经济学人：以关税为武器、以谈判为幌子的策略

作者：经济学人         来源：一天一篇外刊

FOR WEEKS what was in effect an embargo between America and China had the world economy teetering on the brink. Now a headlong plunge has been postponed. On May 11th the two countries agreed to slash tariffs on each other for 90 days while they talked further. Investors are rejoicing. Those who see Donald Trump’s tariffs as mere preludes to deals are jubilant; the president’s more level-headed advisers appear to have muscled out the cranks.

数周以来，中美贸易禁运状态已将全球经济推向崩溃边缘，现在，这场迫使全球经急速下滑的危机暂时得以缓和。5月11日，双方达成阶段性协议：未来90天内逐步削减关税，为持续谈判创造条件。资本市场随即做出积极回应——视特朗普关税政策为谈判筹码的强硬派欢欣鼓舞，而总统幕僚中主张理性妥协的建制派团队，似乎已成功遏制了极端主张的蔓延。这场剑拔弩张的经贸对峙，正通过战术性关税调整赢得宝贵的谈判窗口期。

Do not mistake the reversal of folly for the triumph of sanity, though. Trade policy between the world’s two largest economies is more restrictive and less predictable than it was before Mr Trump took office. A crash has been averted, but the world will keep paying for the president’s protectionism.

然而，将贸易政策的临时调整误以为理性回归实属短视。当前中美两大经济体的贸易壁垒较特朗普执政前更为森严，政策波动性也显著增强。尽管阶段性协议暂时阻断了经济崩盘传导链，但全球市场仍将持续承受这位美国总统推行保护主义政策的结构性成本——这种以关税为武器、以谈判为幌子的策略，正在重塑而非修复全球经济治理秩序。

As important as the direct effect of the tariffs is the harm from the lingering uncertainty. Shipping companies talk of making best use of a 90-day window during which trade policy towards China is predictable. Anything short of clarity inhibits investment in foreign supply chains and domestic factories alike, because companies need to know what tariffs they and their competitors will face.

与关税政策直接影响并行的，是政策不确定性对商业决策的持续性破坏。航运企业正争分夺秒利用这90天关税政策相对稳定的窗口期，加速调整全球航线布局。然而这种喘息空间恰恰暴露出更深层隐忧——贸易政策透明度的持续缺失，正在冻结企业对于跨境供应链和本土制造基地的长期投资布局。当企业无法获得清晰的关税政策路线图时，任何产能扩张计划都将沦为风险博弈，毕竟在华尔街分析师看来，"关税预期管理"已成为比关税税率本身更关键的营商环境指标。

What happens next? The rosiest scenario is that America and China will strike a cosmetic deal, and then call off hostilities altogether. In his first term Mr Trump renegotiated NAFTA, a long-standing trade deal with Mexico and Canada, to much fanfare—but ended up with close to a carbon copy. He also struck the so-called “phase one” deal with China, as part of which the country promised to buy more American exports. Disregard the lowering of trade barriers that Mr Trump himself yanked up and the recent, much-ballyhooed “deal” with Britain is little more than scribbling in the margins.

未来谈判走向何方？最乐观的情况是：华盛顿与北京达成某种象征性和解，为这场持续数月的贸易对峙画上休止符。但回顾特朗普首个任期的谈判轨迹，这种乐观预期不免蒙上阴影——当年他高调重启北美自贸协定（NAFTA）谈判，最终签署的《美墨加协定》实质内容与原版协议惊人相似；与中国达成的"第一阶段"经贸协议，核心条款不过是要求中方扩大美国产品进口；就连近期被大肆渲染的英美贸易突破，若剔除特朗普政府单方面加设的关税壁垒，本质上也只是在原有贸易框架内进行技术性修订。这些案例揭示着某种谈判范式：表面轰轰烈烈的协议签署仪式，往往掩盖了实质性突破的匮乏。

The hope that trade wars fizzle out as agreements are struck is precisely what made investors sanguine about Mr Trump’s second term. The trouble is that he still has three and a half years left in the White House, a genuine belief in tariffs as a tool of reindustrialisation, and a horror of America’s trade deficit which will continue to provoke him. The trade deficit may well widen, considering that Republicans in Congress plan vastly to increase government borrowing, which tends to suck in imports.

市场对特朗普第二个任期的乐观预期，本质上源于对贸易战偃旗息鼓的期待——人们寄望于协议签署后，持续数年的关税对峙能迎来转折点。但现实困境在于，这位总统的执政周期尚余三年半，其核心经济理念与政策惯性将持续扰动全球贸易格局：他深信关税是重塑美国制造业的"战略杠杆"，同时对长期存在的贸易赤字怀有近乎执念的焦虑，这种认知组合正转化为更具破坏性的政策行动。更棘手的是，共和党在国会推动的财政扩张计划——通过大规模举债刺激经济——可能成为贸易逆差扩大的催化剂，毕竟债务驱动型增长往往伴随进口需求的激增，而这与特朗普削减赤字的表面诉求形成了危险的悖论。

Mr Trump is a man who believes in keeping his options open and reneges on deals he himself has struck. China, too, failed to deliver what it pledged in the phase-one deal. Both sides may reasonably doubt the seriousness of the other. As long as Mr Trump is in the White House, another conflagration cannot be ruled out.

特朗普执政期间始终保持着"协议破坏者"的行事风格——这位总统不仅习惯性为谈判预留回旋空间，甚至不惜推翻亲自签署的经贸协定，而中方在"第一阶段协议"中部分承诺的履约争议，更为这场信任危机火上浇油。当华盛顿指责未能按期扩大美国农产品进口时，白宫决策层对协议条款的反复无常，同样令中方质疑美方谈判诚意。这种双向信任赤字构成恶性循环：只要特朗普继续执掌椭圆形办公室，其将关税作为战略筹码的决策惯性，就注定会为中美经贸关系埋下新的冲突引信。

作者：经济学人         来源：一天一篇外刊