各行其是导致欧洲各国影响力下降
Until about a decade ago, I attended an annual conference at which we discussed the future of Europe. We always split into two groups: one focused on foreign policy, one on economics. Each group nominated a rapporteur whose job it was to relay the conclusions of the group to the final plenary. Everyone listened politely.
直到大概10年前，我一直在参加一个讨论欧洲未来的年会。我们总是分成两组：一组关注外交政策，另一组关注经济。每个组指定一个报告人，在最后的全体会议上传达该组的结论。大家都礼貌听取报告。
The separation of politics and economics is in Europe’s DNA. The monetary union is, more or less, a collection of small, open economies, and behaves accordingly. Members are more interested in raising their competitiveness against the rest of the world than in using economic instruments to exert influence. To this day, the worlds of foreign and economic policy communicate largely through rapporteurs. In the US, it is perfectly normal for foreign policy think-tanks to have big economics departments. European think-tanks mainly do one or the other.
政治和经济是两回事——这个观念深入欧洲的基因。货币联盟或多或少由一组规模较小的开放经济体组成，其行为与之相称。比起利用经济工具施加影响，成员国更感兴趣的是提高自己相对于世界其他国家的竞争力。直至今日，欧洲外交政策界和经济政策界主要还是通过“报告人”来相互沟通。在美国，外交政策智库往往拥有规模较大的经济部门。而欧洲的智库则主要专注于单一的领域，要么外交政策，要么经济政策。This separation leads us to downplay the political consequences of long-term economic weakness. Would Russian President Vladimir Putin have acted so ruthlessly in eastern Ukraine if the eurozone had quickly overcome the crisis and begun to lay the foundations for a fiscal and political union? Would we have the strong separatist movements we see today in various member states? Would opinion polls be telling us that Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right Front National, stands a real chance of becoming the next French president? Would an anti-euro party have dislodged the venerable Free Democrats as the party of choice for Germany’s liberal bourgeoisie?
政经分离使我们低估了长期经济疲弱带来的政治后果。当初如果欧元区迅速克服危机，并开始为财政和政治联盟打下基础，俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔•普京(Vladimir Putin)还会在乌克兰东部事务上表现得如此无所顾忌吗？我们在多个成员国内看到的势头强劲的分裂运动还会出现吗？民意调查还会告诉我们极右翼的国民阵线(National Front)党魁马琳•勒庞(Marine Le Pen)有望成为下一任法国总统吗？反欧元政党还会取代备受尊敬的德国自由民主党(Free Democrats)，成为德国自由主义资产阶级的的首选政党吗？
I know several policy makers who feel a deep sense of foreboding about the present situation – which I share – yet feel unable to do anything about it. Mario Draghi’s attempt to change the eurozone policy narrative in his speech at the central bankers’ gathering in Jackson Hole last month was an exception. The European Central Bank president was right to emphasise that we should look at the eurozone as a whole rather than obsessing about its constituent parts.
我认识几个政策制定者，他们对当前的事态有强烈的预感（我有同感），却感到无能为力。马里奥•德拉吉(Mario Draghi)在上月杰克逊霍尔(Jackson Hole)央行行长会议上的讲话中，试图改变欧元区政策叙述，但此举是个例外。欧洲央行(ECB)行长强调我们应该把欧元区看作一个整体，而不是过于关注其组成部分，他是正确的。It is only when you take a global view that you can spot what is wrong. From this vantage point, you can see a shortage in aggregate demand, and the danger that low inflation today will beget even lower inflation tomorrow. You notice that the mix of fiscal and monetary policies is wrong. And you also see that it is quite easy to draw up a stimulus programme as long as you do it at EU level. And from this position, you can clearly spot the potential of a monetary union as a political power.
只有纵观全局，你才能发现哪里出了问题。从这个视角看，你可以看到总需求的匮乏，以及今天的低通胀带来明日更低通胀的危险。你会注意到，当前的财政政策和货币政策搭配是错误的。你还会看到，只要是在欧盟(EU)层面上，制定一个刺激计划相当容易。而且，从这个视角看，你能够清楚看到欧洲货币联盟成为强大政治力量的潜力。But when you take the perspective of a national capital such as Berlin, you see none of that. A good reminder of the distance between the prevailing German consensus and Mr Draghi’s new pan-Europeanism came last week when, during the 2015 budget debate Wolfgang Schäuble, finance minister, promised permanent fiscal surpluses. There is hardly a soul in the Bundestag who questions how permanent fiscal surpluses would fit in with the rest of the eurozone, let alone worrying about the geopolitical consequences.
然而，当你从某个国家首都（比如柏林）的视角看，这一切你都看不到。上周，在进行2015年预算辩论时，德国财长沃尔夫冈•朔伊布勒(Wolfgang Schäuble)承诺德国将永远保持财政盈余状态，这很好地提醒了我们德国主流共识和德拉吉新近提出的泛欧洲主义之间的差距。德国永远保持财政盈余，欧元区其他成员国怎么办？几乎没有哪个德国联邦议院(Bundestag)的议员对此提出疑问，更不用说担忧地缘政治方面的影响了。
