英国不应成为规则的被动接受者

An astute American foresaw Britain’s troubles in Europe long before a common market was a mere glint in the eye of Jean Monnet. Edward Stettinius, then US secretary of state, told President Franklin Roosevelt as the second world war drew towards a close in 1944, that the British would always be uncomfortable in any club that they did not lead.

早在欧洲共同市场只是让莫内(Jean Monnet)眼中的一抹闪光很久之前，一位聪明的美国人就预见到了英国在欧洲的困境。1944年，在二战即将步入尾声时，当时的美国国务卿爱德华斯特提纽斯(Edward Stettinius)告诉美国总统富兰克林圠斯福(Franklin Roosevelt)，英国在任何一个自己不占据领导地位的俱乐部里永远都是不舒服的。

There are many explanations for the singularity of Britain’s view of its own continent, among them history, geography, political culture and self-image. It really does matter that 1,000 years have passed since the country was last invaded and that the chamber of the House of Commons is laid out for combat rather than consensus. The original sin as far as the EU is concerned, though, was to come late to an organisation in which leadership had already been claimed by Paris and Bonn.

英国对自己所处大陆的观点颇为奇特，这有很多原因，包括历史、地理、政治、文化和自我形象。自从英国上一次遭到入侵已经过去1000年了，英国下议院的设计是为了对抗而非达成共识，这些事实都很重要。然而，就欧盟(EU)而言，英国的原罪在于，加入这个组织太晚，领导权已被法国和德国夺走了。

Britain’s European question is as much about temperament as about the dastardly designs of those on the other side of the Channel. Standing aside in 1957 from the founding Treaty of Rome, before scurrying a few years later to climb aboard, spoke to a frame of mind that ricochets between innate superiority and recurring insecurity.

英国的欧洲问题既与脾性有关，也与英吉利海峡对岸国家的卑鄙设计有关。1957年，英国对欧洲共同市场的创始条约《罗马条约》(Treaty of Rome)持观望态度，几年后又急忙加入，这说明了一种心态：英国摇摆于天生的优越感与重复出现的不安全感之间。

Britain may be convinced it does not need the EU, but history recalls it must not allow its neighbours to conspire against it. So successive governments have rarely ventured more than halfway in — an arrangement formalised in opt-outs from the euro and the Schengen frontier-free zone.

英国可能认为，它不需要欧盟，但历史提醒英国，不能让邻国合谋反对英国。因此，历届英国政府往往对欧洲共同市场半推半就：这种安排正式体现在英国选择不加入欧元区和申根区。

The psychodrama is unlikely to be front and centre in the referendum on EU membership. Modern campaigning, we are told, is about pocketbook issues. Jobs, growth and living standards take precedence over grand visions. This, I think, is a mistake. Britain’s relationship with Europe stirs deep-rooted emotions and impulses.

在就英国的欧盟成员国身份举行的公投中，这种心态不太可能唱主角。我们知道，现代运动关乎财政问题。就业、增长和生活标准盖过了远大理想。我认为，这是个错误。英国与欧洲的关系会搅动深层次的情绪和脉搏。

The “outs” have it that plucky Britain is better off striking out alone than bending to the will of Brussels. If anyone is nervous about being excluded, the sceptics add, the UK will get a good deal if the vote is to leave. Hmmm. David Cameron, prime minister, is rehearsing the dubious claim that renegotiation has secured “the best of both worlds” — a place at the table along with an exemption from all that stuff it does not like.

“退欧派”人士认为，勇敢的英国单打独斗要好于向欧盟的意志屈服。怀疑派补充称，如果有人对自己受到排斥感到担心，那么如果公投结果是脱欧，英国将获得一笔不错的买卖。英国首相戴维愠蕓伦(David Cameron)正默诵下面这种值得怀疑的说法：重新谈判会达到“两全其美”的结果——既在议事桌上获得一席之地，又免除所有英国不喜欢的责任。

Valiant souls such as the Conservative Kenneth Clarke are in a minority even among pro-Europeans in recalling that the Union is an essential pillar of peace and security. For the most part such sentiments are seen as relics of the cold war. Today’s deracinated political discourse demands that British pro-Europeans instead sing the praises of, say, the single market in mobile telephony. They are the ones living in the past. Britain is neither safe nor secure. Russian revanchism, Islamist terrorism, and surging migration — these are not threats susceptible to national resolution.

在回想起欧盟是和平与安全的重要支柱方面，即便在支持欧盟的人士中，保守党人肯尼斯克拉克(Kenneth Clarke)等勇敢人士也属于少数派。这种观点基本上被视为冷战的残留。如今的脱欧政治言论要求支持欧盟的英国人赞颂单一移动通讯市场。他们生活在过去。英国现在既不安全也没有保障。俄罗斯的复仇主义、伊斯兰的恐怖主义以及日益增加的移民，这些威胁不是凭一国之力可以解决的。

The UK carries considerable clout: economic, diplomatic, cultural and military. It also confronts an ineluctable strategic fact. Decisions taken by Germany, France, Italy and the rest, whether about hard security, energy supply, climate change, economic management or financial regulation, have an impact on Britain’s national interest. The in-out choice is one between being a maker or a taker of the rules.

英国有着巨大影响力：经济、外交、文化和军事。英国还面临着无法逃避的战略现实。德国、法国、意大利和其他国家做出的决定会对英国的国家利益造成影响，不管是硬安全、能源供应、气候变化、经济管理还是金融监管。选择留在欧盟还是退出欧盟，就是决定是要成为规则的制定者还是接受者。

For now, the “ins” are in the grip of a certain complacency. Buoyed by largely favourable polls you hear them whisper that the die is cast. For all the inevitable brouhaha of the coming campaign (everyone expects a deal next month in Brussels to be followed by a referendum in June), the British will play it safe. They will opt, albeit with a certain sullenness, for the status quo rather than take a leap into the unknown.

目前，“留欧派”陷入了某种自满情绪。受到基本有利的民意测验的提振，你会听到他们小声说木已成舟。尽管即将到来的公投将不可避免地出现骚动（所有人都预计欧盟于下月达成协议，然后英国在6月举行公投），英国人将谨慎行事。尽管情绪有些低沉，但他们将选择维持现状，而不是踏入未知境地。

The pro-Europeans have a point. The glaring weakness of the out campaign is the absence of any credible alternative. The sceptics are profoundly divided on the extent to which Britain should cut itself loose. Some look to the Norwegian or Swiss example — outside but playing by the single market rules. Others see the inherent absurdity of going to the trouble of leaving and then signing up again for all the rules. Singapore, they say, is a better model.

“留欧派”是有道理的。脱欧运动的明显弱点在于没有提出任何可信的替代方案。怀疑派对于英国应获取多大程度的自由分歧严重。一些人考虑像挪威或瑞士那样：不加入欧盟但遵守单一市场规则。还有一些人认为，如此大费周章地退出欧盟、然后又遵守所有欧盟规则，从根本上就很荒唐。他们说，新加坡的模式更好。

Mr Clarke calls the sceptics old-fashioned rightwing nationalists, and there is much of that tradition among the Tory sceptics and in Nigel Farage’s UK Independence party. But Europe is an issue on which far right and far left meet. Jeremy Corbyn, the hard-left opposition Labour party leader, is as hostile to the EU as any rightwing populist. He is kept quiet only by of the threat of open civil war in his own party.

克拉克将怀疑派称为旧式的右翼民族主义者，保守党怀疑派人士以及奈杰尔法拉奇(Nigel Farage)领导的英国独立党(UKIP)在很大程度上具有这种传统。但极右翼和极左翼人士在欧洲问题上意见相合。反对党工党(Labour party)的极左翼领导人杰里米科尔宾(Jeremy Corbyn)对欧盟的敌意与右翼民粹主义分子一样深。他保持缄默的原因仅仅是害怕他所在政党爆发公开内战。

What the pro-Europeans miss is the powerful emotional pull of the “outs”. Their appeal is to a mood that rejects the political elites, demonises big business and banking, and casts Brussels as the agent of unfettered globalisation and uncontrolled migration. In truth, there is no guarantee that when the British come to cast their ballots that they will prefer cold economic logic to the siren call of national self-discovery.

留欧派忽视了退欧派的强大情感力量。退欧派迎合了这种情绪：反对政治精英，将大企业和银行业妖魔化，并把欧盟描绘为不受约束的全球化和不受控制的移民的代理人。实际上，谁也无法保证，英国人在公投时会喜欢冷冰冰的经济逻辑，胜过国家自我发现的诱人召唤。

Stettinius offered his observation as Britain entered the twilight of empire. His concern was that Britain would struggle to adjust to the emerging world of two superpowers. He did not imagine that, seven decades later, Britain would still be vexed by an innate reluctance to accept anything much less than leadership. Mr Cameron says the referendum will settle the matter. He is mistaken. Britain’s European question is about a lot more than membership of the EU.

在英国走向帝国的黄昏时，斯特提纽斯提出了他的观点。他担心，英国将难以适应这个存在两个超级大国的新世界。他不会想到，70年后，英国仍会因为天生不愿接受远远低于领导者的地位而感到烦恼。卡梅伦表示，公投将解决这个问题。他说错了。英国的欧洲问题远远不仅仅是关于欧盟成员国身份。