双语新闻：英国或将脱离欧盟

2012-11-22 00:00:00来源：新东方网

　　The relationship between Britain and the EU looks like a marriagegone bad. Rows are becoming more and more frequent. Thetwo parties are talking openly about separation. The chancesthat Britain will eventually leave the EU are rising inexorably. Thisweekend an opinion poll showed that 56 per cent of Britons nowwant out.

　　英国和欧盟(EU)的关系如同一场走向破裂的婚姻。争吵愈发频繁，双方公开讨论分道扬镳。英国最终离开欧盟的可能性正在不可避免地升高。本周民意调查显示，56%的英国人希望脱离欧盟。

　　In Brussels, this possibility is increasingly greeted with a resigned shrug. It is widely believed thatDavid Cameron is behaving in an impossible fashion. At this week’s summit, the UK prime minister islikely to be the only leader arguing for a freeze in the EU budget. Many in Brussels now believe thatthe union would work better without a British wrecking crew on the inside. In the long run, theysay, it is the British themselves who will suffer.

　　欧盟只能对这种前景无奈地耸耸肩。人们普遍认为戴维卡梅伦(David Cameron)的行为难以置信。在本周的峰会上，英国首相可能将成为唯一呼吁冻结欧盟预算的领导人。很多欧盟人士如今认为，如果没有了“捣乱”的英国人，欧盟反而会做得更好。他们说，长远上吃亏的将是英国人自己。

　　That is the conventional argument. But it is dangerously short-sighted. Britain might well suffer if itleaves the union. But so would the EU itself. The idea that British demands are so unreasonablethat they can never be met is simply wrong. A few eye-catching changes in Britain’s relationshipwith Europe could alter the nature of the debate in the UK – and save both Britain and the EU froma mutually damaging divorce.

　　这种传统观点目光短浅，十分危险。英国离开欧盟固然可能吃亏，但欧盟自身也会遭殃。认为英国的要求不讲道理、无法满足的想法大错特错。如果英国与欧盟的关系能发生一些有亮点的变化，那么这不仅能改变英国国内辩论的性质，还能将英国和欧盟从两败俱伤的“离婚”中拯救出来。

　　There are a few voices in continental Europe who are beginning to make this argument. UlrichSpeck of the Carnegie Endowment has written a piece entitled “Why Britain is vital for theEuropean Union”. He argues that “without Britain’s active participation, the EU can forget itsdreams of becoming a global power”.

　　欧洲大陆开始出现这种声音。卡内基国际和平基金会(Carnegie Endowment)的乌尔里希施佩克(Ulrich Speck)撰写了一篇题为《为何英国对欧盟至关重要》(Why Britain is vital for the EuropeanUnion)的文章。他认为“没有英国的积极参与，欧盟就不要幻想成为世界的重要力量。”

　　But the case for keeping Britain within the EU goes well beyond the military and diplomatic assetsthat it brings to the union or the fact that Britain is a large net contributor to the EU budget. Ultimately, it goes back to the very purpose of the EU, which was to overcome the divisions thatled Europe into repeated wars. It is worth remembering that Britain was a key participant in almostall the big European wars of recent centuries. A European “peace project” that fails to incorporateBritain is leaving out a central piece of the jigsaw puzzle.

　　但主张英国留在欧盟的理由，已经远远超出英国为欧盟带来的军事和外交财富，以及英国对欧盟预算的巨大净贡献。归根结底，它回到了欧盟的初衷——克服历史上屡次令欧洲陷入战争的分歧。值得牢记的是，近几个世纪欧洲的所有大战，英国几乎都是主要参战国。欧洲“和平计划”如果不能纳入英国，就如同拼图游戏缺少中间的一块。

　　A British departure from the EU would also send a bad signal about the future. The eurozone crisishas already led many Americans and Asians to doubt the future of the European project. If Britain – one of Europe’s largest economies and its oldest democracy – chose to leave the EU, the projectwould look even more wobbly. Eurocrats respond that there are several countries that still want tojoin the union. But losing Britain and gaining Croatia would not be a like-for-like swap.

　　英国脱离欧盟还将对未来释放不良的信号。欧元区危机已经让很多美洲和亚洲人士怀疑欧洲一体化计划的未来。如果欧洲最大经济体之一、最古老的民主国家英国选择脱离欧盟，欧洲一体化将更难以站得住脚。欧盟官员的回应是：仍然有几个国家希望加入欧盟。然而，失英国而得克罗地亚，等同于得不偿失。

　　In Germany, where public opinion increasingly makes a crude distinction between law-abidingnorthern Europeans and the unreliable and indebted south, it is often noted with regret that bothSwitzerland and Norway have opted not to join the EU at all – and continue to prosper. Thedeparture of the British, who have traditionally allied with Germany to make the case for the singlemarket, would further weaken the northern European group. Some in France might welcome thedeparture of Britain, for that very reason. But even the French might come to miss the British, whotend to share their views on questions of national sovereignty.

　　德国舆论日益以一种粗略的方式将欧洲分为遵纪守法的北欧和不可信赖、负债累累的南欧。德国人经常后悔地提到，瑞士和挪威根本没有选择加入欧盟，却仍然蓬勃发展。在证明单一市场合理性的问题上，英国向来站在德国一方，它的离去将进一步削弱北欧集团。也正因此，一些法国人可能会对英国的离去拍手称快。但最后或许法国人也将怀念英国人，因为两国在国家主权的问题上看法一致。

　　Even as I make these arguments, I can hear the exasperated response from Eurocrats: “That’s allvery well. But the British keep making impossible demands and threatening to veto everything ifthey don’t get their way. One day it is special protections for the City of London; the next it is abudget freeze.”

　　在我提出这些主张时，我可以听见欧盟官员气急败坏的回答：“你说得很有道理。但英国人不断提出无理要求，如果什么事情不合他们的意，他们就要威胁否决。他们今天要求对伦敦金融城(City of London)实施特殊保护，明天又要求冻结预算。”

　　But are these British arguments so very unreasonable? Take the budget freeze. At a time ofcutbacks in national budgets across Europe, it seems entirely reasonable that EU spending – muchof which is notoriously wasteful – should, at least, be frozen. Until quite recently, this was actuallyGermany’s position as well. The British are also right that, unless the perks and conditions of EUoperatives are cut back, the Brussels Brahmins will seem ever more remote from the plight ofausterity-hit Europeans.

　　但英国的主张是否真的是不讲道理?以冻结预算为例，在欧洲各国纷纷削减本国预算之时，对出了名浪费的欧盟支出进行冻结完全合情合理。其实直到最近，德国都持有相同立场。英国人认为，如不削减欧盟官员的津贴和福利，布鲁塞尔的达官贵人们似乎只能与饱尝紧缩之苦的欧洲民众越来越远，而这种看法是正确的。

本文关键字: 英国