|
Scottish independence UK RIP? 联合王国分崩离析？
译者：老狒狒 SCHOOLCHILDREN once imagined their place in the world, with its complex networks and allegiances, by writing elaborate postal addresses. British youngsters began with their street and town (London or Manchester, Edinburgh or Cardiff), followed by England, Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland; then came the United Kingdom (and after that Europe, the World, the Universe…). They understood that the UK, and all its collective trials and achievements—the industrial revolution, the Empire, victory over the Nazis, the welfare state—were as much a part of their patrimony as the Scottish Highlands or English cricket. They knew, instinctively, that these concentric rings of identity were complementary, not opposed. 以前的时候，英国小学生在设想他们这个有着各种复杂的网络和形形色色的臣民的地方在世界中所处的位置的时候，都会使用书写精心编排的邮政地址的办法：先写出街道；接着是城市，如伦敦、曼彻斯特、爱丁堡或者加的夫；继而是英格兰、威尔士、苏格兰或者北爱尔兰；然后是联合王国；再往后是欧洲、世界，宇宙??。他们懂得，联合王国以及联合王国作为一个整体的足迹和成就，如工业革命、大英帝国、战胜纳粹和福利制度。所有这一切，就如同苏格兰的高地和英格兰的板球一样，都是祖先留给他们的遗产的一部分。他们本能地知道，这些身份的同心圆是相辅相成的，不是相互排斥的。 At least, they used to. After the referendum on Scottish independence on September 18th, one of those layers—the UK—may cease to exist, at least in the form recognisable since the Act of Union three centuries ago. As the vote nears, Scotland's nationalists have caught up with the unionist No camp in the opinion polls, and even edged ahead. More and more Scots are deciding that the UK, which their soldiers, statesmen, philosophers and businessmen have done so much to build and ornament, does not cradle their Scottishness but smothers it. This great multinational state could be undone in a single day, by a poll in which just 7% of its citizens will participate. That outcome, once unthinkable, would be bad for Scotland and tragic for what remained of the UK. 这些同心圆至少以前是这样的。但是，在9月18日的苏格兰独立公投后，其中的一层可能会不复存在，至少是不再会以三个世纪之前签署《联合法案》所认可的那种形式存在了。随着投票的日益临近，苏格兰民族主义者已经在民调中追了上了反对独立的联合阵营，甚至已经取得了微弱的优势。越来越多的苏格兰人认为，这个他们的士兵、政治家、哲人和商界人士花费了如此多的精力去构建并为其增光添彩的联合王国，不但没有呵护他们的苏格兰民族特性，反而是在扼杀他们的苏格兰民族特性。这个伟大的多民族国家可能会在一天之内，被一次将只有7％的公民参与其中的投票所毁。这种曾经不可想像的结果，对于苏格兰来说，是糟糕的，对于其身后的联合王国来说，是悲剧性的。 The damage a split would do 分家的危害 The rump of Britain would be diminished in every international forum: why should anyone heed a country whose own people shun it? Since Britain broadly stands for free trade and the maintenance of international order, this would be bad for the world. Its status as a nuclear power would be doubtful: the country's nuclear submarines are based in a Scottish loch and could not be moved quickly. Britain would also be more likely to leave the European Union, since Scots are better disposed to Europe than are the English (and are less likely to vote for the Conservatives, who are promising a Euro-referendum if they win next year's general election). The prospect of a British exit from the EU would scare investors much more than a possible Scottish exit from Britain. 苏格兰离开后的英国无足轻重，会在所有的国际论坛中遭人轻视。为什么要对一个连自己的民众都避而远之的国家高看一眼呢？由于英国是公认的自由贸易和维护国际秩序的代表，因而，对于这个世界来说，这会是一个糟糕的结果。英国的核大国地位会存在不确定性。因为她的核潜艇基地就位于苏格兰的一处海湾中，且不能被迅速转移。英国离开欧盟的可能性也会增加。这是因为苏格兰人对欧州有更多的好感，这是英格兰人所不及的。同时，苏格兰人不大有可能把选票投给已经承诺在明年大选获胜后将就英国是否离开欧盟举行一次公投的保守党。英国离开欧盟的前景会吓坏投资者，其程度远远大于苏格兰可能离开英国。 The people of Scotland alone will decide the future of Britain, and they are not obliged to worry about what becomes of the state they would leave. But—perhaps not surprisingly, given the endurance and success of the union, imperilled though it is—Scots' own interests, and the rest of Britain's, coincide. 苏格兰民众将独自决定英国的未来，他们没有义务为他们身后之国的前途担忧。但是，考虑到大家已经一起过成功地过了这么长的时间，尽管这种联合危在旦夕，苏格兰人的利益仍然是同英国其他人的利益是息息相连的。这一点也许并不令人吃惊。 At the heart of the nationalist campaign is the claim that Scotland would be a more prosperous and more equal country if it went solo. It is rich in oil and inherently decent, say the nationalists, but impoverished by a government in Westminster that has also imposed callous policies. They blame successive British governments for almost every ill that has befallen Scotland, from the decline of manufacturing industry to ill-health to the high price of sending parcels in the Highlands. Alex Salmond, Scotland's nationalist leader, is broad in his recrimination: Labour and the Tories are of a piece, he suggests, in their disregard for Scotland. 民族主义阵营的核心观点认为，如果单过，苏格兰会成为一个更加繁荣、更加平等的国家。民族主义者说，苏格兰富有石油，天生的正人君子，但是却被一个始终还在对其施加无情政策的政府给搞穷了。在他们看来，落在他们头上的几乎所有的不幸，如制造业的衰落、健康状况不佳以及在高地地区邮寄包裹的高价格，责任全在历届英国政府。苏格兰民族主义者的领导人亚历克斯·萨尔蒙德的指责很有代表性。他说：说到对苏格兰的不重视，工党和保守党没有什么两样。 But Scotland's relative economic decline is the result not of southern neglect but of the shift of manufacturing and shipping to Asia. If Westminster has not reversed all the deleterious effects of globalisation and technology, that is because to do so is impossible. The nationalists know this, which is why, sotto voce, they would continue many of Westminster's policies. Instead they make much of minor adjustments, such as abolishing the “bedroom tax”, a recent measure designed to nudge people out of too-large social housing. To break up a country over such small, recent annoyances would be nuts. 但是，苏格兰经济的相对衰落不是南方不重视的结果，而是由于制造业和造船业转移到亚洲所致。如果说英国政府一直没有完全扭转全球化和技术的有害影响，那是因为这样做是不可能的。民族主义者对此心知肚明。因而，他们会不动声色地延续英国政府的许多政策。相反，他们所做的大多是一些微调，如取消最近专为迫使民众搬出面积过大的公租房而设计的“卧室税”就是如此。为这等小事而拆散一个国家，最近的种种烦恼无异于疯言疯语。 The nationalists’ economics are also flawed. Scotland would not, in fact, be richer alone. The taxes that would flow to it from the North Sea would roughly compensate for the extra cost of its lavish state, which would no longer be funded by Westminster (last year spending was some ￡1,300 per person higher in Scotland than elsewhere in Britain). But oil revenues are erratic. They would have earned Scotland ￡11.5 billion in 2008-09 but only ￡5.5 billion in 2012-13. If an independent state were to smooth these fluctuations by setting up an oil fund, it would have less cash to spend now. In any case, the oil is gradually running out. In order to maintain state spending after it is gone, taxes would have to rise. And a crunch might come much sooner. Foreign investors and big businesses that mostly serve English customers could well move south. 民族主义者的经济学也是有缺陷的。实际上，苏格兰不会因为单过而更加富有。今后来自北海的税收收入也就是刚够这个花起钱来大手大脚且今后再也得不到英国政府资金援助的政府的额外开支之用（英国政府去年花在苏格兰的开销，按人头算，比花在其他地区的大约多出1300英镑）。但是，石油收入是不固定的。它们能在2008财年给苏格兰带来115亿英镑的收入，但是，在2012财年只有55亿英镑。倘若一个独立的国家准备利用建立一支石油基金的办法来填平这些波动，那么，现在可用来支出的现金就必然会有所减少。总之，石油正在慢慢地耗尽。为了维持石油耗尽后的政府开支，税收必然会提高。关键时刻的到来可能会大大提前。大多数为英格兰客户服务的外国投资者和大公司很可能会搬到南边去。 Westminster has ruled out a currency union—correctly, given that the nationalists propose a deficit-widening fiscal splurge and that the assets of Scottish banks are an alarming 12 times the country's GDP. It might relent, but only if Scotland agrees to such strict oversight that independence ends up meaning little. The nationalists say that kinks over currency and the like could be worked out amicably—that it would not be in Britain's interests to antagonise its new northern neighbour, particularly since (they hint darkly) Scotland could refuse to take on its share of the national debt. They are far too sanguine. If Scotland goes, the rest of Britain will be furious, both at the Scots and at their own leaders, who will be impelled to drive a hard bargain. 英国政府已经排除了货币联盟的可能性——考虑到民族主义者建议大幅提高财政赤字以及苏格兰的银行资产已经令人警醒地达到该国GDP12倍这两个事实，这个决定是正确的。如果苏格兰同意对其进行严格得令独立失去意义的监督，事态本来是有缓和余地的。苏格兰民族主义者说，有关货币问题的纠结能够和平解决。激怒北方的新邻居不符合英国的利益，特别是在苏格兰可能会拒绝承担它应该承担的那部分国家债务的情况下更是如此。他们乐观得过头了。如果苏格兰离开英国，其他地区将会对苏格兰人以及他们自己的领导人产生极度的不满，使得这些领导人被迫去推动一场艰苦的讨价还价。 Mr Salmond is on stronger ground when he argues that if Scotland does not leave Britain it might be dragged out of the EU against its will. This is indeed a danger, but in going independent Scotland would swap the possibility of an EU exit for a certain future as a small, vulnerable country. Its best hope of remaining influential is to stay put, and fight the Eurosceptics. 萨尔蒙德说，如果苏格兰不离开英国，它可能会受到拖累，在违背其意愿的情况下，被迫离开欧盟。他的这番话是很有道理的。这确实是一个危险。但是，如果苏格兰选择独立，就等于是在拿未来成为一个脆弱小国的确定性来交换离开欧盟的可能性。对苏格兰来说，保持影响力的最佳希望就是留下来，同疑欧派进行斗争。 A lot to lose 会失去很多 In the end the referendum will turn not on calculations of taxes and oil revenue, but on identity and power. The idea that Scots can shape their own destiny, both at the referendum and afterwards, is exhilarating. Yet Scotland already controls many of its own affairs (even if Mr Salmond's Scottish National Party, which runs the devolved government and is driving the Yes campaign, has not done much with its powers so far). Moreover, as Westminster politicians of all stripes have hastily made clear, if Scotland votes No, the devolved administration will soon get so much clout that the practical difference between staying in the union and leaving it will narrow. That would also lead to the distribution of power away from Westminster and to other bits of Britain, which should have happened long ago. 总之，公投既取决于税收收入和石油收入的考量，也取决于身份和权力的考量。认为苏格兰人能在公投中和公投后塑造其自身命运的想法是令人神往的。然而，苏格兰早就在掌控自己的事务，而且还不在少数。（即便是在运作着权力下放政府同时还在推动独立公投的萨尔蒙德的苏格兰民族党至今仍未使用这些权力的情况下也是如此）。此外，英国政府中所有政党的政客已经匆忙地表明了这样一个想法：如果苏格兰投票反对离开，那么，权力下放政府不久就会得到更多的权力，这不仅会让留下来和离开之间几乎不存在实际的差距，还会带来早就应该有的来自英国政府的权力分散以及将权力交给其他地区。 So by staying in, Scots will not just save the union but enhance it, as they have for 300 years. For the UK, with all its triumphs and eccentricities, belongs to Scots as much as it does to the English—even if increasing numbers of them seem ready to disown that glorious, hard-earned heritage, and to simplify their identities by stripping out one of those concentric rings. That goes against both the spirit of this fluid century—in which most people have multiple identities, whether of place, ethnicity or religion—and the evidence of the preceding three. For all its tensions and rivalries, and sometimes because of them, the history of the union shows that the Scots, Welsh, English and Northern Irish are stronger, more tolerant and more imaginative together than they would be apart. 因此，如果苏格兰选择留下来，它不仅会拯救联合王国，还会让联合王国变得更强大，就像他们在过去的300多年中一直在做的那样。因为，这个有着种种成就和怪癖的联合王国，不仅是属于英格兰的，也是属于苏格兰的——纵然是在准备放弃来之不易光荣传统、准备强行拆除那些同心圆中的一个以简化自己的身份的人似乎越来越多的情况下也是如此。离开联合王国，既是对这个大多数人都拥有地域、种族或者宗教等多重身份的流动世纪的精神的背叛，也是与上述三种身份的证据不相符的。联合王国的历史告诉我们：尽管苏格兰人、威尔士人、英格兰人和北爱尔兰人之间不乏关系紧张和竞争对立，同时，有时也正是因为这些对立和竞争，才使得他们在团结在一起时比分开来单过时，更加强大，更具宽容性，更有想像力。 From the print edition: Leaders |
|
|
