Quora：特朗普宣布将对所有进口钢铁和铝产品征收关税。美国会失去他在欧洲和北美的盟友吗？ [美国媒体]

Quora: Will U.S lose European andNorth American allies to China, given that President Trump is going to hit U.Sallies with the same tariffs as China? What is the point of being an ally whenthe ally gets the same treatment as the "enemy"?

Quora问答背景：特朗普宣布将对所有进口钢铁和铝产品征收关税。美国会失去他在欧洲和北美的盟友吗？作为美国的盟友，在进口关税上却遭受和“敌人”(中国)同样的对待，这到底有何意义？


Robin Daverman, World traveler
LOL! This is like one of the funniest questions I have seen. In case youhaven’t noticed - the so-called “trade wars” are almost always exclusivelyamong friendly nations.

LOL，这是我看到最搞笑的问题。也许你完全没意识到，所谓的贸易战争几乎只发生于友好国家之间。

You see, if you are indeed perceived as a hostile nation, there would behardly any trade to begin with. Basically, anything that can be “weaponized”,you wouldn’t want to allow a dependency on a potentially hostile power. A vastarray of trade items can be “weaponized”, like food, water, energy,telecommunications, critical raw and processed materials, machinery and parts,transportation, banking, etc. So all these things are off-limit. Otherwise,what do you think will happen if you get in a piff with Country A, when CountryA is your sole supplier of bread? How long can you last without bread? Duh. Andthen, with all of those things that can be “weaponized” off limit, what do youhave left to trade with each other? Underwear and perfumes? LOL!

你想，如果你被看作是一个敌对国家的话，那么几乎一开始就没有任何贸易存在。 基本上来说，任何可能武器化的东西，你都不会允许它依赖于潜在的敌对势力。一大批的贸易品都可以武器化，如食物、水、能源、电信设备，关键原料和半成品原料，机械设备和部件，交通运输设备，银行业等等。这些都可以禁止。否则的话，如果你和国家A发生冲突时，你认为会发生什么呢？假如A是你们面包的唯一供应商？没有了面包你能维持多久？所以当所有的这些东西被禁止时，双方之间还剩下什么能贸易？内衣和香水吗？LOL

How much does Russia trade with the US, for example?

例如，俄罗斯对美国的贸易额有多少呢？

Not among the top 15 here. What about the US trade with Russia?

美国还没能排进前15，那么美国对俄罗斯的贸易额有如何呢？



About $20 billion a year. About the same level as Kazakhstan.

大概一年200亿美元左右，同哈沙克斯坦一个水平

TRADE WARS ARE FOR ALLIES. If you are not an ally, there is no “trade” to“war” over!
So what do you get as an “ally”? Well you don’t get bombs, blockades, andgeneral embargoes. Those type of measures are reserved for hostile powers.Trade wars, though, really only work with one’s allies. Allies that you trustenough to develop a trading relationship with. So “being an ally” means thatyou don’t want to kill each other. You may even defend each other in a war. Butyou still want to be paid. I mean, if you look back a bit, to the years afterWWII - the UK was still paying the US for the WWII debt until 2006. UK settles WWII debts to allies
In 2014, countries are stillpaying off debt from World War One
显然，贸易战争是为盟友准备的。假如你不是他的“盟友”，那么他就没有可以用来制裁你的贸易品。(译注：这里的盟友只是金融贸易方面的，比如我们加入WTO后，和全球国家都有了这种盟友关系)
那么作为盟友，有什么好处呢？你不会被轰炸，被封锁和禁运。这些措施是为敌对势力保留的。贸易战争真的只是对盟友起作用。作为同盟意味着你不会想要杀死对方，你们甚至可以在战争中相互保卫彼此。但是你还是需要付出代价，我是说，回头看一看，直到2006年，英国还在偿还二战中对美国的债务。2014，还有些国家在偿还一战的债务。

So what about China? Well China is busy trying to be an “ally” toeverybody - the US, the EU, Russia.
·        The Core Interest of the US is smoothinternational trade. China says, I follow all the rules you set out in WTO,World Bank, and IMF.
·        The Core Interest of the EU is EuropeanIntegration. China says, name me another country who’s been more supportive ofEuropean Integration than I have been.
·        The Core Interest of Russia is Security.China supports Russia’s security interest through Shanghai Cooperation Organisation
·        …

中国又如何呢？好吧，中国一直在致力于和任何人做“盟友”（贸易伙伴）-美国、欧盟和俄罗斯。
l  美国的核心利益是自由国际贸易。中国说，我遵守WTO、世界银行和IMF中你设立的所有规则。
l  欧盟的核心利益是欧洲一体化。中国问到告诉我任何一个比我们还支持欧洲一体化的国家。
l  俄罗斯的核心利益是自身安全。中国通过上合组织来支持俄罗斯。

You can’t stomp on somebody’s toes if you want him as a customer! Generally speaking, if you want to be a reliable trade partner toeverybody, you have to make the commitment that you will NOT weaponize trade,and you will ONLY retaliate against a SPECIFIC country ifand only if it hits you first. If you stick to that, over time, you’ll beviewed as a reliable trade partner.

你不能得罪你的客人! 一般来说，如果你想成为任何人的可信赖的贸易伙伴，你就应当做出不会将贸易武器化的承诺，只有也仅仅只有在别人首先袭击了，你才可以针对它进行报复。这样坚持一段时间，你就会被视作一个可信赖的贸易伙伴。

Lei Sun, learning things about China is alife-long process
Oh please, don’t even call it “same tariffs as China”. If you look at thetrade volumes of steel and aluminum, you’d understand the tariffs areespecially designed to screw over US allies. China won’t even get affected thatmuch.

拜托，不要把这说成与中国同等关税对待。如果看看钢和铝的贸易量，你会理解这样的关税就是专门为了搞美国盟友而设计的。中国不会受到比这多的影响。

When it comes to steel import to US, China is ranked at 11th and accountsfor about 1% of total imports, even behind India’s 2%. Meanwhile Canada has thebiggest share of around 16%, followed by Brazil, South Korea and Mexico.

先来看看美国钢的进口量，中国排在11位，只占了美国进口钢的1%，甚至落后于印度的2%。与此同时，加拿大占有了大约16%的份额，巴西、韩国、墨西哥紧随其后。



For aluminum, the numbers are even more skewed. Canada stands for 56% offoreign aluminum in US, followed by Russia’s 8% and UAE’s 7%. With the newtariffs on steel and aluminum, Canada will get screwed over the most. MeanwhileChina isn’t even getting hurt much since they need the US market as little asUS needs Chinese steel and aluminum. This is consistent with the fact thatofficial response from China is generally quiet.

至于铝，这个数字更加扭曲。加拿大占了美国进口铝56%的份额，紧随其后的是俄罗斯8%，阿拉伯7%，随着新的关税实施，加拿大将会损失最多。与此同时，由于中美之间钢和铝的贸易额很小，中国受到的伤害其实没有那么大。这也和中国官方对此事的回应很平静相一致。

I for one don’t think the entireWhite House is so stupid to not realise this. But they still did it, why? Ican’t help but wonder if it has to do with the ongoing NAFTA-talks. Trumpadministration can use the tariffs as a big stick to subjugate Canada (alsoMexico to a lesser extent) and thereby force a better deal for US. The purposeof NAFTA is to have “free trade” after all. By setting up a biggerhurdle, it motivates Canada to try harder to reach the goal. IfNAFTA doesn’t conclude with an exception forCanadian steel and aluminum, then it defeats the purpose of NAFTA. Butthe question here is what must Canada give up to get there? This also helpsexplain why the White House emphasised the part about “won’t exclude alliesfrom tariffs” at the moment.

对于此事，我并不认为整个白宫都是SB到不会意识到这点。但是他们还是这样做了，为什么呢？我不禁想知道这是不是和正在进行的北美自由贸易协定NAFTA有关联？特朗普政府可以利用关税大棒使加拿大（同样适用于更轻微的墨西哥）屈服，从而达成一个对美国更有利的贸易协定。毕竟，北美自由贸易协定的目的就是贸易自由。通过建立一个更大的障碍,促使加拿大更加努力地达到我们的目标。如果北美自由贸易协定没有对加拿大的钢铁和铝做出一个例外的结论,这就违背了北美自由贸易协定的宗旨。但问题是，加拿大必须放弃什么才能达成这一目标呢?这也解释了为什么白宫此刻强调不会将盟友排除在关税之外.

Another interesting aspect in this trade war is the EU-reaction. First ofall, EU imposed steel tariffs last year against China, so it’s pure hypocrisyto protest about the same thing they once did themselves. Second, if you lookat trade volumes, EU isn’t getting much hurt either, but they scream very loud.I regard the EU reaction as a political move. EU has its own ambitionto overtake US as the leader of the western world. Thisis barely veiled since Trump became POTUS. Trump’s tariffs offeredEU an opportunity to seize the moral high ground as well as hurting US economya bit with counter-tariffs. It should be noted that George W. Bushtried 30% steel tariffs in 2002. But he had to cancel it one year later becauseit hurt the US economy quite a bit, partially due to foreign counter-tariffs.

在这场贸易战中另一个有趣的方面是欧盟的反应。首先，欧盟于去年对中国实施了钢铁贸易关税。所以说，这场纯粹的虚伪，伪君子，他们对自己做过的事情表示抗议。如果你看看贸易量，欧盟也没有遭受更多的损失和伤害，但是他们却叫得最大声。我把欧盟这种行为视作一个政治举动。欧盟有自己的野心，取代美国成为西方世界的领袖，自从特朗普当选总统以来，欧盟的野心几乎是不加掩饰的。特朗普的关税政策给了欧盟一个抓住道德高地的机会，同时又可以以反制关税措施来伤害美国的经济。需要提醒的是在2002年布什对钢铁贸易施加30%关税时的情景。一年后，布什就不得不取消关税，因为这项政策也对美国经济产生了相当大的伤害，更别提其他国家的反制关税了。

DanielWong: I really wonder why even bring China into thepicture. This is obviously targeted at NAFTA and EU countries.

Daniel：我真的很想知道为什么图表中有中国，这明显是针对北美自由贸易协定和欧盟的

Lei Sun: Because China is the western world’s favourite boogeymanlol.

Lei 因为中国是西方国家最喜欢的恶魔。

BobMacKenzie:The person asking the question is obviouslyaffected by negative propaganda being consumed in his home country. He haslittle knowledge of world affairs. China I think is appreciated by morecountries than not. It is hard working, progressive and peaceful in itsdealings with the world.

问这个问题的人明显受他们国内负面宣传的影响。他对国家事务知之甚少。我认为中国受到更多国家的欢迎而不是更少。他们勤劳工作，上进，处理国际事务更平和。

Roger Willcocks: yeah, ah, I’ll grant the firsttwo. I’m not sold on the third (peaceful).Anymore than I’m sold on it in thecase of the USA.

Roger是的 我赞成前两点，但是不认同第三点。我更愿意认为美国在处理国际事务上更平和。

Bob MacKenzie: I give people the benefit of the doubt and atthis point I have seen no reason to think China is anything but peaceful withpeaceful intent. If I were in their place and had the misfortuneto watch US aggression being enacted against so manycountries over the past seventy years and listened to the bellicose nature of some of the rhetoric coming out of USMSM I would want to build an army as well.As you suggestin your words, it is prudent to be careful though.

别人可以怀疑，但是在这点上我没有理由认为中国有任何目的除了和平的意图。如果我处在他们的位置，不幸地看到在过去70年里美国入侵那么多国家，听到美国同性恋者的好战言论，我也会建立一支军队。

Shivam Kumar China is ANYTHING but peaceful!! 

中国绝不是和平的

Allen NgOh No! Another hateful Indian Troll. Too manyin this world。

又一个讨厌的印度阿三，quora 有太多的阿三啊。

Alex Wong, just like to learn about the USA
USA has essentially declared an all out trade war with Canada. Forgeteveryone else.

美国实质上已经宣布了与加拿大的全面贸易战争。把其他国家放一边吧。

Who supplies USA with steel? Canada supplies 16%.
Who supplies USA with aluminum? Canada supplies 60%.
This is after the insane attack on our aerospace industry by slapping a300% tariff on Bombardier.

谁供应了美国钢铁？加拿大供应了16%。 哪个国家供应了铝？加拿大供应了六成。这是发生在对我们的航空工业进行疯狂的攻击，对庞巴迪征收了300%的关税之后。

Which of these tariffs even affect China at all? Trump is attacking Canadaon every front and then people talk about China?

这些关税中哪一项对中国产生了影响？特朗普在各个方面攻击加拿大，然后人们谈论中国？

Liberals in Canada can't accept these attacks and concede on any front, they'll essentially be committing treason. The NDP hasalready demanded we retaliate. Hardly any Canadian thinks anything but astraight exemption is acceptable with no concessions. Many think we shouldretaliate immediately.

加拿大的自由主义者不接受这些攻击和在任何方面的让步，他们本质上是叛国。新民主党已经要求我们进行报复。几乎没有任何加拿大人认为这是可以接受的，除了在没有任何让步前提下，加拿大直接获得豁免。许多人认为我们应该立即采取报复行动。

Liberals can't be seen to concede and also can't be seen as the one thattorpedoes NAFTA.
Trumphas created a perfectly terrible situation. Canada's only options are to committo a full retaliation and switch to EU/China for trade.

自由主义者不能被视为让步，也不能被看作是破坏北美自由贸易协定的人。特朗普创造了一个非常糟糕的局面。加拿大唯一的选择是承诺全面反击，并转向欧盟/中国进行贸易。

Leo Wong, US citizen living in Shanghai
You ask: what’s the point of being an ally when the ally gets the sametreatment as the “enemy”?

关于你的问题“作为美国的盟友，在进口关税上却遭受和“敌人”(中国)同样的对待，这到底有何意义？”

Let’s forget about the questionable term “enemy” for a second. Get thefacts straight: as far as steel is concerned, China have already been screwed,multiple times, over many years. The “allies” are just now facing possibly thesame treatment.

让我们暂时忘掉“敌人”这个有问题的术语吧。实事求是地说：就钢铁而言，中国已经在许多年里被多次搞了。现在，“盟友”们正面临着同样的待遇。

US has erected multiple trade barriers in the past against Chinese steelproducts. As a results, you see the China Steel Exports to the US have beenhovering at level far below small countries like Philippines(!) and Thailand(!)in the chart below. In 2016, US held the distinction of being the smalleststeel market for China among the countries tracked. Who track these trades? Ourvery own US International Trade Administration produced the following data.

过去，美国对中国产的钢铁产品设置了多个贸易壁垒。因此，在下面的图表中，你可以看到中国对美国的钢铁出口一直徘徊在远低于菲律宾和泰国的水平。在2016年所有被追踪的国家中，美国被认为是中国最小的钢铁市场。谁追踪了这些贸易呢?我们自己的美国国际贸易局提供了以下数据。



The latest steel protectionist measures were implemented in 2016, in theform of four new antidumping (AD) andcountervailing duty (CVD) orders that wentinto effect on June 2 (corrosion-resistant steel products) and July 14(cold-rolled steel flat products).

最新的钢铁保护主义措施是在2016年实施的，包括4个新的反倾销税（AD）和反补贴税（CVD），以及6月2日生效（针对抗腐蚀的钢铁产品）和7月14日（针对冷轧钢板产品）。

As a result, Chinese steel exports to the United States decreased sharplyin 2016. The United States purchased just 0.9 percent (ameasly 0.95M tons) of Chinese steel exports, adrop of 57% from 2.21M tons in 2015. Chinese exports to the United States in2016 roughly equaled levels during 2009–10, the years of the GreatRecessions.

结果是，中国对美国的钢铁出口在2016年大幅下降。美国仅购买了0.9%的中国钢铁出口量（仅为95万吨），较2015年的221万吨下降了57%。中国在2016年对美国的钢铁出口量大致相当于09~10年的水平——大衰退时期的水平。

So, you see. US allies do enjoy some benefits — delayed trade barriers, inthis case.

所以,正如你看到的。在这种情况下，美国的盟友确实享受到了一些好处——延迟的贸易壁垒。

Put it another way, US allies should NOT be thinking like:

换句话说，美国的盟友不应该这样想：你知道背叛的悲哀吗？它从不来自敌人。

Rather, the realities unfold like this:

相反，现实是这样的：

Shan'anRuan (阮缮安), Know something about China
I see that you put enemy in parenthesis. China is technically not an enemyto the US. At least not yet.

我看到你把敌人enemy放在括号里了。从技术上讲，中国不是美国的敌人。至少目前还不是。

International relations are not a binary category with the world dividedinto allies and enemies. There's also neutral and friendly bilateral relations,and not-yet-hostile competition or rivalry. And the relationship between the USand China belongs to those in-between categories: neutral, maybe friendly, butnot allied (not in a treaty alliance). A competitor, but not yet an enemy.Though, China is already listed by the new US defense strategy as a majorplayer in Great-Power Competition, and a ‘revisionist power’. It's to thateffect already seen as a potential enemy.

国际关系不是一个二元的范畴，不能简单的将世界分成盟友和敌人。还有中立和友好的双边关系，以及尚未有敌意的竞争或竞争。中美之间的关系属于中间范畴：中立，也许友好，但不是同盟（不是条约联盟）。是一个竞争者，但还不是一个敌人。尽管如此，中国已经被美国的新防卫战略列为大国竞争的主要参与者和“修正主义力量”。这一效应已经被视为美国的潜在敌人。

As Lei Sun pointedout in his answer, US allies do not even get the same treatment as China - theidentified Great-Power Competitor. It’s precisely those allies that are hit thehardest, while China is barely affected at all. More details here.
China shrugs off ‘stupid tradeprotection measure’ by U.S.

正如Lei Sun 在他回答中指出的那样，美国的盟友甚至没有得到与中国同样的待遇——中国是被认定的大国竞争对手。正是这些盟友受到的打击最为严重，而中国几乎没有受到影响。更多细节请点击China shrugs off ‘stupid tradeprotection measure’ by U.S.

As Robin pointed out in his answer, trade war only happens between non-hostilecountries. It’s on the basis of this non-hostility that trading relationshipsare formed to begin with for you to war over. But this non-hostility is notguaranteed to last forever. Allied relationship is also not guaranteed to beunaffected by trade war. When trade-war goes out of hand, a weakening ofalliance is possible, which may turn previous allies into friendly or neutraltrading partners, if not outright hostile. While the worst-case scenarios areunlikely to happen, certain damage can still be done.

又如Robin说的，贸易战争只发生在非敌对国家之间。正是建立在这种非敌意的基础之上的，贸易关系才得以形成，同时这种关系也会因贸易战争而结束。但这种非敌意并不一定会永远持续下去。盟军的关系也不能保证不会受到贸易战的影响。当贸易战争失去控制时，联盟的弱化是可能的，这可能会使以前的盟友变成友好或中立的贸易伙伴，如果不是完全敌对的话。虽然最坏的情况不太可能发生，但仍有一定的损害。

Technically China is not seeking alliance out of most other countries, butonly friendly, bilateral relationship. Further more, China’s internationalreputation is not exactly stellar. Being an authoritarian one-party state makesmany (developed) countries reluctant to form a close relationship with China.China’s trading practices and military tensions with some of its neighborsdon’t exactly help.

从技术上讲，中国并不是在寻求联盟，就像其他大多数国家做的那样，而只是为了建立友好的双边关系。此外，中国的国际声誉也不算一流。作为一个威权的一党制国家，许多发达国家不愿与中国建立亲密关系。中国的贸易行为和与它的一些邻国之间的军事紧张关系也不会让他有什么盟友。

On the other hand, trade-wars started by the Trump administration maypotentially push some of America’s former allies further away from America andcloser into China's orbit - even if they don’t form alliances with China, theymay choose to remain neutral when conflicts happen, or only help Americahalf-heartedly if at all. So, while America may not exactly lose its allies toChina, this can nonetheless be bad for future Great Power Competition. Thusthis move, along with other retreating actions under the Trump admin, quiteconflict with the Power Competition vision they set out.

另一方面，由特朗普政府发起的贸易战争可能会将美国的一些前盟友远离美国，并推向中国——即使他们不与中国结盟，他们也可能选择保持中立。因此，尽管美国可能不会完全失去他的盟友，但这仍可能不利于未来的大国竞争。因此，这一举动，加上特朗普治下的其他撤退行动，与他们制定的权力竞争愿景相当抵触。

I’m not sure why, but it seems that at the moment the Trump admin has notmade the Great-Power Competition national defense strategy and the containmentof China a first-order priority. This maybe because: i) China is still the US’sbiggest bilateral trading partner. Trading relations are already too big, toodeeply penetrated and intertwined to outright carry out containment strategy.ii) Trump is not yet able to go hard on China yet because he still needs Chinato contain North Korea.

我不知道为什么，但现在看来，特朗普政府还没有把大国竞争国防战略和遏制中国列为第一要务。这可能是因为：1.中国仍是美国最大的双边贸易伙伴。贸易关系已经太大、太过深入和相互交织，无法彻底实施遏制战略。2.特朗普还不能对中国进行严厉的制裁，因为他仍然需要中国来牵制朝鲜。

Still, that’s not exactly an excuse to go hard with allies instead. Itmaybe just be the Trump admin is having trouble articulating adequately itsAmerica First ‘doctrine’. America First is not America Alone, Trumpclaimed. But why does trade-warring with allies looks like it’s precisely goingin the America Alone direction?

然而，这并不能成为对盟友进行严厉制裁的借口。也许只是特朗普政府在充分阐明其“美国优先”原则时遇到了麻烦。正如特朗普所说美国优先不是美国孤立。但是为什么与盟国的贸易战争看起来就像走在美国孤立的方向？

Another reason may be because of the influence of the ideologicalnationalist faction in the Trump admin. They chastised those who want tomaintain America’s international network of influence as sinister globalists -including general Jim Mattis (the proponent of the Great Power Competitionstrategy). But withdrawing from international alliance networks that Americahas built for its own self-interest would only leave room for China to fill in.China is on the way to expand its influence and become a global power, orsomething just short of that. To counterbalance a global power, you mustyourself be a global power. If you are motivated only by rational self-interestand practical considerations, that’s the route you would choose. Butideological anti-globalists may be too constrained by ideology to understandand opt for that route - which ultimately hampers national interest.

另一个原因可能是意识形态民族主义势力对特朗普政府的影响。他们谴责那些想要维持美国国际影响力的人是邪恶的全球主义者，包括吉姆马蒂将军（大国竞争战略的支持者）。但是，退出美国为自身利益而建立的国际联盟网络，只会给中国留下足够进入的空间。中国正在努力扩大自己的影响力，成为一个全球大国，或者一切她所欠缺的东西。为了制衡一个全球力量，你必须成为一个全球大国。如果你的动机仅仅是出于理性的自身利益和实际的考虑，那就将是你选择的道路。但是，意识形态的反全球化主义者可能过于受制于意识形态，无法理解并选择这条路线——这最终阻碍了国家利益。

How to Win a Great-PowerCompetition
Now, viewing from China’s perspective: this is precisely an opportunityfor China. If handled correctly, it may enable China to form closerrelationships to the countries alienated by Trump’s decisions. Ideally, Chinashould seek to play this Power Competition game primarily on the economicfront, and avoid military confrontations with America for as long as possible.The economic front is where China’s strength lies, and also the front thatChina most benefited from Trump’s decision. Because America’s military power isstill unsurpassed, and its allies won’t easily switch side in militaryconflicts just because they got treated badly on the economic front.
China’s leaders should try their best to capitalize on this opportunity asfast as possible, to secure and harden the benefit gained from it, to makepermanent the relational changes resulting from it. Because, after Trump leavespower, his successors may seek to overturn his policies, and by then theopportunity may have passed.

现在，从中国的角度来看：这对中国来说是一个机遇。如果处理恰当，这可能使中国与被特朗普的决定所疏远的国家建立起更紧密的关系。在理想的情况下，中国应该寻求在经济方面展开这场权力竞争游戏，并尽可能避免与美国发生军事冲突。经济方面是中国实力的所在，也是中国从特朗普的决定中获益最多的一个方面。因为美国的军事力量仍然是不可超越的，而且它的盟友也不会轻易地在军事冲突中改变立场，仅仅因为他们在经济方面受到了糟糕的的对待。中国领导人应尽最大努力尽快抓住这一机遇，确保并强化从中获得的利益，使之成为永久性的关系变化。因为，在特朗普下台之后，他的继任者可能会试图推翻他的政策，到那时，机会就可能已经过去了。

Henry Young, former Bank Manager (1974-2008)
As Angela Merket had previously said European countries need to take careof themselves more and not rely so much on US which has been a key ally ofEurope. The reasons are obvious: unpredictability, American First (ie Europesecond to last priority, depending in the issue under discussion), foot moredefense bills, etc. Already Europe had suffered as collateral damage from USsanctions to Russia. Now US new tariff on steel and aluminium would definitelyhurt some European countries, the extent of which varies according to eachindividual countries. Obviously any country who suffer would find US no longerfriendly to them when the fact and history shows that import control via tariffwould only hurt the country who impose the tariff. Other countries would haveto find other markets.

正如默克尔之前所说的，欧洲国家需要更多地照顾自己，而不是过于依赖他的重要盟友美国。原因很明显：不可预测性，美国第一（即欧洲第二~倒数，取决于讨论的问题），多支付一些国防费用，等等。欧洲已经因为美国对俄罗斯的制裁而遭受了间接损害。现在美国对钢铁和铝的新关税政策肯定会对一些欧洲国家造成伤害，受伤害程度根据每个国家的不同而有所不同。很明显，任何一个国家都会发现美国对他们不再友好了，因为事实和历史表明，通过关税来控制进口贸易只会伤害征收关税的国家。其他国家将不得不寻找新的市场。

i think to look at losing an ally is somewhat incorrect. Rather a countryshould really find a true independent path for themselves and not rely too muchon other countries. For US, their record shows that they had done regimechnage, orchestrated the toppling of past S Korean presidents and S Vietnampresidents, invaded Panama, cancel aid to Philippines when they find Dutertewalk a independent path （more interesting, US is selling guns of 1970s to Philippines which isinferior to the guns used by the rebels and later Philippines thank China forthe guns they got from China which are superior to that used by the rebels -this fact tells the truth frankly - US is not reliable and as a Chinese, Ilearnt that US sold target warships to Taiwan (what a good bargain for US -those ships were destined to be target for firing testing (to be destroyed) andyet US get money out of the ships) These facts answer the question clearlywithout any further elaboration. That is why China walk its own path, not anally of any nation.

我认为失去一个盟友，是有些不正确的。相反，一个国家应该为自己找到一条真正的独立道路，而不是过度依赖其他国家。说到美国，记录表明，他们曾做过一些事，策划了推翻韩国历届总统和越南总统的行动，入侵巴拿马，取消对菲律宾的援助，因为他们发现杜特尔特走上了一条独立的道路。（更有趣的是，美国在向菲律宾出售70年代的枪支，这比反政府武装使用的枪支更差，后来的菲律宾感谢中国，因为从中国获得的枪支比反政府武装的武器要好。这个事实告诉我们，美国是不可靠的。作为一个中国人，我知道美国对台出售战舰。这些战舰本来是要用作射击靶标测试被摧毁的，现在可以卖钱了，对美国来说多好的一桩交易啊。）这些事实清楚地回答了这个问题，没有必要做进一步的阐述。这也是为什么中国坚持要走自己的道路，而不是依附于其他人的。

Joseph Boyle
Youhave found China is an ally. Although not a treaty ally, it massively funds USdefense spending by purchasing hundreds of billions in US Treasury securities.This is better than many of the treaty allies. It may even have been more thanChina’s funding of its own military in some years; I haven’t done the math yet.

你已经发现中国是我们的盟友了。尽管不是一个条约盟友，但它通过购买数千亿美元的美国国债，为美国的国防支出提供了大量资金。这比我们的许多条约盟友要好。它甚至可能比中国在未来几年的军费开支还要多。

lejandroPeralta,studied at The United States of America
I don’t think so, China is too pragmatic to let everything goes too far.But…
Trump is gonna destroy everything anyway. Given his illusionary, I hardlybelieve he can understand who are allies or enemies.
Trump is Putin’s servant. Donald Trump is a soldier and loyalist ofVladimir Putin, and no difference to Putin, they have the same goal:to isolate the United States, destroy and disunite the EU, instigate tensionsand, favoring Russia’s stance.
China is Russia’s new best friend, China, as a pragmatist itself, foundopportunity to gain victory and success so they have increased their tradeswith Europe and North America when the racist Trump is still in power.
Overall, we are the losing side, and we need to pray in 2020, when Trumpwon’t be re-elected again.

我不这么认为。中国太务实了，不会让情况变的失控。但是。。。
特朗普会把一切东西毁灭的。鉴于他的错觉，我很难相信他能理解谁是盟友或敌人。特朗普是普京大帝的仆人、军人和忠仆。和大帝没什么不同，他们有同样的目标：孤立美国，破坏和分裂欧盟，加剧紧张局势，支持俄罗斯的立场。
中国是俄罗斯的最好的新朋友。中国，作为务实派，找到了获得胜利和成功的机会，因此当种族主义的特朗普还在掌权时，他们已经增加了与欧洲和北美的贸易。
总体上说，我们都是失败的一方，我们需要祈祷特朗普在2020年不会当选为总统。

Marcus Troyka
No, China isn’t really friendly to Europe and certainly won’t protect themfrom Russia (although they get what they deserve for violating every agreementthey ever made with Russia).
The idiotic trade war will almost certainly hasten the implosion of the USeconomy though. Prosperity comes from free trade, and you don’t gain anythingby putting tariffs on things. All this nonsense of using tariffs as abargaining chip to force other countries to do what you want them to is sheerignorance, the primary losers due to tariffs are the countries imposing them.

不，中国并不是对欧洲很友好，当然也不会保护欧洲免遭俄罗斯的攻击（尽管他们违反了与俄罗斯的每一协议，但他们也得到了应有的惩罚）。
愚蠢的贸易战几乎肯定会加速美国经济的崩溃。繁荣来自于自由贸易，而对产品征收关税并不能获得任何好处。把关税当作讨价还价的筹码，迫使其他国家做你想做的事情是完全无知的，而关税的主要输家是那些强加关税的国家。

Yigui Sun, MSc. from Copenhagen BusinessSchool
Won't happen.
What is China's foreign policy? Two facts: 1, non-interventionalism. 2,China do not have allies, not the sort of allies that the US always had. Wehave business and development partnerships, but not amilitary ally for the purpose of warfare.
And I doubt if europe and north american countries will react much to whatUS will do.

不会发生。中国的外交政策是什么？2个事实：一是不干涉政策，二是中国没有盟友，不是美国盟友这种意义上的盟友。我们之间有商业和发展合作上的伙伴关系，但不是军事盟友关系。另外我也怀疑欧洲和美洲国家是否对美国即将的执行的关税政策作出更剧烈的反应。

Shané Richter
A better question would be why is china an enemy, did they do something toyour family? Did they harm anybody you know? Did they invade or enslave somepeople? Why is it that supposedly all the god loving people always need anenemy.
As for Europe trump is simply a wake up call, that america was always init for its own interests, its just no longer a secret.

更好的问题可能是：为什么中国是我们的敌人，他对你的家庭做过什么？他伤害了你认识的人？还是入侵或者奴役了一些人？为什么所有上帝爱的人需要一个敌人。对于欧洲来说，特朗普已经敲响了警钟，美国总是为了他自己的利益，这已经不是一个秘密了。

Clifford Heseltine, Science fiction writer publishedon Amazon
Perhaps the biggest problem, and one that only a businessman like Trumpcan address is this constant need to categorize every nation as either ally orENEMY!
Maybe, just maybe, it's time to consider nations as associates orcompetitors and stop trying to foment wars.

也许最大的问题是，只有像特朗普这样的总统才能解决的问题是这种不断需要将每个国家归类为盟友还是敌人。可能，只是有可能，是时候把国家看作伙伴或竞争者，停止煽动战争了。

Gordon Graham, BA Political Economy,University of California, Berkeley (1973)
OurGlorious Tweeter-In-Chief, Hair Gropin'Fuhrer Drumpf, hasn't a clue what anally is until he needs one to volunteer. Fewer and fewer people and economiesare willing to do so.

伟大的推特首席执行官特朗普先生对盟友一点概念都没有直到他需要一个志愿者为他讲解。越来越少的人和经济体愿意这么做。

DonHarmon,BA & MA International Relations & Military Studies, University ofSouthern California (1969)
Tariffs are usually intended to protect industry at home, ratherthan as a weapon against another country. Another reason might be to respond inkind to another country's tariffs, bringing an end to a tariff contest.Therefore, a tariff could be invoked against a hostile country, but alsoagainst an ally.

关税通常是用来保护本土工业的，而不是针对其他国家的贸易武器。另外一个可能原因是：对另一个国家的关税做出回应，以结束关税战争。因此，关税可以针对敌对国家，也可以用来对付盟友。

Omar Martinez, studied at Merced College
I don’t want ant to I impose a sense of upcoming war, but wearen’t not friends with anyone—simply trade partners. The only nations thatwill truly have our back is the British Commonwealth. So, taxation on everyoneis going to occur. There is no true friend.

我不想欺骗自己，这种即将来临的战争的感觉。但是我们和任何人都不是朋友，仅仅是贸易伙伴。唯一会帮助支持我们的国家英联邦。因此，对每个人征税即将发生。没有真正的朋友。

LenseiNishizawa
Highly unlikely.
Can China guarantee the security of European or American nations? No.There might be economic policy shifts, but noone's going to leave the U.S.security umbrella.
U.S. power still protects NATO countries, and U.S. power still dominatesthe American continents. China can't challenge that power in either sphere.That's the point of the alliance, and a change in trade policy isn't going tochange that.

微乎其微。
中国可以保证欧洲或者美国的安全吗？不会。经济政策可能会转变，但是没人会离开美国的安全保护伞。美国仍然保护着北约国家，美国主宰者美洲大陆。在这些领域，中国挑战不了美国。这就是盟友，在贸易政策上的改变不会改变这一点。