《国家利益》封面文章。AIG主席对亚洲热点问题，及美国政治的看法，鄙视了一下印度。 [美国媒体]

Asia's Future: A Conversation with Maurice R. Greenberg

亚洲的未来：与莫利斯·格林伯格的对话



Jacob Heilbrunn, editor of the National Interest, spoke with Maurice R. Greenberg in mid-November 2017 in New York. Greenberg is chairman emeritus of the Center for the National Interest’s board of directors and chairman and CEO of C.V. Starr & Co., Inc.

《国家利益》的编辑Jacob Heilbrunn于2017年11月中旬在纽约对莫利斯格林伯格进行了访谈。格林伯格是美国国家利益集团（AIG）董事会主席、C.V. Starr & Co. Inc.董事长兼首席执行官的名誉主席。（注：下文中《国家利益》的编辑Jacob Heilbrunn简写为：编辑，Maurice R. Greenberg简写为：格林伯格）

Jacob Heilbrunn: What is your assessment of the approach of China and America to North Korea?

编辑:你对中国和美国对朝鲜的态度有何评价?

Maurice R. Greenberg: When it comes to North Korea, there is no visible change that you can see—obviously there is a lot of gossip about the situation. When I met with President Xi, I asked him directly about North Korea, and he said that they are working on it—he wasn’t very specific. That has to be a high priority for us: South Korea and Japan. If we don’t see progress, then sooner or later, Japan and South Korea will want to become nuclear powers. That is not in China’s interest. Everybody knows that, so the question is obvious: what has to be done?

格林伯格:在朝鲜问题上，你看不到明显的变化——很明显，有很多关于朝鲜局势的流言。当我与中国主席会面时，我直接问了他关于朝鲜的问题，他说他们正在努力——他没有说得很具体。朝鲜问题对我们，包括韩国和日本来说是当务之急。如果我们看不到进展，那么日本和韩国迟早会想要成为拥核国。这并不是中国的利益所在。每个人都知道，所以问题很明显:需要做什么?

It is not the missiles that I am concerned about, it is the leader, Kim Jong-un. How do you change him or get rid of him? It has to be one or the other. I can speculate, but that doesn’t do any good. All the countries involved know what I am thinking as well—they’re thinking the same way. It must be resolved, and it is going to be sooner rather than later.

我担心的不是导弹，而是担心朝鲜领导人金正恩。你如何改变他或摆脱他?必须选一个。我可以推测，但那没有任何好处。所有参与的国家都知道我想的这些，他们也有同样的想法。它必须得到解决，早解决比晚解决好。

Had Europe, France and the United States acted on a timely basis and stopped Hitler before he really started, World War II might have been avoided and millions of people would have been saved. Failure to act is not a great strategy.

如果当时欧洲、法国和美国及时采取行动，在希特勒真正开始之前阻止他，第二次世界大战可能会避免，数百万人将被拯救。不采取行动不是一个好的策略。

Heilbrunn: Do you think Russia will play a role in the resolution?

编辑:你认为俄罗斯会在解决（朝鲜问题）中发挥作用吗?

Greenberg: They are playing a role now by trading with North Korea. President Trump has alluded to this. How do you cut off all trade? China is still trading with North Korea. I don’t know if there is an easy solution. It is unclear how President Trump can influence President Vladimir Putin. They spoke in Vietnam and had conversations on different topics—including Syria, including allegations of interfering with our elections.

格林伯格:他们现在正在和朝鲜进行贸易。特朗普总统提到了这一点。你如何切断所有的贸易往来?中国仍在与朝鲜进行贸易。我不知道有没有简单的解决办法。目前还不清楚特朗普总统将如何影响俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔•普京(Vladimir Putin)。他们在越南发表了讲话，并就包括叙利亚，以及干涉我们选举的指控等不同领域的问题进行了会谈。

Heilbrunn: What should President Trump do next toward China—what would be beneficial moves for American interests?

编辑:特朗普总统下一步应该对中国做什么?采取什么行动对美国利益有好处?

Greenberg: Don’t have a meeting, as President Trump and President Xi did, which from all outward appearances was quite good, but then President Trump departs China and starts hammering on about something different. You have to be consistent with what you are doing. I was in China about the time when President Trump arrived. I am on the advisory board of Tsinghua University, the top university in China. After the advisory board meeting, we met with President Xi. I think President Trump had a much better visit and relationship with President Xi than I think many people realized or acknowledged. Many of the things that China gave in on were being negotiated for some time before, but nonetheless, there was definite progress. China did agree that foreign life insurance companies, which currently could own up to 50 percent of a life operation in China, will go to 51 percent very soon, and in five years, likely to 100 percent, which is a major step.
Whether it applies to other than life companies remains somewhat vague. My guess is the insurance market will open up in a reasonable period of time. That is a good thing. China has more banks and financial services than ever before, and that is good. From the point of view of progress on things that were irking many American businesses, there is some progress, but we should continue to negotiate and move the ball forward.

格林伯格:不要像特朗普总统和中国主席上次那样，就开个会，表面上看起来相当不错的，但后来特朗普总统一离开了中国，就开始对一些不同的事进行抨击。你必须与你正在做的事情保持一致。我在中国的时候，特朗普总统来了。我是中国的顶尖大学清华大学的咨询委员会成员。咨询委员会会议结束后，我们会见了中国主席。我认为，特朗普总统与中国主席的访问和关系要比许多人意识到或承认的要好得多。中国在很多事情上的让步在过去的一段时间都在谈判中，但尽管如此，仍有一定的进展。中国已经同意外国人寿保险公司在中国经营的（占股）达到50%，很快将达到51%，并且在五年内可能达到100%，这是一个重要的进步。
它是否适用于其他公司，仍然有些模糊。我想保险市场会在合理的时间内开放。这是一件好事。中国的银行和金融服务比以往任何时候都多，这是好事。从那些让许多美国企业苦恼的事情上取得进展的观点来看，有了一些进展，但我们应该继续谈判，把球向前推进。

Heilbrunn: One topic that’s faded away is the issue of control over the South China Sea.

编辑:一个逐渐消失的话题是对南中国海的控制问题。

Greenberg: Well, how much is China’s fault and how much is our fault? President Obama did nothing about it. He walked off the stage internationally. And the vacuum got filled right away. China filled the vacuum in Asia, and Russia filled it in the Middle East. That is the reality. Now you want to take it back? Good luck. It is much harder to do.

格林伯格:嗯，中国的失误有多少?我们的失误有多少?奥巴马总统对此无动于衷。他走出了国际舞台。真空马上就被填满了。中国填补了亚洲的真空，俄罗斯填补了中东的空白。这就是现实。现在你想把它拿回来?祝你好运。做（比想）难多了。

Heilbrunn: So you think Obama is the culprit, at bottom?

编辑:你实际上认为奥巴马是罪魁祸首吗?

Greenberg: I think he walked off the stage internationally. You can call it anything you want, define it any way you want, but the fact of the matter is he did. When China first began to build these little rocks into islands, and ignored the decision in the World Court on the Philippines, what did we do? We did nothing.

格林伯格:我认为他走下了国际舞台上。你可以用任何你想要的名称来称呼和定义他，但事实是他确实这样做了。当中国第一次开始把这些小石块建到岛屿上时，却忽视了世界法院对菲律宾的决定，我们做了什么?我们什么也没做。

Heilbrunn: What do you think about the eleven Asian nations agreeing on economic trade, and the United States being on the sidelines?

编辑:你怎么看11个亚洲国家在经济贸易问题上达成一致，而美国却袖手旁观?

Greenberg: I think that was wrong. I think to go around as President Trump does and to say “America First”—why are you saying it that way? I don’t think it helps the relationship at all to say “America First.” Quite the contrary. It is counterproductive. You may believe that, but why advertise it that way?

格林伯格:我认为那是错误的。我认为像特朗普总统那样四处奔走，说“美国第一”——你为什么这么说?我不认为说“美国第一”对我们的关系有任何帮助。“恰恰相反。这是适得其反。你可能相信这一点（美国第一是正确的），但为什么要那样宣传它呢?

Heilbrunn: With all the talk about “America First,” is free trade in danger.

编辑:“美国第一”的说法，会使自由贸易处于危险之中吗?

Greenberg: I don’t think in the rest of the world.

格林伯格:我认为对世界其他地方不会（产生风险）。

Heilbrunn: But what about the United States? We have a lot of conflict now with Mexico and Canada on NAFTA. President Trump periodically threatens to jettison the trade agreement.

编辑:那美国呢?我们现在与墨西哥和加拿大在北美自由贸易协定上有很多冲突。特朗普总统时不时威胁要抛弃贸易协定。

Greenberg: I was very involved in NAFTA during the George H. W. Bush administration. Carla Hills was then the U.S. trade representative and the chief negotiator of NAFTA. I was on her committee and we worked very hard together to get a satisfactory agreement with Mexico and Canada.
The bottom line is this: you can’t have it all one way. There has to be a balance. Things change and periodically trade agreements have to be reviewed to make sure that you’re getting the results that you intended, and to check whether a change has taken place that requires some modification—that is always the case, so I don’t fault that. But the tone you adopt, how you say it and how you go about it, is very important. Mutual benefit, not a futile attempt to extract unilateral concessions and pocket the gains, is the key.

格林伯格:在乔治·布什政府时期，我深度参与了北美自由贸易协定。卡拉·希尔当时是美国贸易代表和北美自由贸易协定的首席谈判代表。我是她的委员会成员，我们一起努力工作，与墨西哥和加拿大达成了令人满意的协议。
底线是:你不可能拥有一切。必须有一个平衡。事情会发生变化，定期的贸易协议必须被审查，以确保你得到了你想要的结果，并且检查（事情）是否发生了变化，需要做出修正——总是这样，所以我认为（那样做）没有错。但是你采用的语气，你怎么说以及你怎么做，都是非常重要的。关键是互利，而不是徒劳无功地试图获得单方面的让步和利益。

Heilbrunn: So are we ceding the ground globally, as some claim, to China?

编辑:那么，我们是否像某些人所宣称的那样，正在放弃全球范围（的影响力），让给中国?

Greenberg: I think we are conceding a great deal of it. Appearances are very important.

格林伯格:我认为我们正在大量的弃权让步。表面迹象是很重要的。

Heilbrunn: What about the prognosis for Russia? There’s Putin, and then what happens next?

编辑:俄罗斯接下来会如何?还是普京（当总统）吗，接下来会发生什么?

Greenberg: Well, he will be around until he dies. He is not a president, he is an authoritarian.


格林伯格:嗯，他会一直呆到死。他不是总统，他是一个独裁主义者。

Heilbrunn: How did Russia end up going down this road?

编辑:俄罗斯是怎么走到这条路上的?

Greenberg: The Chinese as well are looking at that, at what happened to Russia—or the Soviet Union after 1989 when it ended up collapsing—and they don’t want to make the same mistake of promoting policies that lead to internal dissolution. So in that sense, Russia, from the Chinese viewpoint, is an example of what not to do.

格林伯格:中国人也正在观察俄罗斯发生了什么，或者1989年苏联解体后发生的事情——他们不想犯同样的错误，推动导致内部解体的政策。所以从这个意义上讲，从中国的观点来看俄罗斯，（俄罗斯）是一个不应效仿的例子。

Heilbrunn: Tensions are mounting in another region: the Middle East. How do you view the region’s future?

编辑:另一个紧张局势正在加剧的地方：中东。你如何看待该地区的未来?

Greenberg: If Lebanon goes down, Iran is the winner. If Saudi Arabia then becomes in danger, we will probably be there to help them. Russia has been on the side of Iran; we’ve got to neutralize the Iranians.

格林伯格:如果黎巴嫩倒下，伊朗就是赢家。如果沙特阿拉伯陷入危险，我们很可能会帮助他们。俄罗斯一直站在伊朗一边;我们必须压制伊朗人。

Heilbrunn: Do you foresee another war in the Middle East?

编辑:你认为中东还会有战争吗?

Greenberg: It can happen—and we would be involved.

格林伯格:会发生——我们也会参与其中。

Heilbrunn: How likely is it that Trump would reach some kind of an accommodation with Moscow?

编辑:特朗普与莫斯科达成某种和解的可能性有多大?

Greenberg: I would say this: a world where the U.S. and China are allies is a much safer world than if China and Russia are allies. That would be a concern. So we have to keep that from occurring. We have to try and neutralize Russia, not give in to them, but on the other hand, not treat them like they are a third-rate country.

格林伯格:我想说的是:在这个世界上，美国和中国做盟友，比中国和俄罗斯是盟友要安全得多。这将是一个令人担忧的问题。所以我们必须防止这种情况的发生。我们必须尝试压制俄罗斯，而不是屈服于他们，但另一方面，不要像对待一个三流国家那样对待他们。

Heilbrunn: So you prefer a kind of Asia-first foreign policy: join up as far as possible with China to promote world stability.

编辑:所以你更喜欢亚洲第一的外交政策:尽可能与中国联合，以促进世界稳定。

Greenberg: Yes, but we have to have a good relationship with India at the same time. China is going to resist that.

格林伯格:是的，但是我们必须同时与印度保持良好的关系。中国将抵制这种做法。

Heilbrunn: Do you think India’s in fact more likely to do well than China in the coming decades? There’s a lot of speculation there as well.

编辑:你认为印度在未来几十年里会更有可能比中国做得更好吗?也有很多这方面的猜测。

Greenberg: It will take more than a decade. They’ve got some real serious problems. Even Apple is having some trouble in India; Amazon wants to deal there; there are some smart people, but you look at the people, and how many are doing well and how many are not. They have a long way to go. The climate is getting worse, not better; education is lagging.

格林伯格:这需要十多年的时间。他们有一些严重的问题。甚至苹果在印度也遇到了一些麻烦;亚马逊想要在那做生意;那里有一些聪明人，但是你看看这些人，有多少人做得很好，有多少人没有。他们还有很长的路要走。气候正在恶化，而不是好转;教育也落后。

Heilbrunn: So you would put your chips on China, as it were.

编辑:所以你会把你的筹码放在中国。

Greenberg: Absolutely. Change in China is startling. Even in technology, the way things are going, they’ll be the first nation to have electric cars in numbers.

格林伯格:当然。中国的变化令人吃惊。即使在技术方面，也在产生变化，他们也是（全球）拥有电动汽车最多的国家。

Heilbrunn: When you look at the state of America right now, where the political system, even with Republican majorities, has essentially ground to a halt, are you feeling less optimistic about America’s future, or do you think we’re going to emerge from this in good shape?

编辑:你观察现在美国的政治体系，即使是共和党是多数派，基本上已经停滞不前了，你认为美国的未来不那么乐观了吗?还是你认为我们会摆脱这个状态进入更好的状态?

Greenberg: All during history, there have been rising powers and declining powers. You had the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire, the French Empire and the British Empire; what happened? They reach a certain point, and their population changes—the mix of the population, the development of the population—a country that is united becomes splintered and becomes a declining power. What is happening here? During my lifetime, I’ve never seen the country so divided. Two totally different countries. We are declining until we get that turned around.
And China—in everything I’ve seen and read, I’ve never seen a nation develop so rapidly. A country with a billion, four hundred million people with a history that goes back many hundreds of years, and for hundreds of years was static—look what is happening, in a relatively brief time. Since I first went to China, it’s like a different country today. That is a reality.

格林伯格:纵观历史，有崛起的政权有衰落的政权。看看希腊帝国，罗马帝国，法兰西帝国和大英帝国发生了什么事?他们到达了一个特定的点，随着人口的变化——人口的融合，人口的发展——一个统一的国家变得分裂，成为一个衰落的国家。我们这里（美国）正在发生什么?在我的一生中，我从未见过这个国家如此分裂。（像）两个完全不同的国家。我们正在衰落，直到我们得到扭转。
而且，在我所看的和阅读的所有东西中，我从未见过一个国家（像中国这样）发展得如此迅速。一个拥有10亿人口的国家，一个回溯到几百年前，历史上拥有4亿人口，几百年停滞不前的国家，看看在相对较短的时间内正在发生什么。从我第一次去中国，到今天它看起来就像一个不同的国家。这是一个现实。

Heilbrunn: What is your assessment of Trump as president?

编辑:你对川普做总统的评价是什么?

Greenberg: Well, he’s different than any president we’ve ever had. His approach of America First—I can understand what he wants to achieve. I don’t agree with the way he is going about it. Obviously you can’t isolate yourself from the rest of the world. You have to try and influence the rest of the world but not threaten it. You have give and take; you can’t just take and not give. There is more to foreign policy many times than just a trade agreement. You have to have friends in the world that you are doing things with besides just trade.

格林伯格:嗯，他和我们以前的任何一位总统都不一样。他想要的美国优先——我能理解他想要达到什么目标。我不同意他为了达到（美国优先）所使用的方法。显然，你不能把自己与世界隔离开来。你必须尝试影响世界其他地方，但不要威胁到它。你给予和索取;你不能只索取而不给予。外交政策远不止是一项贸易协定。在这个世界上，你除了贸易与朋友进行贸易，还有很多事必须要做。

Heilbrunn: Looking at Trump now, and the America First rhetoric, have we reached the end of the era of Republican internationalism that they symbolized, and have we now moved into a new and different phase?

编辑:现在看看特朗普，以及美国优先的言论，我们是不是已经到了以共和为象征的时代的终点，我们现在已经进入了一个新的、不同的阶段了吗?

Greenberg: I would hope that we haven’t. I think there is a residue of that—more than a residue—of people that understand that. I don’t think it is dead forever. I do not believe that.

格林伯格:我希望我们没有。我认为美国有共和制的残留——不仅仅是一种残余物——人们能够理解这一点。我不认为它（政治制度）永远是死（不变）的。我不相信（政治制度永远保持不变）。

Heilbrunn: It’s surprised many people that the Republicans are having as much trouble as they are given that they control all three branches of government.

编辑:让很多人吃惊的是，共和党人在控制政府三大权力部门的同时，也遇到了同样多的麻烦。

Greenberg: They are. I am concerned that they will lose the House and maybe the Senate as well. You want to change Obamacare? Fine, but you can’t take everything away. You simply can’t. There is a lot to be done in health care. I’ve been on the board of New York–Presbyterian Hospital for years. I chaired it for a long time. I know what has to be done. Once a person is diagnosed with a disease in a hospital and a treatment is recommended, get them out of the hospital. There are all kinds of downsized facilities you can use at a fraction of the cost. Take the pressure off the emergency rooms as well. It’s crazy the way it is.

格林伯格:是的，我担心他们会失去众议院，也可能失去参议院。你想改变奥巴马医改?好吧，但你不能什么都不留。你只是不能。在医疗保健方面有很多事情要做。我在纽约长老会医院的董事会工作了很多年。我主持了很长时间。我知道必须做什么。一个人在医院一旦被确诊为某种疾病和推荐治疗建议（给他们）,让他们走出医院。你可以低成本的使用各种精简的设施。还要减轻急诊室的压力。这个方式（废除奥巴马健保）很疯狂。

Heilbrunn: It is interesting: we spend the most and our results are not good. It all seems to get steeped in ideological disputes.

编辑:这很有趣:我们花的钱最多，然而结果不怎么好。这一切似乎都充满了意识形态的纷争。

Greenberg: It is, and every state has different problems.

格林伯格:是的，每个州都有不同的问题。

Heilbrunn: So on the optimism scale, one to ten, where are you?

编辑:乐观的范围从1到10，你打地分数是多少?

Greenberg: I don’t lose faith in America. I mean, we have the right to speak out, and that is important. Some people listen in government. Hopefully in time more will listen. I haven’t lost faith in our country.

格林伯格:我不会对美国失去信心。我的意思是，我们有权利说出来，这很重要。有些人听政府的。希望到时更多的人会倾听。我对我们的国家没有失去信心。

Heilbrunn: Well, we’ve clawed back out of every crisis that we’ve experienced, but we are in a crisis again, aren’t we?

编辑:嗯，我们已经摆脱了我们经历过的每一次危机，但我们又陷入了危机，不是吗?

Greenberg: Yes, we are.

格林伯格:是的。

Heilbrunn: To some extent it seems like an artificially inflicted crisis. Because we’re not in a Great Depression. We’re not mired in some catastrophic war abroad.

编辑:在某种程度上，这似乎是人为造成的危机。因为我们没有陷入大萧条。我们没有陷入国外的灾难性战争。

Greenberg: No, but the quality of life for many people hasn’t improved very much, and that is important. Creating more jobs, better jobs, is important. We are living in an era where machines are going to take over human jobs. We have to change our education system. They are creating more jobs in China than we are in the high-tech area.

格林伯格:确实没有，但是很多人的生活质量并没有得到很大改善，这一点很重要。创造更多的就业机会，更好的工作，是很重要的。我们生活在一个机器将取代人类工作的时代。我们必须改变我们的教育体制。在高科技领域，中国创造的就业机会比我们多。

Heilbrunn: So your worry, if I understand you correctly, is that the Chinese are more nimble and flexible than we are and adapting faster to new global realities.

编辑:所以你的担心，如果我能正确理解你的话，那就是中国人比我们更聪明、更灵活，更能快速适应新的全球现实。

Greenberg: Now they are—absolutely.

格林伯格:现在他们绝对是这样的。

Heilbrunn: And if we don’t react, then that’s a death sentence for America as the leading power in the world?

编辑:如果我们不做出反应，那么这是美国作为世界头号强国的死刑判决吗?

Greenberg: That’s the endgame, no question about it. I am not saying we have to fight China; what I’m saying is we have to look in the mirror at what we are doing, what we are not doing and what we are capable of doing. China is learning a lot from us, and they want to buy into many areas that are open. They learn very quickly. I don’t deny them the right to do that—we want the same rights no matter where it may be. And we have to start talking with one voice, not many different voices.

格林伯格:毫无疑问，这是最后的结果。我不是说我们必须对抗中国;我想说的是，我们必须照照镜子，看看我们在做什么，我们没有做什么，我们有能力做什么。中国正在向我们学习很多东西，他们想要购买很多开放（购买）的领域。他们学习得很快。我不否认他们有权这样做——无论在哪里，我们都想拥有同样的权利。我们必须开始用一个声音说话，而不是很多不同的声音。