瑞士冒着激怒美国的风险与中国加强贸易是否值得？
S
以下评论已自动从EN翻译成中文。
在我游历非洲期间，有人对我说过……“中国带来基础设施和就业机会，美国和欧洲带来的却是腐败和教堂”。____与美国做生意的代价太高了。没有忠诚，也没有荣誉。 是时候把目光投向那些在向前迈进的国家，而不是那些热衷于战争和入侵的国家了。美国在侵略方面比俄罗斯要恶劣得多……没有制裁？没有冻结账户？
As I was told whole touring Africa...."China brings infrastructure and jobs, the US and Europe bring corruption and churches". ____The price of doing business with the US is too steep. No loyalty. No honor. Time to look to those that are moving forward instead of those interested in war and invasions. The US is far worse in its aggression than Russia...no sanctions? No blocked accounts
A
以下评论已自动从EN翻译成中文。
在国际关系这一宏大舞台上，我们今天面临的问题需要的不是激情，而是远见；需要的不是空谈，而是理性。 与中华人民共和国开展更紧密的贸易往来，是否值得冒得罪美国的风险？这一问题在外交场合和董事会中被提出得越来越频繁，它值得一个超越一时政治紧张局势纷争的答案。 我在此表达的观点——这是对我们的美国盟友怀着最深切的敬意提出的——是：与中国建立更紧密的贸易关系不仅值得冒这个风险，而且是一项植根于经济现实主义、地缘政治稳定以及主权选择这一核心精神本身的必然要求。____让我们首先承认一个显而易见的事实。 美国依然是世界上最重要的经济和战略伙伴之一，瑞士与许多国家一样，珍视横跨大西洋将我们紧密联结的纽带。 跨大西洋关系建立在共同价值观、历史渊源以及对民主原则的共同承诺之上。若认为与中国加强交往是对这种关系的背叛，既属言过其实，又缺乏历史视野。毕竟，外交并非零和游戏。 它是一幅由多条经线编织而成的挂毯，每条经线都为整体的坚韧与强大贡献着力量。____然而，中国不仅仅是一条经线——它已成为全球经济秩序的主要支柱之一。忽视这一现实，无异于刻意视而不见，这既不符合我们的国家利益，也不利于国民的繁荣。 试想这一机遇的巨大规模。中华人民共和国是世界第二大经济体，是制造业强国，也是日益成熟的创新与技术枢纽。 对于瑞士这样一个经济活力依赖于出口、精密工程、制药和金融服务的国家而言，中国市场绝非奢侈品——而是必需品。____2024年，中国仍位居瑞士第三大贸易伙伴，双边贸易额超过400亿瑞士法郎。 瑞士手表、机械和制药产品在中国各大城市需求旺盛，而中国的投资和旅游业也为瑞士经济做出了重大贡献。这并非一种权宜之计的关系，而是一种互补的关系。 瑞士提供品质、精准与信任；中国则拥有庞大的市场规模、蓬勃的发展活力，以及不断壮大的中产阶级——他们对我们所擅长的商品和服务的需求日益增长。____批评者可能会认为，与中国的更紧密贸易会带来政治和安全风险，特别是在北京与华盛顿之间存在战略竞争的背景下。 然而，值得深思的是：难道有哪一种有意义的经济伙伴关系不带有一定程度的风险吗？美国自身通过其贸易政策和时而显现的保护主义倾向，已经证明，即便是最紧密的联盟也会出现摩擦。 将中国单独视为一个特殊的问题，无异于忽视了现代全球经济所特有的复杂相互依存关系。____事实上，有人可能会认为，通过贸易与中国开展交往，恰恰是促进稳定、对话和相互理解的最有效途径。 经济相互依存是和平的基石。当各国开展贸易时，它们建立的关系便超越了政治言辞。这种关系在双方都催生了利益相关者，他们对维持和谐关系有着切身的利益。欧盟凭借其长期奉行的“通过贸易开展接触”政策，早已深刻理解这一原则。 瑞士凭借其中立和搭建桥梁的传统，具有倡导这一方法的独特优势。____此外，值得注意的是，中国自身在过去四十年间也经历了非凡的转型。 数亿中国公民摆脱了贫困，这一壮举在人类历史上无与伦比。这一成就很大程度上得益于中国融入全球贸易体系。 若退出该体系，或人为限制我们与该体系的互动，无异于削弱我们在当代最重要经济叙事之一中的角色。____关于“与中国加强贸易往来会‘惹恼’美国”的说法，也值得仔细推敲。 美国是一个成熟且精明的国家，完全能够理解其盟友和伙伴也有自己需要追求的主权利益。无论其政府组成如何，美国政府在符合自身利益时，始终与中国在贸易问题上保持着接触。 尽管中美贸易关系偶有波折，但它仍是世界上最大的双边贸易关系之一。若认为瑞士与北京保持类似的务实关系会让华盛顿感到根本性的不安，这低估了美国外交政策的韧性和成熟度。____此外，“风险”这一概念必须结合具体语境来理解。 在全球供应链中断、气候变化和技术转型的时代，多元化绝非奢侈品——而是最高级别的风险管理策略。中国不仅是一个市场，更是全球供应链中的关键节点，包括欧美所依赖的那些供应链。 在稀土矿产、制药和绿色技术生产领域，中国发挥着不可或缺的作用。更紧密的贸易关系能确保瑞士及其合作伙伴在谈判桌上拥有话语权，而非在影响我们繁荣的决策中被边缘化。____同样重要的是要认识到，更紧密的贸易并不意味着不加批判地与中方保持一致。 瑞士一直是一个重视独立性和独立判断能力的国家。我们有权——事实上，也有责任——按照自己的方式与中国开展合作，同时就治理、人权和国际法等问题保持强有力的对话。 这两者并不相互排斥。事实上，开展对话本身就为这类讨论提供了平台，而不是将它们局限于遥远的告诫之中。____归根结底，问题不在于与中国加强贸易往来是否值得冒得罪美国的风险。 问题在于，我们是否有勇气和清醒的头脑，以坚定不移的信念和远见卓识来追求我们的国家利益。美国将继续是一个至关重要的合作伙伴，我们与华盛顿的关系将经久不衰。 但中国代表着一片我们绝不能忽视的机遇之境。若置之不理，无异于将我们的经济未来拱手让给那伪装成审慎之名的保护主义海市蜃楼。____世界并非非此即彼的选择舞台。它是一个充满可能性的连续体，而瑞士一直凭借优雅、智慧和务实的精神在这连续体中游刃有余，从而蓬勃发展。 让我们继续与中国开展贸易，不是因为冒着风险，而是因为能获得回报。让我们睁大双眼、坚守价值观、坚定不移地履行对盟友的承诺，以此开展贸易。 通过这样做，我们将证明，真正的外交不在于选边站队，而在于搭建桥梁。____因此，我谨此提出：与中国开展更紧密的贸易往来不仅站得住脚，更是可取的、必要的，并且完全符合瑞士政治家精神的最佳传统。风险是可以控制的，而回报将带来变革性的影响。 而另一种选择——退缩、猜疑和自我孤立——绝非任何有远见的国家会心甘情愿走上的道路。
In the grand theatre of international relations, the question before us today is one that demands not passion, but perspective; not rhetoric, but reason. Is closer trade with the People's Republic of China worth the risk of annoying the United States? It is a query that has been posed with increasing frequency in diplomatic corridors and boardrooms alike, and it deserves an answer that rises above the fray of transient political tensions. My contention, offered with the utmost respect for our American allies, is that closer trade with China is not merely worth the risk—it is an imperative rooted in economic realism, geopolitical stability, and the very ethos of sovereign choice.____Let us begin by acknowledging the obvious. The United States remains one of the world's most vital economic and strategic partners, and Switzerland, like many nations, cherishes the ties that bind us across the Atlantic. The transatlantic relationship is built on shared values, historical kinship, and a mutual commitment to democratic principles. To suggest that closer engagement with China constitutes a betrayal of that relationship would be both hyperbolic and historically myopic. Diplomacy, after all, is not a zero-sum game. It is a tapestry woven from multiple threads, each contributing to the strength and resilience of the whole.____China, however, is not merely another thread—it has become one of the primary pillars of the global economic order. To ignore this reality is to engage in a form of wilful blindness that serves neither our national interest nor the prosperity of our citizens. Consider the sheer scale of the opportunity. The People's Republic of China is the world's second-largest economy, a manufacturing powerhouse, and an increasingly sophisticated hub for innovation and technology. For a nation such as Switzerland, whose economic vitality depends on exports, precision engineering, pharmaceuticals, and financial services, the Chinese market is not a luxury—it is a necessity.____In 2024, China remained Switzerland's third-largest trading partner, with bilateral trade volumes exceeding CHF 40 billion. Swiss watches, machinery, and pharmaceutical products enjoy robust demand in Chinese cities, while Chinese investment and tourism have contributed significantly to the Swiss economy. This is not a relationship of convenience; it is a relationship of complementarity. Switzerland offers quality, precision, and trust; China offers scale, dynamism, and an ever-expanding middle class with a growing appetite for the very goods and services in which we excel.____Critics may argue that closer trade with China entails political and security risks, particularly in light of the strategic competition between Beijing and Washington. Yet it is worth asking: is there any meaningful economic partnership that does not carry some degree of risk? The United States itself, through its trade policies and occasional protectionist impulses, has demonstrated that even the closest alliances can experience friction. To single out China as uniquely problematic is to overlook the complex interdependence that characterises the modern global economy.____Indeed, one might argue that engaging China through trade is precisely the most effective means of fostering stability, dialogue, and mutual understanding. Economic interdependence is the handmaiden of peace. When nations trade, they build relationships that transcend political rhetoric. They create stakeholders on both sides who have a vested interest in maintaining harmonious relations. The European Union, with its longstanding policy of "engagement through trade," has long understood this principle. Switzerland, with its tradition of neutrality and bridge-building, is uniquely positioned to champion this approach.____Moreover, it is worth noting that China itself has undergone a remarkable transformation over the past four decades. Hundreds of millions of its citizens have been lifted out of poverty, a feat without parallel in human history. This achievement has been facilitated, in large part, by China's integration into the global trading system. To withdraw from that system, or to artificially constrain our engagement with it, would be to diminish our role in one of the most significant economic narratives of our time.____The argument that closer trade with China somehow "annoys" the United States also warrants closer scrutiny. The United States is a mature and sophisticated nation, fully capable of understanding that its allies and partners have their own sovereign interests to pursue. The American administration, regardless of its composition, has consistently engaged with China on trade matters when it suits its own purposes. The US-China trade relationship, despite its occasional turbulence, remains one of the largest bilateral trade relationships in the world. To suggest that Washington would be fundamentally perturbed by Switzerland maintaining a similarly pragmatic relationship with Beijing underestimates the resilience and sophistication of American foreign policy.____Furthermore, the notion of "risk" must be contextualised. In an era of global supply chain disruptions, climate change, and technological transformation, diversification is not a luxury—it is a risk management strategy of the highest order. China is not only a market; it is a critical node in global supply chains, including those upon which Europe and the United States depend. The production of rare earth minerals, pharmaceuticals, and green technologies are areas in which China plays an indispensable role. Closer trade ensures that Switzerland and its partners have a seat at the table, rather than being relegated to the margins of decisions that affect our prosperity.____It is also important to recognise that closer trade does not imply uncritical alignment. Switzerland has always been a nation that values its independence and its capacity for independent judgment. We have the right—indeed, the duty—to engage with China on our own terms, while maintaining robust dialogues on matters of governance, human rights, and international law. The two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the very act of engagement provides a platform for such conversations, rather than relegating them to the realm of distant admonition.____In the final analysis, the question is not whether closer trade with China is worth the risk of annoying the United States. The question is whether we have the courage and the clarity to pursue our national interests with conviction and foresight. The United States will continue to be a vital partner, and our relationship with Washington will endure. But China represents a horizon of opportunity that we cannot afford to ignore. To do so would be to surrender our economic future to a mirage of protectionism, disguised as prudence.____The world is not a stage for binary choices. It is a continuum of possibilities, and Switzerland has always thrived by navigating that continuum with grace, intelligence, and pragmatism. Let us continue to trade with China, not in spite of the risks, but because of the rewards. Let us do so with our eyes wide open, our values intact, and our commitments to our allies unwavering. In doing so, we will demonstrate that true diplomacy is not about choosing sides—it is about building bridges.____I therefore respectfully submit that closer trade with China is not merely defensible; it is desirable, necessary, and entirely consistent with the best traditions of Swiss statesmanship. The risks are manageable. The rewards are transformative. And the alternative—retreat, suspicion, and self-imposed isolation—is a path that no nation of vision would willingly choose.
以下评论已自动从EN翻译成中文。
当然值得冒这个险……美国根本不讲什么忠诚，如果瑞士面临灭顶之灾，美国只会照常运转，根本不会试图出手相救。其实，瑞士早就该这么做了。这就像身处一段不健康的感情关系中。 你留下来，一边期待对方会改变，一边又因为无处可去而不得不留下。你不知道自己该如何生存下去。直到某一天，你鼓起勇气迈出了那一步。 虽然会经历一些痛苦，但最终你会站稳脚跟，并为自己终于鼓起勇气采取行动而感到无比欣慰。……无论是美国还是欧盟，都已证明自己是不值得信赖的伙伴。瑞士面临的最大问题在于，其约70%的贸易往来都与这两个国家有关。 但这给我们上了一堂宝贵的课：“切勿将过多的鸡蛋都放在一两个篮子里。”瑞士必须大力实现多元化，并逐步摆脱对这两个实体的过度依赖，包括不再盲目追随它们在国际政治中的决策。这绝非易事，但必须去做……我想，迟做总比不做好。
Of course it's worth the risk....USA offers no loyalty whatsoever and if Switzerland were drowning the US would simply carryon and not try to help save Switzerland. Actually, Switzerland should have made this move a long time ago. It's much like being in an unhealthy relationship. You stay, and stay hoping the other person will change or you stay because you have nowhere else to go. You don't know how you will survive. Then one day you gather your strength and make that move. You suffer a bit but eventually you gather your footing and you're so happy that you finally had the courage to take the actions that you did. ......Both USA and EU have proven themselves to be unworthy partners. The biggest problem for Switzerland is that roughly 70% of their trade is with these two countries. But this teaches a valuable lesson "never put too many of your eggs in only one or two basket." Switzerland must heavily diversify and slowly wean off of too much dependence on these two entities including following their decisions in global politics. It won't be easy but it must be done...I guess it's better late-than-never.
SWI SWISSINFO.CH
以下评论已自动从EN翻译成中文。
@ProperD
ProperD，我明白你的意思，但有什么保证能证明中国会成为更可靠的贸易伙伴呢？“中国制造”政策因激进地从西方企业攫取技术诀窍而在西方饱受批评。 这里有一个例子：____https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/trade-policy/china-is-courting-swiss-start-ups-for-their-intellectual-property/91787850
I take your point ProperD, but is there any guarantee that China will prove a more reliable trading partner? The "Made in China" policy has been criticised in the West for aggressively syphoning technology know-how from Western companies. Here's one example: ____https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/trade-policy/china-is-courting-swiss-start-ups-for-their-intellectual-property/91787850
以下评论已自动从EN翻译成中文。
@Matthew Allen
嗯……我认为你的观点并没有你所说的那样非黑即白。 切勿忘记，所有经济成功的故事都包含一个阶段，即模仿和借鉴行业领军企业的技术和产品。 例如，美国曾窃取英国的织机和工厂设计，这帮助美国成为了金融超级大国。此外，正是通过模仿，日立、任天堂和索尼等日本企业才成为了全球瞩目的焦点……请记住，中国当然也从其“以市场换技术”的战略中获益匪浅。 尽管如此，中国仍无法获得关键技术，因为企业只分享了与产品相关的技术——即在中国本地生产的产品部件。设计中最关键的部分，也就是所谓的“主蓝图”，则被隐瞒了。因此，中国无法完全实现或复制其制造的产品。 我认为，让西方如此愤怒的原因在于，中国不仅发展得很好，而且做得比他们更好！……由于地缘政治动荡和贸易战，中国已摒弃了依赖技术进口的政策，转而实施更加自力更生的战略。 例如，特斯拉虽然在上海工厂生产了大量汽车，并完全掌控着其知识产权和技术，但中国仍在生产效率更高、更可靠的电动汽车……在我看来，西方就像一群不愿公平竞争的任性小孩子。 在全球范围内做出愚蠢的政治决策并鼓吹战争，正是导致西方衰落的最大原因，别无其他……！！！……西方竟想将中国的全面成功归功于自己。哈哈，仿佛中国没有智慧和能力去创建一个伟大的国家——一个拥有约3500至5000年有记载历史的国家。中国加入世界贸易组织（WTO）推动了其全球贸易，并促进了其融入世界经济。 更重要的是，中国的创新在于探索将服务变现、开拓新客户等新途径。中国拥有全球最高的储蓄率，且在出口端存在巨大的全球贸易失衡。依我之见，中国已是世界最大经济体，而西方对此深恶痛绝。 一个大国的衰落和另一个大国的崛起并非新鲜事。纵观历史，许多帝国都曾覆灭，而它们通常将衰亡归咎于所有人，唯独不承认自身的问题。因此，总而言之，是的，我认为在历史的这一时刻，中国是、也将继续成为更可靠的贸易伙伴，因为他们专注于正确的事情。
Well...I don't think your point is as cut-and-dry as you make it out to be. It’s crucial not to forget that all economic success stories include a phase that involved copying and mimicking the technologies and products of industry leaders. For example, America stole British designs for looms and mills which helped make America a financial superpower. In addition, copying made Japanese companies like Hitachi, Nintendo, and Sony global sensations.....Keep in mind that China of course benefitted from their strategy of "trading market for technology." Nonetheless, China did not have access to key technologies as companies only shared the technology important for those products i.e. parts of products produced locally in China. The most important components of the design "the master blueprint" so to speak, was withheld. So China wasn't able to completely implement/copy the products they manufactured. I think that what's making the west so angry is that China is not only doing well but they're doing it better!......Due to geopolitical upheavals and trade wars, China has moved away from importing technology as a policy and is implementing a more self-reliant strategy. For instance, Tesla is manufacturing a huge amount of autos from its factory in Shanghai but has complete control of its IP and technology but China is still producing more efficient and reliable EVs .....It appears to me that the west is acting like little, spoiled children who don't want to play fair. Making foolish political decisions and warmongering across the globe has been the biggest contribution to the west's demise and nothing Else....!!!......The west wants to award China's total success to them. LOL As If China has no intelligence and ability to create a great nation, a nation that has roughly 3500 to 5000 years of recorded history. China joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) boosted its global trade and integration into the world economy. What's more, China's innovation is based on discovering new ways to monetize its services, gain new customers, etc. China has the world's highest saving rate and a massive global trade imbalance on the export end. China is the world's largest economy IMHO and the west don't like it one bit. The downfall of one power to another is nothing new. Many empires have fallen throughout the ages and they usually blamed their demise on everyone but itself. Therefore in conclusion, yes I think at this time in history China is and will continue to be a more reliable trading partner. because they're focusing on the right things.
加入对话