中國應練好市場經濟內功

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.

近幾個月來，歐美與中國之間的貿易關係處於緊張狀態，而且緊張程度仍在上升，一個主要原因是美國大選初選階段冒出的淺薄的保護主義論調。

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.

對布魯塞爾、華盛頓以及其它國家的首都來說，現在要做出是否給予中國“市場經濟地位”(MES)的決定在時機上有點尷尬；這種地位將讓更多廉價中國產品進入歐美市場。

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.

歐洲議會(European Parliament)週四開會討論這個問題，結果很可能是強烈反對。尚不清楚這個立法機構的觀點將產生多大影響：適用這個問題的規則的艱深法律語言使問題更加複雜。顯而易見的是，真正的解決方案是由中國進一步大力深化經濟改革，以阻止國家主導的扭曲產生全球衝擊力。

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.

中國獲得市場經濟地位，將使外部世界更難對從中國進口的產品開徵反傾銷稅。它將要求貿易伙伴在計算相關產品的價格是否低得不公平時，將本國市場的價格與中國國內經濟中的價格進行比較。目前，有關各國政府可以挑一個第三國的價格作爲比較基準，這讓他們能夠挑挑揀揀，選擇一個有利於自己主張的價格。

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.

這類第三國條款長期受到濫用，向一個需要透明度和公平的政策體制引入了任意和不公平元素。但是，這並不一定意味着應當給予中國市場經濟地位。

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年加入世界貿易組織(WTO)以來，獲得市場經濟地位一直是北京方面國際經濟外交的主要目標之一。迄今只有澳大利亞和南非等少數國家承認中國屬於市場經濟，其背景是這些國家與中國在雙方都作出讓步的情況下達成了全面貿易協定。

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熱衷於依靠遊說獲得市場經濟地位，而不是改革本國經濟，憑藉真實表現獲得這一地位。多數國家相當合理地得出結論：在基本上不受國家指導的情況下作出放貸和生產決定這一條上，中國達不到標準。

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.

北京方面辯稱，2001年的入世協議規定了中國將在15年後獲得市場經濟地位。直到幾年前，這種解釋一直普遍被認爲是正確的；但它已日益受到貿易律師的挑戰，他們提出，這種解釋是基於對協議中措辭含糊的相關部分的誤讀。北京方面威脅要把此事提交世貿組織爭端解決程序，這似乎是處理這個特定法律問題的合理途徑。

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.

很難明確指出擺脫這團亂麻的出路。尤其是考慮到國家指令性放貸在中國造成的巨大扭曲，辯稱中國是市場經濟是很難站得住腳的。與此同時，如果支持自動授予市場經濟地位的法律主張勝訴，而各大經濟體仍拒不給予中國這種地位，那將是對國際貿易體系中的法治的沉重打擊。

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.

最好的結局將是歐盟(EU)和其他大型經濟體收緊並澄清其反傾銷制度，而不是依靠適用非市場經濟體的武斷規則。另一種辦法是給予中國市場經濟地位，但對脆弱行業出臺保護措施。

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.

無論歐盟和美國選擇什麼戰術，他們都必須試圖推動中國在真正開放經濟的道路上繼續前進；迄今中國在這條道路上取得的進展，遠遠少於它當初加入世貿組織時作出的承諾。