联合国安理会前主席：美国每一次对外干涉，都是给中国的一个礼物 [俄罗斯媒体]

Every US foreign intervention is a gift to China – ex-president of UNSC

联合国安理会前主席：美国每一次对外干涉，都是给中国的一个礼物



The US trade war against China is putting the global economy and world order to the test. Which side has more to lose? We ask Kishore Mahbubani, former president of the United Nations Security Council.

美国针对中国的贸易战，给全球经济和世界秩序带来考验。哪一方会失去更多？我们询问了联合国安理会前主席Kishore Mahbubani。

Follow @SophieCo_RT

Sophie Shevardnadze: Mr. Mahbubani, it’s really great to have you in our show. Welcome. So lots to talk about. We’re going to start with your book. You believe that the Western global domination is over. Your latest book that we have displayed here is actually titled “Has the West lost it? A provocation”. I have a couple of questions regarding the title right away - why has the West “lost” it? To who has it lost it? And what has it lost - the knowledge, the understanding of the global processes, or the economic might and domination?

Sophie Shevardnadze：Mahbubani先生，很高兴能邀请您参加我们的节目。欢迎。要讨论的东西可真多。我们将从您的书开始说起。你认为西方的全球霸权已经终结。我们现在展示的这本书，《西方输掉了吗？一次挑衅》，是您的最新着作。根据标题，我现在有几个问题：为什么西方“输掉”了？输给了谁？输在何处？是对全球发展的知识、理解，还是经济实力以及主导权？



KM: I think, they can pay lip service, but they don’t understand it deep in their guts that the world has changed.

KM: 我认为，他们嘴上会这样说，但在内心身处，他们并没有理解这个事实，即世界已经改变。

SS: Are they in denial?

SS: 他们否认吗？

KM: I’ll give you a simple example. The world’s two most important global economic organisations are the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Today you have a rule that says that to become the head of the IMF you must be a European. To become the head of the World Bank you must be an American. And Asians which make up the vast majority of the world’s population and which have the most dynamic economies in the world today don’t qualify to run the IMF and the World Bank. That’s a sign of resistance to the idea that they now have to share power...

KM: 我给你举个简单的例子。全世界最重要的两个全球经济组织，是国际货币基金组织和世界银行。但如今，有这么一条规则，要想成为IMF的总裁，你必须是欧洲人。要想成为世界银行的行长，你必须是美国人。而亚洲人口占世界绝大多数，拥有世界上最具活力的经济，他们却没有资格管理国际货币基金组织和世界银行。这是一个信号，表明必须分享权力的想法正在遭到他们的抵制……

SS: Resistance or snobbism and supremacy?

SS: 是抵制，还是势利和霸权？



SS: If you don’t mind we’re going to go through all of those Ms step by step. But we’ll start with Trump. You’ve mentioned the WTO - he wants to pull America out of WTO, he was sceptical of the organisation from the very beginning of his presidency. If that actually happens, if America is out of the organisation what would that mean for WTO and for the global economy?

SS: 如果你不介意，我们一步一步的讨论那几个M。我们还是从特朗普说起。你提到了WTO，而他想让美国退出WTO，他从上任伊始就对该组织持怀疑态度。如果这真的发生了，如果美国退出了世贸组织，这对世贸组织和全球经济意味着什么?

KM: Here I actually have some good news for you. The good news is that the rest of the world will carry on with the WTO with or without the U.S. Just a few days ago I had a conversation with Mr. Pascal Lamy, the former head of the WTO for many years. He said: “Kishore, the WTO can carry on without the United States, and the United States surprisingly will pay a prize if it leaves the WTO.” So this is where, I think, the United States should think very carefully because at the end of the day if you want to curb some of the unfair economic processes of China - and some of them are unfair clearly - then use the WTO to change China’s behavior.

KM: 实际上我有一些好消息要告诉你。好消息是，不管美国留下与否，世界其他国家都将继续留在世贸组织。就在几天前，我与世贸组织前主席帕斯卡尔·拉米先生进行了交谈。他说:“Kishore，世贸组织可以在没有美国的情况下继续存在，如果美国离开世贸组织，美国将会付出代价。”因此，我认为，美国应该非常谨慎地考虑这个问题，因为归根结底，如果你想遏制中国的一些不公平的经济进程——其中一些进程显然是不公平的——那就利用WTO来纠正中国的行为。

SS: You mentioned that your book will help the West, America to adjust to the changing world. But right now in the current American political climate everything is based on patriotism and the “America First” concept and that is causing so much traction. What would it take for the Americans to realise that they’re not No.1 any more?

SS: 你提到你的书将有助于西方、美国适应不断变化的世界。但在目前的美国政治环境下，一切都是基于爱国主义和“美国优先”的理念，这带来了很大的牵制力。美国人要怎样才能意识到自己不再是世界第一呢？

KM: I’m not anti-American. I speak as a friend of America. And I want to help America adjust to the new world, and it’s the world that America could live comfortably in because Americans will continue to do well in this large globalising economy with rising Asian economies. It just has to give up it’s desire to dominate the world and dominate the planet. And I think, most Americans if you give them a sensible choice “Do you really want to continue domination and pay a heavy prize? Or do you want to have a good life for your citizens?” - in my book I give a very shocking statistics which is that two thirds of American households do not have 500 dollars in emergency cash. That’s crazy! Your population doesn’t have money and you’re burning money maintaining 13 aircraft carriers around the world! Why? Why don’t you change your policies and do something that is good for the American people in the long run?

KM：我不反美。我在以美国人朋友的身份说话。我想帮助美国适应新的世界，这是一个美国人可以舒适生活的世界，因为随着亚洲经济体的崛起，美国人也将继续在这个庞大的全球化经济中大显身手。但它必须放弃统治世界和地球的欲望。我还认为，对于大多数美国人而言，如果你让他们做出一个明智的选择：“你是想继续霸权，并付出沉重的代价，还是想让你的公民过上美好的生活？”在我的书中，我列出了一个非常令人震惊的数据，那就是三分之二的美国家庭没有500美元的应急现金。这太疯狂了！你的人民没有钱，而你却在浪费钱，在世界各地维护13艘航空母舰！为什么？你为什么不改变你的政策，做一些从长远来看对美国人民有益的事情呢？

SS: If you take the last two presidents, for example, Barack Obama which you mentioned, and he was a very peaceful president, he came with a message of peace but then he was obliged to do so many interventions. It’s because the president doesn’t always decide. It’s the establishment…

SS: 如果要以前两任总统为例，比如你提到的巴拉克?奥巴马，他是一位非常和平的总统，他带来了和平的信息，但随后他不得不进行许多干预。这是做决定的并不总是总统，而是美国当局……

KM: That’s right.

KM: 说得对。

SS: If you look at Trump he clearly became President on this new wave of people wanting to live better in America and not really caring that much about the rest of the world because that’s oversees for them and doesn’t take care of their problem of having less than 500 dollars in security cash. But then Trump came and he can't do the things that he wants to do because of the establishment. So when you say “Americans should realise…” - who are the “Americans”? The people clearly want what you’re saying, the last two presidents wanted a change, but it’s not like they were able to do much...

SS: 如果你看看特朗普，他成为总统，显然是一股新的浪潮推动的结果，这股浪潮是由那些想要在美国获得更好生活的人们形成的，他们并不真正在意全世界其他国家，对他们来说，那太遥远了，而且与他们的“救命钱不到500美元”的困境没有关系。所以你说“美国人应该意识到……”，那些美国人是谁？那些人明显想听你说的话，过去两任总统想要做出改变，但他们似乎力有未逮……



KM: I spoke to one of the leading trade economists of the world when I was in Harvard University in February this year. He said to me: “Kishore, Donald Trump doesn’t understand the basics of trade economics. He thinks like a businessman: a deficit is a loss, a surplus is a profit.” That’s rubbish. All countries live by the theory of international trade: even if you have deficit you’re benefiting because you’re buying a product at lower cost from somebody who can make it cheaper and better. If you do an objective audit and put all the factors in America is actually one of the biggest beneficiaries of the current trading order. It has a surplus in services, it doesn’t measure that. More importantly, the U.S. dollar is the global reserve currency. That means that Chinese workers have to work hard 24 hours a day to manufacture things to sell to America. How does America pay for that? It prints dollars. Come on, you’re having a very good trade! You print dollars, you’re getting hard workers’ products. America’s benefiting. Most sophisticated Americans know that America is benefiting enormously from the current system. And therefore the one dangerous thing that Donald Trump is doing is that he’s giving the rest of the world an incentive to move away from the U.S. dollar. And if the rest of the world moves away from the U.S. dollar the impact on America will be disastrous because you can no longer print dollars to buy products.

KM: 今年2月，我在哈佛大学与一位世界领先的贸易经济学家进行了交谈。他对我说:“Kishore，唐纳德特朗普不懂贸易经济学的基本知识。他像商人一样思考——赤字代表损失，盈余代表利润。”这纯属无稽之谈。所有国家都根据国际贸易理论运作：即使有赤字，你也会从中受益，因为你可以从别人那里以更低的成本购买产品，而别人可以以把产品生产得更便宜而且更好。如果进行一个客观的审计，把所有的因素都考虑在内，会发现美国实际上是当前贸易秩序的最大受益者之一。它在服务方面存在盈余，但它没有衡量这一点。更重要的是，美元是全球储备货币。这意味着中国工人必须每天24小时辛勤工作，生产产品销往美国。美国为此付出了什么？不过是印刷的美元。得了吧，你们现在的生意已经获利丰厚了！你们只需要印刷美元，就能得到勤劳的工人生产的产品。美国人从中受益。大多数老练的美国人都知道，美国从当前的体系中获益良多。因此，唐纳德特朗普正在做的一件危险的事情，他正在给世界其他地区一个动机，让他们脱离美元。如果世界其他地区都不再使用美元，对美国的影响将是灾难性的，因为他们不能再印刷美元来购买产品了。

SS: I don’t think he thinks in that light. I think for him the primary goal is to undermine China. He made no secret of that from day one when he came. I was actually reading this analysis from Barclays Capital, they are saying that this war on tariffs would actually be more detrimental for China than America because China’s economy is more dependent on exports than American economy. So maybe this strange tactics of Trump that many people do not understand is actually justified in the long term, if he wants to undermine China?

SS: 我认为他没有那样想。我认为他的主要目标是削弱中国。从他上台的第一天起，他就对这一点毫不隐瞒。我读了巴克莱资本的分析，他们说因为中国经济比美国经济更依赖出口，所以关税战争对中国而言，比对美国更有害。所以，如果特朗普想要破坏中国，那么从长远来看，这种很多人都不理解的奇怪策略或许是合理的？

KM: Well, you’re right, he might succeed. But believe me, it is a fact that there will be pain for America, there will be pain for China. Let me ask you a simple question: is it easier for a democracy to accept pain, or is it easier for an authoritarian government, like China, to accept pain? The Chinese population as far as I know (I’ve spent two months in China recently) are strongly supportive of the Chinese government, they say: “If America is trying to bully us we will pay the price, we will carry on.” So I think it’s a big mistake to underestimate Chinese resolve. Of course, China is going to pay the price, but in the long-run China cannot afford to be seen to be weak in the face of such pressure. China will stay firm by contrast. As you know, Donald Trump is going to face very difficult elections in November. And if he does badly in November he will be so distracted by the domestic issues that the trade war with China will be put aside.

KM: 你说得对，他可能会成功。但请相信我，美国和中国都将遭受痛苦，这是一个事实。让我问你一个简单的问题：民主国家更容易接受痛苦，还是像中国这样的威权政府更容易接受痛苦？据我所知，中国人民（我最近在中国呆了两个月）强烈支持中国政府，他们说:“如果美国想要欺负我们，我们会付出这个代价，我们将坚持下去。”因此，我认为低估中国的决心是一个重大错误。当然，中国将为此付出代价，但从长远来看，中国承受不起在这种压力面前显露软弱的后果。相比之下，中国将保持强硬。众所周知，唐纳德·特朗普将在11月面临非常艰难的选举。如果他在11月表现不佳，他将会被国内问题分心，以至于与中国的贸易战将被搁置一边。

SS: But do you understand where it’s coming from when he wants to undermine China economically and militarily? Because he feels threatened by China? Do you understand why he’s doing that? Is it justified in any way?

SS: 但是他想要从经济和军事上削弱中国，你知道这种想法是从何而来的吗？因为他感受到中国的威胁吗？你知道他为什么要那样做吗？这种做法存在某种程度上的合理性吗？

KM: I would say in that sense, if you want to understand his thinking you have to read the writings of Steve Bannon. And Steve Bannon actually believes that America should be number one forever, and if China is about to overtake we must undermine China. And that is actually a strong school of thought in Washington DC who believe that America should undermine China and prevent it from overtaking it. But this cannot be done, it’s a mission impossible. China, just by the sheer laws of mathematics with the population that is four times the size of the United States of America, if you think that an average Chinese is even half as smart as an American, China will have the economy which will be twice the size of America. And as you now the Chinese are as smart as any Europeans. And the mistake that these American thinkers are making is thinking that these two last centuries of Western domination is normal. Actually, as I said it was an aberration, because from year one to the year 1820 the two largest economies were always those of China and India. So this aberration has to come to an end when you cannot fight.

KM: 要我说，从这个意义上说，如果你想理解他的想法，你必须读史蒂夫班农的作品。史蒂夫班农实际上认为，美国应该永远是世界第一，如果中国即将超越美国，我们就必须削弱中国。在华盛顿特区，这种思想流派实际上很强大，他们认为美国应该削弱中国，阻止它超越自己。但这是不可能完成的任务。仅通过纯粹的数字计算，就知道中国的人口是美国的四倍，即使普通中国人只有美国人一半聪明，中国的经济规模也将达到美国的两倍。而你也知道，中国人与任何欧洲人一样聪明。这些美国思想家所犯的错误在于，他们认为过去两个世纪的西方统治是正常的。实际上，正如我所说，这是一种反常现象，因为从公元1年到1820年，全世界最大的两个经济体一直是中国和印度。所以当他们打不下去的时候，这种失常就会结束。



SS: So talking precisely about that and another M from the three Ms you’ve written that the western elites do not understand that it is in their interest to be prudent and non-interventionist because every intervention comes with repercussions. You could have understood from the intervention of 2003 that the consequences were disastrous, you just shouldn’t do it any more over and over again. But the truth is that this course of action of Westerners interfering in other people’s affairs is still on the table and going pretty strong. I do not believe that is because the Western leaders are stupid or don’t have an understanding or reason. I just don’t understand why. I understand that they are smart people, I understand that this doesn’t work, and it’s been proven that it doesn’t work, but it is still happening and it is an official line of action. Why?

SS: 所以准确的说，你书中的三个M中的最后一个，就是西方精英所不理解的地方，他们不知道行事谨慎和不干涉主义是符合他们的利益的，因为每次干预都会带来反响。从2003年的干预中他们就应该明白，干预的后果是灾难性的，不能再一而再再而三的做这种事。但现实在于，西方国家干预其他国家事务的进程依然在持续当中，并且愈演愈烈。我觉得这并不是因为西方领导人愚不可及，不能理解或者毫无理智。我就是不理解为什么。我明白他们是聪明人。我明白这是行不通的，事实也证明这是行不通的，但它仍在发生，而且成为官方的行动方针。为什么？

KM: Well, it’s very hard to give up habits of two hundred years…

KM: 抛弃200年的习惯是很难的……

SS: Old habits die hard?

SS: 积习难改？

KM: Old habits die hard, exactly. For example, the British-French intervention in Libya was a disaster. The result of the British-French intervention in Libya was a flood of migrants into Europe, it led to the rise of far-right parties in Europe. It shows you the dangers of intervention. Why? It is actually very puzzling. I completely appreciate your question. This society that has produced the best thinkers for so long have completely lost the art of strategic thinking. And I can tell you one point that I make in my book that every time the United States intervenes and invades in another country, for example, its intervention in Iraq was a geopolitical gift to China. It gave China 10 years to keep growing while America was busy fighting a war. And in that decade something remarkable happened. In year 2000 the United States’ GNP (the nominal market terms) was eight times the size of China. By the last year it was only 1.6 times. So while America was busy fighting wars China was busy growing its economy. And that shows the strategic stupidity of the United States.

KM: 确实，积习难改。例如，英法对利比亚的干涉就是一场灾难。英法对利比亚干涉的结果，导致难民涌向欧洲，进而导致欧洲极右翼政党的崛起。这就向人们展示了干涉的危险之处。为什么？实际上很令人费解。我很感激你的问题。这个社会长期以来培养出最好的思想家，而现在它已经完全丧失了战略思维的艺术。我可以告诉你们一点，我在书中也提出来，每当美国干预和入侵另一个国家，例如它对伊拉克的干预，就是给中国送上了一份地缘政治礼物。它给了中国10年的时间来保持增长，而美国却忙于打仗。在那十年里发生了一些不同寻常的事情。2000年，美国的国民生产总值(名义市场价格)是中国的8倍。而到了去年，却仅有1.6倍。因此，当美国忙于打仗时，中国却忙于发展经济。这显示了美国在战略上的愚蠢。

SS: But on the other hand, do you blame the Westerners for feeling so superior about their systems? The standards of living in Europe or in America are light years ahead if you compare it to any other country in the world…

SS: 但另一方面，西方人对自己的制度感觉如此优越，你会因此而责怪他们吗？如果把欧洲或美国的生活水平与世界上任何其他国家相比，他们的生活水平都要领先好几光年……

KM: Well, you haven’t been to Japan and Singapore then…

KM: 那么你没有去过日本和新加坡吧……

SS: That’s right, I’m sorry.

SS: 你说的对，我道歉。

KM: No actually you’re fine. The most important thing a society needs is to provide hope for its young people. And it’s the societies where the young people are the most optimistic are the happiest societies on planet Earth. And trust me, if you looking for optimism in young people don’t come to Europe. And if you looking for optimism in young people today don’t even go to America because Americans are also very troubled about their future which is why they voted for Trump. If you want to find the most optimistic populations come to Asia, come to China, India, Indonesia, South-East Asia, and you’ll find incredibly optimistic young people. So clearly in terms of not where you’re today but where you will be tomorrow it’s very hard to beat the optimism of Asia.

KM: 不，实际上你没错。一个社会最重要的事情是给年轻人提供希望。年轻人最乐观的社会是全地球最快乐的社会。相信我，如果你想在年轻人中寻找乐观，不要来欧洲。如果你在今天的年轻人中寻找乐观，甚至不要去美国，因为美国人对自己的未来也很担心，这就是他们投票给特朗普的原因。如果你想找到最乐观的人来亚洲，来中国，印度，印度尼西亚，东南亚，你会发现非常乐观的年轻人。所以很明显，如果不考虑你今天的位置，而是考虑你明天的位置，亚洲的乐观情绪是很难战胜的。



SS: Thank you so much for this wonderful insight. I really recommend all of you to read this amazing book by this amazing man, and hopefully we’ll have you as a guest really soon again.

SS: 十分感谢你的精彩观点。我真的建议大家都来读这本精彩人物撰写的精彩着作，希望我们早日再次邀请您来做客。

KM: Thank you, my pleasure.

KM: 谢谢，这是我的荣幸。