Charlemagne
查理曼专栏
Unity is strength
团结就是力量
Aug 28th 2008
From The Economist print edition
There are reasons why European countries find it hard to unite against Russia
欧盟国家发现与俄罗斯对抗时很难团结起来，这是有原因的
THE European Union will be heeded by Russia only when it speaks with one voice. That was the universal battle cry in Brussels as EU officials and diplomats hurried back from their summer holidays to prepare for an emergency EU summit on the Georgian crisis, called by the current French presidency for September 1st. And faced with the sobering sight of tanks trundling around Europe’s backyard, there was equally loud agreement among national politicians that their usual squabbling over the right attitude towards Russia harms the common interests of the 27-member union.
只有用一个声音说话的欧洲才能引起俄罗斯的注意。这是一场在布鲁塞尔的集体斗争。欧盟的官员和外交官们匆忙地中断了他们的暑期休假，准备参加将于9月1号召开的，由轮值主席国法国召集的关于格鲁吉亚危机的欧盟紧急峰会。面对着在欧洲后院横冲直撞的坦克，各国的政治家一致认为，以往针对如何正确对待俄罗斯的争论损害了27个成员国的共同利益。
Yet the rhetoric seems largely empty. The summit will certainly see a lot of joint finger-wagging over Russia’s recognition of the breakaway Georgian territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. There may be more talk of an EU civilian mission to monitor the situation in Georgia (though the idea of an EU military force has been shelved, at least for the moment). But when it comes to the stated purpose of the meeting-to re-examine EU-Russia relations-the 27 leaders will remain divided into several overlapping camps. These include: those who think Russia can and must be engaged as a partner; those who think Russia needs containing; and a larger group of fatalists who think that Russia “has us over a barrel”, as one diplomat punningly puts it. The summit is not expected to agree to make any big changes to the status quo, for the simple reason that the various leaders do not agree over whether that would be a good idea or counter-productive.
但是这些外交辞令看起来只是空谈。峰会当然会针对俄罗斯承认从格鲁吉亚分裂出来的阿布哈兹和南奥塞梯独立形成一份共同谴责声明，也许还会进一步讨论派遣欧盟民事使团监控格鲁吉亚局势（至少在目前，派遣欧盟部队的建议已被搁置）。但是当谈到这次会议的预设目的–重新审视欧俄关系时–27国领导人又会分裂成几个互相重叠的集团，这包括：认为俄罗斯应该而且必须被接纳为伙伴的；认为需要遏制俄罗斯的；还有占大部分的宿命论者，一位外交官一语双关地指出，那些国家认为俄罗斯”已经把他们装进了油桶”。不要指望峰会做出什么改变现状的决定，理由很简单，各国领导人在这种问题上难以达成一致。
Does disunity towards Russia hurt the common EU interest? Probably. A November “power audit” by the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), a think-tank, argued that Europe was throwing away what should be its considerable leverage over Russia. After all, the EU’s population is more than three times that of Russia, and its wealth more than a dozen times greater. The EU depends heavily on Russian energy, but the flipside is that it is Russia’s biggest market for gas (indeed, for all Russian exports). If the 27 EU countries dealt with Russia as one, they would surely have less to fear from Moscow hawks.
对俄罗斯步调不一有损欧盟的整体利益吗？答案是，很有可能。一家名为”欧洲外交委员会”的智库进行的”力量审计”认为，欧盟本来对俄罗斯有相当大的影响力，但是欧盟却白白浪费掉了。毕竟欧盟的人口是俄罗斯的七倍还多，它的财富是俄罗斯的十二倍多。欧盟严重依赖俄罗斯的能源供应，但反过来说欧盟是俄罗斯天然气的最大市场（事实上，对俄罗斯的所有出口商品来说都是如此）。如果27个欧盟成员国作为一个整体同俄罗斯打交道，那么他们就不会这么害怕莫斯科鹰派了。
The problem is that the ECFR’s argument is both true and beside the point, because it is so far removed from the way that individual countries act and think (reminiscent, in this respect, of the French statement issued after the Olympics proclaiming that the EU had collectively won, with a total of 280 medals). The cold calculation of national interests is a complex business, as any student of game theory can tell you. Disunity would be irrational if EU members always saw their common interests as paramount. But they do not, certainly when it comes to dealing with big third countries, from Russia to China to America.
欧洲外交委员会的观点既对又不对，因为它与单个国家的行动和思考模式相去甚远。在这个方面，法国在奥运会后的声明与之有异曲同工之处，它声称欧盟作为一个整体是胜者，因为欧盟成员国一共获得了280枚奖牌。对国家利益的计算是个复杂问题，任何一个学过博弈论的学生都知道这一点。如果欧盟成员国通常将整体利益看得极为重要，那么不统一步调就是不理性的。但是他们恰恰就是步调不一，这一点在与俄罗斯，中国和美国三大国打交道时更是如此。
In Europe, it is rarely enough to show that the union, in aggregate, will gain from a given policy. One must also show that the overall European gain manifestly outweighs individual national interests. This may seem a shabby calculation, but it has democratic roots. The EU is not a single country, whose most senior leaders are elected by a single electorate. In its highest decision-making body, the European Council, the 27 heads of state and government remain accountable to 27 different sets of voters.
欧洲极少通过特定的政策获取集体利益。这样的政策必须表明整个欧洲的利益要明显超过单个国家的利益。这看起来是一种不公平的计算，但是它有民主根源。欧盟不是单一国家，它的大部分高级官员都由单一选区选举产生。在最高决策机构欧盟理事会中，27国的国家元首或政府首脑仍然要对27个不同国家的选民负责。
Europeans do not even agree on what unity means. Countries such as Germany, which come closer than most to believing in a common European interest, tend to talk of it in terms of the interests of a majority of EU countries, not the interests of all. In recent disputes that pitted Russia against such countries as Poland or Estonia, a favourite line of German diplomats or politicians was to complain that individual countries had no right to take the wider EU’s good relations with Russia “hostage”.
欧洲人甚至在团结意味着什么这个问题上也不能达成一致。像德国这样的国家，比大多数国家更为坚信欧盟共同利益，它倾向于在维护大多数欧盟国家的利益，而不是全体成员利益的条件下探讨这个问题。
Nor do the costs of disunity fall equally. Take energy. It must be in the EU’s interests to diversify away from the block’s dependence on Russian gas-which is why it supports pipeline projects that would bring in gas from elsewhere. But in each individual EU country the voters expect to have the heating on this winter and the lights on all year as cheaply as possible (nor would they easily tolerate sharing their energy with neighbouring countries in the event of rationed supplies). In recent years, countries from Germany and Italy to Bulgaria and Greece have signed deals that increase the EU’s dependence on Russia, and undercut alternative routes. From the perspective of those individual countries, such selfishness probably felt quite rational.
单个国家为不团结付出的代价也不一样。拿能源来说，拓宽天然气进口渠道，减少对俄罗斯的依赖肯定符合欧盟的利益，这也正是欧盟支持可以从其他地区供应天然气的管道工程的原因。但是每个国家的选民都希望能让那个尽量便宜的获得能源供应，这样他们冬天才不至于挨冻（因此他们不愿与邻国分享定量的能源供应）。这些年来，从德国，意大利到保加利亚，希腊都签订了类似的双边能源协定，这增加了欧盟对俄罗斯的依赖，有损能源进口多元化的努力。但是从单个国家的角度来看，这种私心还是很理性的。
I’m all right, Jacques
American officials often wonder why they seem to take European energy security more seriously than the Europeans themselves. One answer is that not every country has to worry about energy security. Russia may shut off oil or gas deliveries to smaller ex-communist countries for spurious “technical” reasons from time to time. But it has never turned off the taps to Germany or Italy. And plenty of EU countries, from Sweden to Portugal, barely consume any Russian energy.
美国好像比欧洲人自己更关心欧洲能源安全，这经常让美国官方感到困惑。一种解释是并非所有国家都要考虑能源安全。俄罗斯可能会以种种”技术”原因经常切断对前共产党小国的能源供应。但是它从未切断对德国、意大利的能源供应。而大部分国家，从瑞典到葡萄牙则很少进口俄罗斯能源。
Will the benefits of European unity ever trump the pursuit of national interests when it comes to Russia? Optimists like those in the ECFR say that a more united Europe still has the chance to prod Russia into being a more reliable partner, wedded to the rule of law, international norms and other virtues. Pessimists say that the EU is unlikely to show much grit and unity until Russian behaviour becomes a lot more threatening.
在俄罗斯问题上，欧盟整体利益能否取代对国家利益的追求呢？像欧洲外交委员会那样的乐观者认为，更加团结的欧洲仍然有机会把俄罗斯变成可信赖的伙伴，使俄罗斯尊重法治，国际惯例和其它道德原则。悲观者认为除非俄罗斯的行为更加具有威胁性，否则欧盟不会团结起来。
If Russia starts to act even more recklessly-perhaps by stirring up trouble in Ukraine, which has millions of ethnic Russians, or among Russian minorities in EU countries like Estonia and Latvia-EU members may decide that their individual national interest is to stand up together. Even the largest EU country would not wish to be in a club that cannot look after its own. But that won’t happen unless Russia throws its weight around a lot more. Meanwhile weakness, selfishness and division will continue, however many fingers wag in Brussels on September 1st
如果俄罗斯开始表现的更加不计后果，比如说有可能是在乌克兰制造麻烦，那里有数百万俄罗斯族人，或者是在俄罗斯族人占少数的欧盟国家，比如爱沙尼亚和立陶宛挑起事端，那么欧盟成员国可能会超越国家利益而团结起来。即使是欧盟大国也不希望待在一个他们说了不算的组织里。但是只有在俄罗斯更加穷兵黩武的条件下，这才会发生。与此同时，不管9月1号在布鲁塞尔有多少人指指点点，自私、软弱、分化的局面还会继续下去。