IMF需退出“三驾马车”

当前位置：首页 > 英语笔译

IMF需退出“三驾马车”

天之聪教育 2013-04-22 天之聪教育 251次

IMF需退出“三驾马车”

The IMF must pull out of the troika if it wants

There are many victims of the Eurozone crisis but one loser is seldom mentioned: the IMF has suffered considerable collateral damage. It has been dragged along in an unprecedented set-up as a junior partner within Europe, used as a cover for the continent’s policy makers and its independence lost.

欧元区危机有很多受害者，但其中一个受害者很少被提及：国际货币基金组织(IMF)在这次危机中遭受了很大的连带伤害。作为欧洲范围内的次要合作伙伴，该组织一直在一个史无前例的“局”中被牵着鼻子走，被用作欧洲政策制定者及其丧失独立性的遮羞布。

The monetary fund was set up as a technocratic institution. That, indeed, is why it was brought into Europe: it was felt that a neutral broker was needed to fix the eurozone’s problems. It is an outsider that would seem less biased in its assessments of peripheral eurozone countries than, say, the chancellor of Germany or the president of the European Commission. While the distribution of voting power within the IMF has been controversial for some time, it is a consensus-driven body. Its independence from any one region or power has provided the basis for efficient decision-making – and is essential to it.

从本质上讲，IMF是一家技术官僚机构。正因为这一点，它才被引入欧洲：有关方面认为，有必要引入一个中立的中间人来解决欧元区的问题。在评价欧元区外围国家时，一个局外人应该会比德国总理或欧盟委员会(European Commission)主席更没有偏见。尽管一段时间以来，IMF内部的投票权分配问题一直备受争议，但它仍是一家以共识为导向的机构。它独立于任何地区、任何强权，这为它的高效决策奠定了基础。这种独立性对IMF至关重要。

So the fact that decisions about IMF-supported adjustment programmes are seemingly being taken in Berlin, Frankfurt and Brussels should horrify its members. The commission and the European Central Bank are not even members of the IMF yet they seem to be running the show. Together with the IMF, they are the troika running the continent’s rescues. Being part of this approach means political meddling has been institutionalised. The approach to the eurozone crisis also undermines the long-running efforts to reform the governance of the IMF, which were, after all, intended to reduce the disproportionate influence of western European governments.

因此，当IMF成员国看到与IMF所支持的调整计划有关的决策似乎正在由柏林、法兰克福和布鲁塞尔作出时，它们应该会非常震惊。欧盟委员会和欧洲央行(ECB)连IMF的成员都算不上，但这两者似乎却在唱主角。这两家机构与IMF一起构成了管理欧洲纾困事宜的“三驾马车”。IMF参与到这种安排中意味着，政治干预已经机制化。为应对欧元区危机而出台的这一安排，还损害了长期以来改革IMF治理的相关努力——毕竟，这一改革的本意是要削弱西欧国家政府过分的影响力。

This is hardly the first time that the IMF has been seen to be unduly influenced by its largest shareholders. During the Latin American and Asian crises it was said that the US Treasury Department was never far away from the negotiation table. But it is new that key IMF programme decisions are being taken outside the fund. The interests of other eurozone countries or institutions dominate proceedings unduly, so it is often unclear whether the interests of the IMF, the global economy, the eurozone or individual countries that are being protected by its work.

这很难说是我们首次看到IMF受其大股东的过分影响。在拉美危机和亚洲危机期间，据说美国财政部就从未远离过谈判桌。但与IMF计划有关的关键决策正在该组织以外作出，这一事实倒是一个新的情况。其他欧元区国家或机构的利益过分地主导着决策程序，因此人们往往很难看清，IMF的利益、全球经济的利益、整个欧元区的利益或个体国家的利益是否受到IMF所做努力的保护。

The mishandled Cyprus bailout affirmed the deficiencies of the current crisis-resolution approach in the eurozone. The poor record of adjustment effectiveness has undoubtedly undermined confidence in the IMF; troika adjustment programmes have been guided often by the needs of neighbouring European governments rather than global economic considerations. It would surely already have walked away from Greece had it not been held back by political inconvenience.

搞砸了的塞浦路斯纾困突显出欧元区现行危机解决方案的缺陷。调整计划之效力的糟糕记录无疑打击了人们对IMF的信心；“三驾马车”的调整计划往往以邻近的欧洲国家政府的需求为出发点，而不是基于全球经济考虑。如果不是碍于政治上的不便，它肯定早就不管希腊的事了。

The eurozone has further undermined the IMF by setting up its own crisis resolution institution. The European Stability Mechanism is for all practical purposes a European monetary fund. Proposals for an Asian monetary fund during the Asian crisis were attacked with good reason: there was real concern that a regional fund would reduce the effectiveness of multilateral co-operation. These concerns seem to have been forgotten.

通过建立自身的危机应对机构，欧元区进一步对IMF构成了伤害。欧洲稳定机制(ESM)从其各种实际用途来看，都是欧洲的货币基金组织。亚洲危机期间有人曾提议建立亚洲货币基金组织，但国际社会以有力的理由对此进行了抨击：人们真的很担心地区性基金组织会降低多边合作的效力。如今，这种担心似乎已被抛在脑后。

The risk of a fragmentation of international co-operation is considerable. It is not hard to imagine a scenario where a country has suffered a considerable economic shock and requires significant financial resources to avoid a painful and disruptive adjustment – say a large debt restructuring. In such circumstances, the interests of that nation, the world and neighbouring countries might not be aligned. That is why a multilateral approach is more likely to be effective.

国际合作有很大风险走向分裂。我们不难想象一种情形：一个国家遭遇严重的经济打击，需要大量金融资源来避免一场痛苦而具有破坏性的调整，比如大规模的债务重组。在这种情形下，当事国、邻国和整个世界的利益可能并不一致。正因为如此，真正有效的才更有可能是多边机制。

The fund cannot be seen as neutral and at the same time serve the immediate interests of the eurozone. This is not saying that a trustworthy IMF would be able to rescue the world economy overnight. It would not – and it has made mistakes in the past. But the eurozone debacle risks destroying the credibility of the IMF – and therefore the foundations for multilateral economic co-operation.

IMF不可能一面服务于欧元区的切身利益，一面被视为一家中立机构。这并不是说，一个值得信赖的IMF就能够在一夜之间拯救世界经济。这是不可能的，并且IMF过去也犯过错误。然而，欧元区的崩溃有可能毁掉IMF的公信力，进而毁掉多边经济合作的基础。

The IMF’s potential effectiveness has suffered and countries may be less willing to seek assistance from the fund, possibly prolonging future economic pain. This will come to matter a great deal if a larger eurozone country should come to require its help. To restore its critical role, the IMF needs to remove itself from the troika.

IMF的潜在效力已受到损害，各国可能已经不那么愿意向该组织寻求援助，这可能会让未来的经济苦难变得更长。一旦一个较大的欧元区国家需要它的援助，这一点的危害性就会极大地显现出来。为了恢复其关键职能，IMF需要从“三驾马车”中退出。