评论
打印
In the first year of the Trump administration, the president’s threats to upend the global trade system seemed like mostly bluster — lots of threats, not much action.
在特朗普政府执政的第一年里，总统要颠覆全球贸易体系的威胁似乎大都是虚张声势——雷声大雨点小。
Not anymore.
不再如此。
The administration moved forward Friday with a 25 percent tariff on $50 billion of Chinese imports. In recent weeks, it imposed taxes on imported steel and aluminum, including that from close allies like the European Union and Canada. And those actions both follow earlier measures on washing machines and solar panels.
特朗普政府周五宣布，对从中国进口的价值500亿美元的产品加征25%的关税。政府在最近几周对进口钢材和铝材加征了关税，包括来自欧盟和加拿大等亲密盟友的钢材和铝材。这些行动是在早些时候对洗衣机和太阳能电池板加征关税之后采取的。
All of which prompts some important questions: Is the United States engaged in what should be classified as a trade war? And what are the economic consequences likely to be?
所有这一切引发了一些重要的问题：美国是否卷入了一场应该被归类为贸易战的冲突？其经济后果可能会怎样？
Is this a trade war?
这是一场贸易战吗？
Definitely maybe.
绝对可能是。
A “trade war” refers to measures and countermeasures on import restriction that escalate over time, causing trade between two countries to break down.
“贸易战”是指国家之间对进口商品不断升级的限制和反制，导致两国之间的贸易崩溃。
But there is no specific definition. Everyone would agree that the Depression-era period of escalating tariffs was a trade war. Everyone would agree that, say, George W. Bush’s 2002 steel tariffs and the retaliation by Europe was not. But the exact line between trade skirmish and trade war is subjective.
但贸易战并没有具体的定义。所有人都会同意，大萧条时期不断提高的关税是一场贸易战。每个人都会同意，比如乔治·W·布什(George W. Bush)2002年对钢铁征收的关税、以及欧洲的报复行动不是贸易战。但贸易冲突和贸易战之间的确切界线没有客观的定义。
“Yes, we are now in a trade war,” said Mary Lovely, an economist at Syracuse who studies trade. She emphasizes two factors. First, the Trump administration is signaling that it will meet Chinese retaliation with further retaliation, and second, “the two sides are no longer engaged in productive talks to defuse tensions.”
“是的，我们现在正在一场贸易战中，”研究贸易的雪城大学(Syracuse)经济学家玛丽·络芜里(Mary Lovely)说。她强调了两个因素。第一，特朗普政府已发出信号，它将对中国的报复措施采取进一步的报复行动。第二，“双方已不再为缓和紧张局势进行有效益的谈判。”
Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, is more cautious. Is this a trade war? “In my view not yet,” he said. “My view of a trade war is when all countries start responding unilaterally, and without respect to international rules in terms of the levels of tariff retaliation that they engage in.”
彼得森国际经济研究所(Peterson Institute for International Economics)高级研究员乍得·鲍恩(Chad Bown)则持更谨慎的态度。这是一场贸易战吗？“在我看来还不是，”他说。“我对贸易战的看法是，所有的国家都开始单方面地做出反应，而且在所采取的报复关税水平上，它们都不遵守国际规则。”
So far, China, the European Union and other trading partners have responded within the confines of World Trade Organization rules.
到目前为止，中国、欧盟，以及美国的其他贸易伙伴作出的反应都是在世界贸易组织规定的范围内。
What’s the logic behind the administration’s action?
是什么逻辑在支配特朗普政府的行动？
For many years, American companies have complained of being treated shabbily as they try to do business in China. They often must partner with Chinese companies to be allowed to do business in the country, and frequently complain that their most advanced technologies are being stolen, among other concerns.
多年来，美国公司一直抱怨在中国做生意时受到不公正的对待。它们通常必须与中国企业合资，才能获得在中国做生意的许可，美国公司还经常抱怨，它们最先进的技术正在被窃走等等。
The Trump administration’s list of goods to be subjected to the tariffs is aimed at these high-tech sectors, including aerospace, telecommunications equipment and robotics.
特朗普政府将加征关税的产品清单针对的是包括航天、电信和机器人在内的高技术行业。
China has said it will place tariffs on $50 billion worth of American imports in retaliation. That’s where things get interesting. The Trump administration is threatening to escalate things further if China retaliates, pulling another $100 billion of goods into the mix. This increases the possibility that the dispute will spiral to encompass ever larger swaths of goods.
中国表示将对价值500亿美元的美国进口产品征收报复性关税。事情在这里变得有意思了。特朗普政府威胁说，如果中国采取报复行动的话，将让事态进一步升级，政府已将价值1000亿美元的更多商品纳入可能加征关税的行列。这就增加了纠纷不断升级、把越来越多的商品包括进来的可能性。
Will it work?
会奏效吗？
China views development of its high-tech industries as core to its economic strategy of the future and won’t want to give up advantages in those sectors lightly. On the other hand, the substantial U.S. trade deficit with China means the American side has more potential Chinese imports on which to slap punitive tariffs than the Chinese do, a potential source of leverage.
中国把发展高新技术产业作为未来经济战略的核心，不会轻易放弃这些领域的优势。另一方面，美国对中国的巨额贸易逆差意味着，美国有更多对之征收惩罚性关税的潜在中国进口，比中国能进行反制的多，这是美方砝码的一个潜在来源。
The Trump administration’s negotiating strategy has been erratic. At one point last month, there seemed to be progress toward an accord in which China would buy more American agriculture and energy products. That would have helped reduce the United States’ trade deficit with China, one of the president’s major goals. But it wouldn’t have done much of anything about the longer-term issues around technology theft, and those talks fell apart.
特朗普政府的谈判策略一直不稳定。上月的某个时候，美国似乎在与中国达成协议方面取得了进展，中国将购买更多的美国农产品和能源产品。那将有助于减少美国对中国的贸易逆差，减少逆差是特朗普总统的主要目标之一。但那没有解决多少围绕着技术盗窃的长期问题，所以那些谈判破裂了。
The United States might have a stronger negotiating position if it were joined by allies like Canada, Japan and the European Union. But given the steel and aluminum tariffs and tensions with Canada, the United States finds itself on its own in talks with China.
如果加拿大、日本和欧盟等盟友加入进来的话，美国的谈判立场可能会更强。但考虑到美国对钢铁和铝加征关税、与加拿大紧张关系，它在与中国的谈判中只能孤身作战了。
Is this going to crash the U.S. economy?
这会让美国的经济崩溃吗？
Probably not.
可能不会。
The United States has gross domestic product of nearly $20 trillion, so a new tax on $50 billion (or, eventually, $150 billion or more) of Chinese imports is a rounding error. Even when you count the costs of steel and aluminum and other tariffs that have resulted from the president’s aggressive trade, it’s hard to get to numbers that move the dial much on overall growth.
美国的国内生产总值(GDP)接近20万亿美元，因此对从中国进口的价值500亿美元（最终或许达到1500亿美元或更多）的产品征收新税可以略而不记。即使你把特朗普声势浩大的贸易攻势中所有的钢铁、铝和其他关税的代价计算进来，也很难达到能在较大程度上影响整体经济增长的数字。
As countries retaliate, they can certainly cause damage for individual American industries that export, but the reality is most of the economic activity in the United States is for domestic consumption. Exports constitute about 12 percent of G.D.P.
随着其他国家采取报复行动，它们肯定会对从事出口的个别美国行业造成损害，但现实情况是，美国的大多数经济活动都是针对国内消费进行的。出口只占GDP的12%左右。
That’s not to play down the potentially heavy damage in the industries caught in the middle. Soybean futures prices fell Friday, as commodities traders predicted China would buy fewer soybeans in retaliation. Some major industries that use steel and aluminum are complaining of sharply higher prices, which in turn makes them less competitive against global competitors.
这不是要淡化对那些卷入贸易争端的行业可能带来的严重损害。上周五，由于大宗商品交易商预测，作为报复，中国将减少购买美国大豆，大豆期货价格下跌。一些使用钢铁和铝的主要行业正在抱怨原材料价格大幅上涨，这继而会降低它们在全球竞争对手面前的竞争力。
“The questions are does this escalate from here, is this part of a much bigger process, and how do business confidence and financial markets respond?” said Lewis Alexander, chief U.S. economist at Nomura. “With these relatively modest first-round things, it’s hard to make the case that it’s material” to the overall economy.
“问题是，将从这里升级吗？这是一个更大过程的一部分吗？商业信心和金融市场将如何反应呢？”野村证券首席美国经济学家刘易斯·亚历山大(Lewis Alexander)说。“只是这些相对温和的首轮战火，很难说对（整体经济）有实质性影响。”
The risk comes if things spiral out of control in ways that crater the stock market or lead businesses to pull back significantly on their investment spending. Keep in mind the way that trade disputes can cause economic damage without triggering a recession. Gary Cohn, the former White House economic adviser, said this week that tariffs could wipe out economic gains from the tax cut passed late last year. Still, with the economy in relatively strong shape, there is a big difference between “not growing as fast as it would without a trade war” and outright recession.
如果发生导致股市崩盘、或导致企业大幅削减投资支出的事态失控的话，会产生风险。请记住贸易争端可能造成经济损失、但不引发衰退的方式。前白宫经济顾问加里·科恩(Gary Cohn)本周说，关税可能会抵消去年底通过的减税法案带来的经济好处。尽管如此，由于经济状况相对很好，“增长比在没有贸易战的情况下缓慢”与经济彻底衰退之间有很大的差别。
Will this mean higher prices?
这将意味着更高的价格吗？
The initial tariffs on Chinese goods are not focused on consumer products. They are to be levied on products mainly purchased by businesses, such as industrial equipment. That could mean upward pressure on inflation eventually, but in subtle ways.
首批加征关税的中国产品并不针对消费品。这些关税是对主要由企业购买的产品征收的，比如工业设备。这可能意味着最终会有让通货膨胀上行的压力，但是以一种微妙的方式。
Even if the dispute spreads to consumer goods, the actual amount American consumers will pay depends on many factors, including the availability of domestic substitutes and the competitiveness of the industry. For any given product, it is hard to predict how much of a 25 percent tariff will be passed through to consumers versus absorbed by producers and retailers.
即使争端扩大到消费品，美国消费者实际要掏出的钱取决于许多因素，包括国内替代品的供应和那个行业中有多少竞争。对任何给定产品来说，很难预测加征的25%的关税中将有多少会转嫁到消费者身上，而不是被生产商和零售商吸收。
Still, consumers ultimately pay the bill for trade barriers in one way or another. At the start of the year, the administration put a 20 percent tariff on imported washing machines; the price of laundry equipment is up 17 percent since then.
尽管如此，消费者最终还是会以某种方式为贸易壁垒买单的。今年初，政府对进口洗衣机加征了20%的关税；洗衣设备的价格在那之后已经上涨了17%。
