去年11月标志着自历史性的一刻——逐渐消耗耐力的多哈回合贸易谈判开始以来第十个年头的开始。德国总理安格拉?默克尔和英国首相戴维?卡梅伦以及土耳其和印尼政府首脑也在去年11月共同要求一批专家研究出切实达成多哈协议的方法。

　　Led by Peter Sutherland, a combative former director-general of the World Trade Organisation and its predecessor body, GATT, and by a trade economist at Columbia University, Jagdish Bhagwati, the experts were due to issue a report on January 28th. That will be in the midst of the annual jamboree at Davos in Switzerland, where global bigwigs gather to chew over world affairs.

　　由世贸组织和其前身关税及贸易总协定的前总裁彼得?萨瑟兰和哥伦比亚大学贸易经济学家贾迪什?巴格瓦蒂带头的专家们将于1月28日发布一份报告。在瑞士的达沃斯年会上，全球的权威人士相聚一堂讨论世界事务，这份报告正好在该年会召开期间发布。

　　The report could cause a few attendees to choke on their Glühwein. It urges its sponsors, along with the rest of the leaders of the world’s big economies, formally to commit to finishing the round by the end of the year. It is far from clear how such a deadline could be made binding, but the idea is as much tactical as practical, and received backing this week from the International Chamber of Commerce.

　　这份报告可能会导致一些与会人员在喝葡萄酒时呛到。该报告敦促主办方以及世界大经济体的其余领导人正式致力于到今年年底完成多哈回合谈判。如何使这样一个最后期限具有约束力尚不甚清楚，但是这个想法既有战术性又有实用性并且在本周得到了国际商会的支持。

　　Mr Sutherland argues that his experience during the Uruguay round of trade talks taught him that having a firm timetable is the best way to knock heads together. Those talks took a mere seven years, ending in 1994, and if it is any consolation to today’s negotiators, even the WTO’s official history admits that at times they “seemed doomed to fail”.

　　萨瑟兰先生称，他在乌拉圭贸易谈判中的经历告诉他，一个坚定的时间表是达成协议的最好方法。那些谈判只进行了7年，于1994年结束。如果这对如今的谈判人员有什么安慰的话，那就是甚至连世贸组织的官方历史也承认，有时那些谈判“似乎注定会失败”。

　　That is a fate that must not befall Doha, the experts insist. They reckon that only a few more steps are needed for an agreement. Richard Baldwin of the Graduate Institute in Geneva, one of the economists in the group, argues that “Doha is a lot closer to being done than it has ever been, and than a lot of people realise.”

　　专家们强调，这样的命运一定不能降落到多哈回合谈判身上。他们认为只需再走几步就可以达成一项协议了。日内瓦研究生所、专家组中的经济学家之一理查德?鲍德温表示“与以往以及许多人意识到的情况相比，多哈回合离达成协议要近得多。”

　　One reason is that agricultural commodity prices are high, so in America subsidies to farmers, which are linked to world prices, have been tapered down. This means that trimming them back should be less controversial than might otherwise be the case. That could encourage Barack Obama to throw his weight behind the talks. Finishing the Doha round could also help his administration flaunt its pro-business credentials, which have been under question of late.

　　原因之一是农产品价格昂贵，因此美国与世界价格相关的农业补贴已经有所减少。这意味着使农产品价格回落应该会比以往少一些争议，这可以促使贝拉克?奥巴马在谈判背后施加影响力。完成多哈回合也有助于表明他的政府是支持企业的，最近这一点一直受到质疑。

　　An emphasis on the importance of removing trade barriers in service industries, such as technology, could help to bring the agreement of big service-sector exporters, notably India. That country’s reluctance to make concessions on agriculture was blamed by many for the collapse of the last serious attempt to finish the Doha round in July 2008. And the big emerging economies, the authors argue, need to remember that an umbrella trade agreement that covers almost all countries is far preferable to the idea of trying to strike scores of bilateral deals.

　　着力于消除服务业（如技术行业）的贸易壁垒可能会有助于获得服务业出口大国（主要是印度）的同意。2008年6月，进行了完成多哈回合的最后一次认真尝试，但失败了。许多人将那次失败归咎于印度不愿在农业方面让步。报告的撰写者们称，新兴大经济体需要铭记的是，几乎所有国家签订的全面贸易协议要比努力签订众多双边协议可取得多。

　　Some Doha doubters argue that the world economy has moved on since the round began—trade in services has become far more important, and many countries have already cut tariffs on their own—making the talks largely irrelevant. But the authors provide some convincing evidence against this view. The proposals already on the table would add $360 billion in new trade each year. They would lead to a substantial reduction in the tariffs paid. For example, the total amount of tariffs paid on manufactured goods imported into America could fall by almost 50%.

　　一些多哈回合的怀疑人士称，自多哈回合开始以来，世界经济已经发展了。服务业的贸易变得重要得多，许多国家已经自行降低关税，这使谈判变得基本上无关紧要了。但是报告的撰写者提供了一些令人信服的证据来推翻这种观点。在谈判中已经提出来的意见将使新的贸易额每年增加3600亿美元。它们将使所支付的关税大大减少。比如，进入美国的制造业商品所需的关税总额将减少近50%。

　　The authors do, though, admit that there are growing gaps “between 20th-century trade governance and 21st-century trade”. A case in point is the growth and rising complexity of global supply chains, which means that today’s protectionists are more likely to resort to targeted rules rather than tariffs; this makes trade negotiators’ traditional goal of tariff-killing less relevant. But abandoning the present negotiations in favour of an entirely new round of talks with a more up-to-date agenda, as some have advocated, has even less chance of getting anywhere than the Doha effort. That is saying something.

　　不过，报告的撰写者也承认，“20世纪和21世纪之间的贸易管理”差距日益加大。证明这一点的一个例子是全球供应链增加并且越来越复杂，这意味着如今的贸易保护主义者更有可能采用有针对性的法规，而不是关税，这使贸易谈判人员消除关税的传统目标不那么合理了。但是要是像一些人所提倡的那样，放弃当前的谈判，采用一个更加与时俱进的议程，启动一轮全新的谈判，那么成功的可能性比多哈回合甚至还要小。这是有一定道理的。