奧巴馬遭遇自家人找麻煩

　　It is not just President Barack Obama’s trade agenda that hangs in the balance. The Senate’s rebuff to his request for a vote on the fast-track negotiating authority also casts doubt on his “pivot to Asia”. The White House downplayed the defeat as a “procedural snafu”. It insists common sense will prevail. But the goal of enacting Trade Promotion Authority — an essential step to wrapping up both the Pacific and transatlantic deals — is starting to look arduous.

　　The Senate was supposed to be the easy part. Moreover, Mr Obama’s toughest opponents are within his own party — a new challenge after years of grappling with reflex Republican obstructionism. What remains of his trade agenda will depend on persuading Democrats to climb down and keeping Republicans onside. It also poses a test of America’s authority in an era of geopolitical rivalry. China does not suffer from procedural mishaps. Mr Obama must retrieve the initiative.

　　Hillary Clinton’s ambivalence is one measure of how tough that will be. As secretary of state, Mrs Clinton described the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) as the “gold standard” of global trade rules. As the Democratic frontrunner to replace Mr Obama, she has stayed ominously silent on the deal. Her stance owes much to political calculation. Mr Obama is opposed by the entire spectrum of Democratic interest groups — from trade unions to environmentalists and consumer organisations.

　　The president may have erred in presenting it as a personal fight with Elizabeth Warren, the populist senator from Massachusetts. Mrs Warren has made defeat of the TPA into her own cause. Dismissing her as misinformed — and opponents in general as “calcified” — Mr Obama has only encouraged other Democrats to fall in line with her. Their view is that TPP will lower US labour and environmental standards. They are wrong. Mr Obama needs to do a better job of explaining why.

　　He must also set out how the Pacific deal would differ from the North American Free Trade Agreement, which was passed during Bill Clinton’s administration. Nafta has become a touchstone on the US left for all that is wrong with free trade. It was sold as a deal that would generate millions of US jobs. It fell far short.

　　The left sees TPP as another “giant sucking sound” for corporate offshoring. This is in spite of the fact that China is not a part of TPP. The left says never again. Even moderate Democrats say they will only support a deal if it includes a provision to punish China for manipulating its currency. That would kill any chance of a Pacific agreement and would rightly invite Mr Obama’s veto.

　　Mr Obama must also be careful not to oversell the economic benefits of TPP. At the margins it will create jobs and open up Japan, Vietnam and other markets to US exports and investment. Nor should it be seen as a geopolitical counter to a China that is increasingly willing to make up its own rules and set up its own clubs. It is vital for the US to make clear that TPP will be open to all, including Beijing. Mr Obama should be careful to avoid a game of zero-sum rivalry with the Chinese.

　　Mr Obama’s challenge is novel. He must rely on Republican support to salvage the centrepiece of his economic diplomacy. The clock is against him. America’s partners know there is no chance that Congress will ratify a trade agreement in 2016, which is a presidential election year. TPA must be passed within the next few weeks if a deal is to be concluded and enacted before the end of 2015. Capitol Hill’s obstacles must be overcome. America’s global credibility is at stake.

　　前程未蔔的不單單是美國總統巴拉克•奧巴馬(Barack Obama)的商業議程。美國商討院謝絕奧巴馬就“快車道”(fast-track)會談授權舉辦投票的要求，也給他的“重返亞洲”計謀罩上疑雲。白宮將這次波折淡化為“法式淩亂”。白宮堅稱，知識將會占領優勢。但得到“商業增進授權”(TPA)是締結跨寧靖洋和跨大泰西協議的癥結一步，如今看起來實現這個目的有些艱苦。

　　美國商討院原來應當不是題目。別的，奧巴馬最難纏的否決者是在本黨內部——在多年疲於應答共和黨反射性的反對以後，這是一個新的挑釁。他的商業議程前程若何將取決於可否說服民主黨做出妥協，並堅持共和黨的支撐。這也讓美國在地緣政治反抗時期的威望擔當磨練。中國沒有湧現法式淩亂。奧巴馬必需規復自動。

　　希拉裏•克林頓(Hillary Clinton)的抵觸立場註解這將是何等的艱苦。希拉裏曾在任國務卿時將12國介入的《跨寧靖洋火伴幹系》(Trans-Pacific Partnership，簡稱TPP)描寫為環球商業規矩的“黃金尺度”。作為有望代替奧巴馬的民主黨總統競選人，她又對該協議堅持緘默，這是一個不祥的跡象。她的態度在很大水平上是出於政治上的考量。奧巴馬遭到民主黨全部好處團體的否決——從工會到環保主義者和花費者集團等。

　　奧巴馬大概犯了一個錯，那便是表示得似乎這是他與來自馬薩諸塞州的布衣主義商討員伊麗莎白•沃倫(Elizabeth Warren)的小我爭斗。沃倫已將挫敗“商業增進授權”看成本身的奇跡。奧巴馬鞭撻沃倫遭到了誤導，並以為否決者團體“鈣化”，成果只會匆匆使其他民主黨人贊成沃倫的概念。他們以為，TPP將會下降美國勞工和情況尺度。他們是毛病的，奧巴馬須要更好地說明緣故原由安在。

　　他還必需說明TPP與《北美自由商業協議》(North American Free Trade Agreement)若何分歧，後者在比爾•克林頓(Bill Clinton)當局時代經由過程。美國左翼每每拿《北美自由商業協議》來解釋自由商業的弊端。該協議曾被兜銷為將會為美國發明數百萬就業崗亭，成果卻遠未有那末多。

　　美國左翼以為TPP是企業運動外流到外洋發出的又一個“偉大的吸吮聲”，這照樣在中國沒有介入TPP的情形下。左翼說不克不及再如許了。乃至平和的民主黨人也表現，只有協議包括處分中國把持國民幣匯率的條目，他們才會支撐協議。這將會抹殺簽訂跨寧靖洋協議的大概性，也無疑會招致奧巴馬的反對。

　　奧巴馬還必需堅持謹嚴，不要過分誇張TPP的經濟好處。它最少會創培養業並為美國的出口和投資打開日本、越南和其他市場。它也不該被視為在地緣政治上反抗中國，後者日趨故意制訂本身的規矩和創立本身的俱樂部。相當主要的是，美國應明白表現，TPP將會向包含中國在內的全部國度開放。奧巴馬應當當心防止與中國進入零和反抗。

　　奧巴馬面對的挑釁很獨特。他必需依附共和黨的支撐來搶救其經濟交際的焦點議程。奧巴馬必需分秒必爭。美國的互助火伴曉得，美國國會弗成能在舉辦總統大選的2016年同意商業協議。假如要在2015歲尾前締結並經由過程協議，就必需在將來數周內得到“商業增進授權”。必需戰勝國會山的停滯。美國的環球信用正擔當磨練。