the open U.S. markets.  The result: Ten to 15 percent of China's GDP depends on exports to the U.S.  And because much of this trade is unfair, China enjoyed a continual trade surplus with America – some $275 billion in 2017 alone.  Should the U.S. decide to play hardball on trade or just merely demand that cross country-trade be fair, China's internal stability would be shaken.  And the Chinese know it.

当然这是无法改变的事实，但如今呢？一个无法掩饰的事实是中国的经济稳定性和内聚力仍强烈依赖于美国。在美国所执行的布雷顿森林体系中，中国也像其它国家一样，利用并设计其出口驱动型经济，目标就是开放的美国市场。因为不公平的贸易，中国享受了连续的贸易顺差，光2017年就有约2750亿美金，如果美国在贸易中强硬或要求跨国贸易必须公平，中国内部的稳定性就会动摇--中国人自己也知道。

Also, to feed its massive export machine, China has become the world's largest importer of a wide variety of basic materials like high-tech components, plastics, wood, food, etc., with oil being the most prominent.  The problem here is that China is hemmed in.  Its maritime routes run beside countries like Japan, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Singapore.  If any one of these countries should become hostile, China's shipping could be disrupted.  What prevents this from happening is not the Chinese navy, not now or in the foreseeable future.  It's the U.S. Navy and the willingness of America to keep the sea lanes open for all.

此外，为了喂饱他们的出口机器，中国已成为世界最大的原材料进口商，包括高科技元件，塑胶，木头，食品等等，其中石油份额最大。这里最大的问题的中国的通道被限制，其海军在日本，菲律宾，印尼，新加坡等周坡游荡。如果有任何以上国家变得敌对，中国的货运就会被扰乱。防止这一切动乱发生的力量不是现在也不是可见将来的中国海军，而是美国海军和美国的意志在保护航道通畅。

The thing is this.  America does not have to do anything directly to harm China.  All that has to happen to shake China is for the U.S. not to become isolationist, but just to 1) adopt a diminished, a more traditional, interest in the world and 2) insist on fair trade. 

事情是这样的，美国没有必要做任何直接伤害中国的事，不是做孤立主义者来动摇中国，而是：
1)采取弱化的，更为传统的世界利益对待方式
2）坚持公平贸易

Some fear that if the U.S. demanded fair trade with China and an end to its technology theft, this would start a trade war.  But as President Trump recently said, when America is constantly running trade deficits of hundreds of billions of dollars each year, a trade war is "good and easy to win."  Although the globalists and Chinese apologists will dispute that point, the president's logic is hard to refute. 

有人担忧一旦美国要求中国进行公平贸易并结束科技盗窃，贸易战就会开打。但就像川普总统最近所说的，当美国年复一年损失数千亿美元时，贸易战“很好，很容易赢”。尽管全球主义者和中国辩护者会为此争论不休，总统的逻辑却很难被驳倒。

And even if for some reason the U.S. continues to accommodate China indefinitely, the Chinese still face a combination of nearly insurmountable problems, ranging from China's enormous debt to its inherent corruption and polluted environment to its unsolvable upside-down demographics.  Given all this, it is disputable that China will still exist as a recognizable entity in 30 years.

即使因为其它的原因，美国仍旧无限期地接纳中国，中国人仍旧面临着诸多几乎无法克服的问题，从巨额债务，内部腐败，环境污染到无解的人口结构颠倒（老龄化）。基于上述考虑，在未来30年里，中国仍旧是一个有影响力的实体是值得讨论的。

China is much more fragile than commonly believed.  It may indeed be a paper dragon.

中国远比普遍认识的要脆弱，也许它真的就是一条纸龙。