评论
打印
Supporters suggest the G20 could eventually emerge, in a manner of which the Austrian statesman Metternich would have approved, as a global concert of powers: Americans and Asians, Europeans and Africans, Latin Americans and Antipodeans would all sit down to safeguard prosperity and settle conflicts.
支持者们表示，20国集团最终可能会以世界各国协作的面貌出现：美国人和亚洲人、欧洲人和非洲人、拉美人和北美人将一起坐下来维护繁荣并解决冲突。奥地利政治家梅特涅(Metternich)也将同意这种方式。
This enterprise, though, has already hit an embarrassing snag. Diplomats charged with the meeting's preparation confide that, contrary to popular belief, the G20 summit is, well, not really a G20 summit.
然而，该计划已经遇到了令人尴尬的障碍。负责此次峰会准备工作的外交家表示，与普遍的看法相反，20国集团峰会并非20个国家参加的峰会。
It is true that heads of government from all points north, south, east and west will converge on London. For reasons too complicated to explain in this space, 28 delegations have been invited – 23 (or is it 24?) national leaders as well as the heads of organisations such as the International Monetary Fund.
确实，来自地球东西南北各国的政府首脑将齐聚伦敦。出于诸多过于复杂无法在这里解释的原因，28个代表团受邀参加此次峰会——包括23（或者24？）位国家领导人以及国际货币基金组织(IMF)等机构的主席。
This numerical confusion, though, does not explain why the event is officially named the London (as opposed to the G20) summit. The problem is rather more substantive. Strange though it seems, there is as yet no agreement among the attendees that the G20 actually exists.
然而，这种数字混乱并没有解释为何此次峰会在官方被称为伦敦峰会（而非20国集团峰会）。这个问题更为重要。尽管看似奇怪，但与会者迄今尚未就20国集团是否真正存在达成一致。
If this sounds surreal, let me refine the last statement. The G20 has long met at the level of finance ministers and central bankers. It has a rotating chairmanship and a secretariat.
如果这听上去有些超现实，那么让我来提炼一下最后一句吧。长期以来，20国集团一直在财长和央行行长级别的会议上碰面。各国轮流担任主席和秘书长。
But there is no consensus that the group should reach beyond the financial and the economic to become a permanent political institution. To the contrary, some rich nations – Japan and Italy spring to mind – fear regular meetings of G20 leaders would undermine the G8 industrial nations. Others think a G13 – the G8 plus the five biggest emerging nations – would be a more effective global forum.
但尚未达成共识的是，20国集团是否应超越金融和经济领域，成为永久性的政治组织。相反，一些富国——日本和意大利的名字在脑海中闪现——担心，20国集团定期会议将破坏八国集团(G8)。其他人认为，13国集团(G13)——八国集团加上5个最大新兴国家——将成为更有效的全球论坛。
The temptation is to laugh at the bureaucratic imbecility of such wrangling. Who but the diplomats could care about the precise number after the “G”; or whether we should talk about the London or the G20 summit? What matters surely is that governments, rich and rising, pull in roughly the same direction.
人们不禁嘲笑这种争论的官僚愚蠢之处。除了外交家，谁会关心G后边的确切数字；或者谁会关心我们是应讨论伦敦峰会还是20国集团峰会呢？重要的问题肯定是富有和正崛起的政府差不多往同一个方向努力。
Sad to say, however, this argument is a painfully perfect metaphor for the more profound confusion and competition standing in the way of effective international co-operation.
然而，遗憾的来说，这种看法是一个完美的令人痛苦的比喻，体现了阻碍国际有效合作的更为深刻的混乱和竞争。
It is one thing for political leaders to agree that safeguarding globalisation requires more coherent international governance. After all, prominent among the causes of the financial crash was the failure of politics to keep up with economic integration. Global markets ran far ahead of the capacity of governments to oversee, even to understand, them.
政治领袖同意，捍卫全球化需要更为一致的全球管理，这是一回事。毕竟，在此次金融垮台的原因中，一个突出的原因是政治未能跟上经济一体化的步伐。全球市场远远领先于政府监管甚至理解市场的能力。
