评论
打印
Tensions over trade between Europe and the US on one side and China on the other have been high and rising in recent months, not least because of the frothy protectionist rhetoric emanating from the US presidential primaries.
近几个月来，欧美与中国之间的贸易关系处于紧张状态，而且紧张程度仍在上升，一个主要原因是美国大选初选阶段冒出的浅薄的保护主义论调。
It is an awkward time for Brussels, Washington and other capitals to make a decision on whether to accord China “market economy status” (MES), which could allow yet more cheap Chinese imports to enter their markets.
对布鲁塞尔、华盛顿以及其它国家的首都来说，现在要做出是否给予中国“市场经济地位”(MES)的决定在时机上有点尴尬；这种地位将让更多廉价中国产品进入欧美市场。
The European Parliament meets to discuss the issue on Thursday and is likely to be strongly against. How much impact its views will have is unclear: the issue is complicated by the dense legal language of the rules governing the matter. What is obvious is that the real solution is for China to go much further in reforming its economy to prevent state-led distortions having a global impact.
欧洲议会(European Parliament)周四开会讨论这个问题，结果很可能是强烈反对。尚不清楚这个立法机构的观点将产生多大影响：适用这个问题的规则的艰深法律语言使问题更加复杂。显而易见的是，真正的解决方案是由中国进一步大力深化经济改革，以阻止国家主导的扭曲产生全球冲击力。
The award of MES would make it harder for the outside world to impose antidumping duties on imports from China. It would require trading partners to compare prices in their own market with those in China’s domestic economy when calculating if they are priced unfairly low. Currently, governments are entitled to select prices in a third country as a comparator, enabling them to pick and choose one that backs up their case.
中国获得市场经济地位，将使外部世界更难对从中国进口的产品开征反倾销税。它将要求贸易伙伴在计算相关产品的价格是否低得不公平时，将本国市场的价格与中国国内经济中的价格进行比较。目前，有关各国政府可以挑一个第三国的价格作为比较基准，这让他们能够挑挑拣拣，选择一个有利于自己主张的价格。
The third-country provision has long been subject to abuse, and introduces an arbitrary and unfair element in a policy regime that needs clarity and equity. But that does not necessarily imply that MES should be granted.
这类第三国条款长期受到滥用，向一个需要透明度和公平的政策体制引入了任意和不公平元素。但是，这并不一定意味着应当给予中国市场经济地位。
Attaining market economy status has been one of Beijing’s main goals in international economic diplomacy since it joined the World Trade Organisation in 2001. Only a few countries such as Australia and South Africa have so far acceded, in the context of wider trade deals with China with concessions on both sides.
自2001年加入世界贸易组织(WTO)以来，获得市场经济地位一直是北京方面国际经济外交的主要目标之一。迄今只有澳大利亚和南非等少数国家承认中国属于市场经济，其背景是这些国家与中国在双方都作出让步的情况下达成了全面贸易协定。
But Beijing has been much keener to lobby for MES than to reform its own economy to attain it on merit. Most countries, reasonably enough, have concluded that China does not meet the criteria whereby its lending and production decisions are substantially made without state direction.
但北京方面一直更加热衷于依靠游说获得市场经济地位，而不是改革本国经济，凭借真实表现获得这一地位。多数国家相当合理地得出结论：在基本上不受国家指导的情况下作出放贷和生产决定这一条上，中国达不到标准。
Beijing argues that its accession agreement to the WTO in 2001 provided for it to be granted MES in 15 years. This interpretation, which until a couple of years ago was widely treated as correct, has been increasingly challenged by trade lawyers who argue that it is based on the misreading of an ambiguously worded section in the agreement. Beijing has threatened to take the matter to the WTO’s dispute settlement process, which seems as good a way as any of dealing with that particular legal issue.
北京方面辩称，2001年的入世协议规定了中国将在15年后获得市场经济地位。直到几年前，这种解释一直普遍被认为是正确的；但它已日益受到贸易律师的挑战，他们提出，这种解释是基于对协议中措辞含糊的相关部分的误读。北京方面威胁要把此事提交世贸组织争端解决程序，这似乎是处理这个特定法律问题的合理途径。
It is difficult to chart a clear way out of this tangle. It is hard to argue that China, particularly given the massive distortions from its state-directed lending, is a market economy. At the same time, if the legal arguments in favour of automatic granting of MES prevail, it will be a serious blow to the rule of law in the international trading system if the big economies continue to withhold such designation.
很难明确指出摆脱这团乱麻的出路。尤其是考虑到国家指令性放贷在中国造成的巨大扭曲，辩称中国是市场经济是很难站得住脚的。与此同时，如果支持自动授予市场经济地位的法律主张胜诉，而各大经济体仍拒不给予中国这种地位，那将是对国际贸易体系中的法治的沉重打击。
The best outcome would be for the EU and other large economies to tighten and clarify their antidumping regimes rather than relying on the arbitrary rules governing non-market economies. Another option would be to grant China MES but introduce protection for vulnerable sectors.
最好的结局将是欧盟(EU)和其他大型经济体收紧并澄清其反倾销制度，而不是依靠适用非市场经济体的武断规则。另一种办法是给予中国市场经济地位，但对脆弱行业出台保护措施。
Whatever tactics the EU and US choose, they must try to nudge China further down the path to genuinely liberalising its economy, a journey on which it has made much less progress than it promised when it first joined the WTO.
无论欧盟和美国选择什么战术，他们都必须试图推动中国在真正开放经济的道路上继续前进；迄今中国在这条道路上取得的进展，远远少于它当初加入世贸组织时作出的承诺。
