您现在的位置: 纽约时报中英文网 >> 纽约时报中英文版 >> 国际 >> 正文


更新时间:2017-7-26 18:47:56 来源:纽约时报中文网 作者:佚名

International Monetary Fund Based in Beijing? Maybe, Its Director Says

WASHINGTON — Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, joked on Monday about donning “dream binoculars” and seeing the possibility of relocating the group’s headquarters to China.

华盛顿——国际货币基金组织(International Monetary Fund)总裁克里斯蒂娜·拉加德(Christine Lagarde)周一开玩笑说,她举起了“梦想的望远镜”,看到了将该组织总部迁至中国的可能性。

“We might not be sitting in Washington D.C.,” Ms. Lagarde said at a Center for Global Development event here in which she envisioned what the I.M.F. might look like in 2027.

“届时我们可能就不是坐在华盛顿了,”拉加德在这里的一场全球发展中心(Center for Global Development)活动中说道,她在讲话中展望了2027年的IMF会是怎样的一番模样。

Ms. Lagarde may joke, but her comments reflect a concern that world leaders have about the changing role of the United States in global organizations. The articles of the organization say the headquarters should be the country of the member with the largest economy.


When the United States, Britain and other global powers met in Bretton Woods in 1944 near the end of World War II to stabilize the world’s economies, the United States’ overwhelming economic power was reflected in the decision to base both the I.M.F. and the World Bank in its capital. It is a decision that is sometimes questioned given the growth of economies like India and China.

1944年第二次世界大战行将结束之际,美国、英国及其他大国齐聚布雷顿森林,以求稳定世界经济,IMF和世界银行(World Bank)总部皆设于美国首都的决定,反映了这个国家无与伦比的经济实力。而鉴于印度、中国等国的经济增长,这个决定时常遭到质疑。

Beijing has signaled its eagerness to play a greater role in the global economy with the rise of Chinese-backed regional institutions, such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, a rival to the World Bank.

随着由中国支持的地区性机构的崛起,比如与世界银行分庭抗礼的亚洲基础设施投资银行(Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank),北京已经表现出在世界经济中发挥更大作用的意愿。

And since President Trump gained the White House on an anti-globalization platform, pledging to withdraw from the Paris climate change agreement and rewrite longstanding trade agreements, world leaders, including Ms. Lagarde, have closely observed the changing global role of the United States.


Speaking to a packed audience in the capital, Ms. Lagarde did play down the impact of the United States pursuing an agenda that diverged from that of the I.M.F.


“The world is changing, that is No. 1,” Ms. Lagarde said, pointing out that emerging and low-income countries now contribute around 60 percent of total GDP and 80 percent of global growth.


“No. 2, one needs to look at the deeds more than the creeds and what is actually being done. Where is money actually being invested?”


Despite Ms. Lagarde’s comments, analysts point out the United States’ veto power at the I.M.F. gives Washington a crucial role in the institution. The fund’s leadership is careful to keep the White House on its side following every change in administration.


“There is no doubt she must be deeply concerned by the turn we have taken in Washington but there is no advantage to her in using inflammatory language,” said Benn Steil, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

“我们在华盛顿的转向无疑会让她深为担忧,但是煽动性的言辞对她没什么好处,”对外关系委员会(Council on Foreign Relations)高级研究员本·斯太尔(Benn Steil)说。

“At the end, she is a servant of the shareholders and of course, one in particular has overwhelming power with the organization, so the best she can do is prod.”


In her remarks on Monday, Ms. Lagarde also discussed the I.M.F.’s latest World Economic Outlook, in which it forecast 3.5 percent growth in the global economy this year, picking up to 3.6 percent in 2018.

在周一的讲话中,拉加德还谈到IMF最新发布的《世界经济展望》(World Economic Outlook),其中预测今年全球经济增长为3.5%,到2018年会增至3.6%。

It revised its forecasts downward for Britain, given the risks around Brexit, and for the United States, given what Ms. Lagarde labeled “less obvious fiscal development and less rapid infrastructure investment than we had initially thought.”


She identified the major medium-term risks to the world economy as inequality, the “backlash” against globalization, international trade and technological breakthroughs.


She warned of those who feel left behind by globalization — those who feel “there is nothing there for them, as a result of which, populist voices can actually carry the day and prevail over other forces” — a group political analysts have identified as driving Mr. Trump’s win in November.