不便外发的段落 | 国际货币基金组织 / IMF

正文10.1 对整个组织存在及偏向的批评

文中可能包含无法从中国内地访问的链接。

Overseas Development Institute (ODI) research undertaken in 1980 included criticisms of the IMF which support the analysis that it is a pillar of what activist Titus Alexander calls global apartheid.[141]
【参考译文】1980年，海外发展研究所（ODI）开展的研究包括对国际货币基金组织（IMF）的批评，这些批评支持了以下分析：IMF是活动家提图斯·亚历山大（Titus Alexander）所称的全球种族隔离制度的支柱。[141]

• Developed countries were seen to have a more dominant role and control over less developed countries (LDCs).
  【参考译文】发达国家被认为在较不发达国家（LDCs）中扮演着更为重要的角色，并对其进行控制。

• The Fund worked on the incorrect assumption that all payments disequilibria were caused domestically. The Group of 24 (G-24), on behalf of LDC members, and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) complained that the IMF did not distinguish sufficiently between disequilibria with predominantly external as opposed to internal causes. This criticism was voiced in the aftermath of the 1973 oil crisis. Then LDCs found themselves with payment deficits due to adverse changes in their terms of trade, with the Fund prescribing stabilization programmes similar to those suggested for deficits caused by government over-spending. Faced with long-term, externally generated disequilibria, the G-24 argued for more time for LDCs to adjust their economies.
  【参考译文】该基金错误地认为，所有支付失衡都是由国内因素造成的。24国集团（G-24）代表最不发达国家成员，以及联合国贸易和发展会议（贸发会议）抱怨称，国际货币基金组织没有充分区分主要由外部原因而非内部原因造成的失衡。这一批评是在1973年石油危机之后发出的。当时，最不发达国家发现自己由于贸易条件的不利变化而出现支付赤字，而基金组织却为这些赤字开出了与政府过度支出导致的赤字类似的稳定计划。面对长期外部造成的失衡，24国集团要求为最不发达国家提供更多时间调整其经济。

• Some IMF policies may be anti-developmental; the report said that deflationary effects of IMF programmes quickly led to losses of output and employment in economies where incomes were low and unemployment was high. Moreover, the burden of the deflation is disproportionately borne by the poor.
  【参考译文】国际货币基金组织的一些政策可能是反发展的；该报告称，国际货币基金组织计划造成的通货紧缩效应迅速导致那些收入低、失业率高的国家的产出和就业减少。此外，通货紧缩的负担大部分由穷人承担。

• The IMF's initial policies were based in theory and influenced by differing opinions and departmental rivalries. Critics suggest that its intentions to implement these policies in countries with widely varying economic circumstances were misinformed and lacked economic rationale.
  【参考译文】国际货币基金组织的初步政策以理论为基础，并受到不同意见和部门竞争的影响。批评者认为，该组织在经济状况大相径庭的国家实施这些政策的意图是错误的，缺乏经济合理性。

ODI conclusions were that the IMF's very nature of promoting market-oriented approaches attracted unavoidable criticism. On the other hand, the IMF could serve as a scapegoat while allowing governments to blame international bankers. The ODI conceded that the IMF was insensitive to political aspirations of LDCs while its policy conditions were inflexible.[142]
【参考译文】海外发展研究所（ODI）得出的结论是，国际货币基金组织（IMF）促进市场导向方法的本质不可避免地会招致批评。另一方面，国际货币基金组织可以作为替罪羊，让政府指责国际银行家。海外发展研究所承认，国际货币基金组织对最不发达国家的政治愿望不敏感，而其政策条件又不灵活。[142]

Argentina, which had been considered by the IMF to be a model country in its compliance to policy proposals by the Bretton Woods institutions, experienced a catastrophic economic crisis in 2001,[143] which some believe to have been caused by IMF-induced budget restrictions—which undercut the government's ability to sustain national infrastructure even in crucial areas such as health, education, and security—and privatisation of strategically vital national resources.[144] Others attribute the crisis to Argentina's misdesigned fiscal federalism, which caused subnational spending to increase rapidly.[145] The crisis added to widespread hatred of this institution in Argentina and other South American countries, with many blaming the IMF for the region's economic problems. The current—as of early 2006—trend toward moderate left-wing governments in the region and a growing concern with the development of a regional economic policy largely independent of big business pressures has been ascribed to this crisis.[citation needed]
【参考译文】阿根廷曾是国际货币基金组织（IMF）眼中遵守布雷顿森林机构政策提案的模范国家，但在2001年却遭遇了灾难性的经济危机，[143]一些人认为这场危机是由国际货币基金组织强加的预算限制引起的——这种限制削弱了政府维持国家基础设施的能力，甚至在卫生、教育和安全等关键领域也是如此——以及对战略上至关重要的国家资源的私有化。[144]另一些人则将这场危机归咎于阿根廷设计不当的财政联邦制，该制度导致地方政府支出迅速增加。[145]这场危机加剧了阿根廷和其他南美国家对这一机构的普遍憎恨，许多人指责国际货币基金组织是导致该地区经济问题的罪魁祸首。自2006年初以来，该地区向温和左翼政府发展的趋势，以及对制定基本上独立于大企业压力的区域经济政策的日益关注，都被归咎于这场危机。[需要引证]

另一个引起争议的国家是肯尼亚。原本肯尼亚的中央银行控制了该国货币的流动，IMF提出协助后，要求放宽货币政策。调整后不但外商投资大减，在贪污官员的协助下，Kamlesh Manusuklal Damji Pattni 亏空了数以十亿计的肯尼亚先令（是为 Goldenberg scandal），肯尼亚的财政状况比之前更差。

In 2006, a senior ActionAid policy analyst Akanksha Marphatia stated that IMF policies in Africa undermine any possibility of meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) due to imposed restrictions that prevent spending on important sectors, such as education and health.[146]
【参考译文】2006年，国际行动援助组织（ActionAid）的高级政策分析师阿坎克莎·马尔帕蒂亚（Akanksha Marphatia）表示，国际货币基金组织（IMF）在非洲的政策破坏了实现千年发展目标（MDGs）的任何可能性，因为这些政策施加了限制，阻碍了教育、卫生等重要部门的支出。[146]

In an interview (2008-05-19), the former Romanian Prime Minister Călin Popescu-Tăriceanu claimed that "Since 2005, IMF is constantly making mistakes when it appreciates the country's economic performances".[147] Former Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere, who claimed that debt-ridden African states were ceding sovereignty to the IMF and the World Bank, famously asked, "Who elected the IMF to be the ministry of finance for every country in the world?"[148][149]
【参考译文】在2008年5月19日的一次采访中，罗马尼亚前总理卡林·波佩斯库-塔里塞阿努（Călin Popescu-Tăriceanu）声称，“自2005年以来，国际货币基金组织（IMF）在评估该国的经济表现时一直在犯错误”。[147]坦桑尼亚前总统朱利叶斯·尼雷尔（Julius Nyerere）声称，负债累累的非洲国家正在将主权让渡给国际货币基金组织和世界银行，他曾著名地问到：“是谁选举国际货币基金组织成为世界上每个国家的财政部长的？”[148][149]

Former chief economist of IMF and former Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Governor Raghuram Rajan who predicted the 2007–2008 financial crisis criticised the IMF for remaining a sideline player to the developed world. He criticised the IMF for praising the monetary policies of the US, which he believed were wreaking havoc in emerging markets.[150] He had been critical of "ultra-loose money policies" of some unnamed countries.[151][152]
【参考译文】国际货币基金组织（IMF）前首席经济学家、印度储备银行（RBI）前行长拉古拉姆·拉詹（Raghuram Rajan）曾预测2007-2008年金融危机，他批评国际货币基金组织一直是发达国家的边缘角色。他批评国际货币基金组织赞扬美国的货币政策，而他认为这些政策正在新兴市场造成破坏。[150]他还对一些未具名国家的“极度宽松的货币政策”提出了批评。[151][152]

Countries such as Zambia have not received proper aid with long-lasting effects, leading to concern from economists. Since 2005, Zambia (as well as 29 other African countries) did receive debt write-offs, which helped with the country's medical and education funds. However, Zambia returned to a debt of over half its GDP in less than a decade. American economist William Easterly, sceptical of the IMF's methods, had initially warned that "debt relief would simply encourage more reckless borrowing by crooked governments unless it was accompanied by reforms to speed up economic growth and improve governance", according to The Economist.[153]
【参考译文】赞比亚等国家没有获得具有长期效果的适当援助，这引起了经济学家的担忧。自2005年以来，赞比亚（以及非洲其他29个国家）确实获得了债务减免，这有助于该国的医疗和教育资金。然而，赞比亚在不到十年的时间里，债务再次超过了其国内生产总值的一半。据《经济学人》报道，美国经济学家威廉·伊斯特利（William Easterly）对国际货币基金组织（IMF）的方法持怀疑态度，他最初警告说，“除非债务减免伴随着加快经济增长和改善治理的改革，否则只会鼓励腐败政府更加肆无忌惮地借贷”。[153]

冷战后期以来，布雷顿森林机构的角色一直引起争议。有批评指出，基金偏袒与欧美公司有良好关系的资本主义军事du2 cai2者。另有批评称，国际货币基金不重视民主、r人权和劳工权益。这些批评引起社会的讨论，促进了反全球化运动。相反意见认为，国际货币基金促使国家mi民主化的能力有限，而它的宗旨也没有写明要这样做。有支持者指出，经济稳定是民主的先决条件。

有经济学家批评，国际货币基金的经济援助都是“有条件地”批出：受援助国需要实行基金建议的经济改革。经济学家认为，这样做会影响国家的社会稳定，实际上适得其反。

一般来说，国际货币基金和它的支持者推崇凯恩斯主义。于是，供应学派的支持者通常与国际货币基金唱反调。国际货币基金提倡把货币贬值，被供应学派批评会造成通货膨胀。大部分反对经济全球化的组织，例如课征金融交易税以协助公民组织，认为IMF的加深了贫穷问题，也增加了第三世界国家和发展中国家的债务负担。反对IMF的组织各有不同的立场。例如，供应学派认为，ATTAC提出的政策，理念上与IMF的相差无几。

国际货币基金亡羊补牢的行动影响了它的声誉：往往当国家已深受经济打击，IMF才伸手援助。其实这些国家出现经济问题，通常是数十年管理不善的结果，而不为外界所知。管理不善导致国家陷入多年的经济困境，IMF通常于这时提供协助，人们于是把经济崩溃与IMF的介入连系起来。政客善于转移视线，利用民族主义和人们对IMF的坏印象，以IMF作自己的代罪羔羊，将大量利益纳入得利者的口袋中。

虽然IMF成立目的是协助稳定环球经济，但自1980年代以来，超过100个国家曾经历银行体系崩溃，并令GDP下降4%以上，这是史无前例的。IMF对危机的迟缓反应，以及亡羊补牢的做法，令不少经济学家提出要改革IMF。尽管西方社会对国际货币基金毁誉参半，研究中心的调查显示，各地区认为IMF和世界银行对他们的国家有“正面”影响的比例，亚洲61％、非洲71％、北美洲62％、拉丁美洲54％，西欧和东欧则分别为64％和58％[19]。

记录片《债与命》（Life and Debt ）以批判的角度描述国际货币基金的政策对牙买加的影响。2011年希腊纪录片《解放债务》（Debtocracy）亦对国际货币基金颇有微词。2018年的《分秒币争》，或译《国家破产之日》韩语：국가부도의 날／國家不渡의 날 Gukga-budo-eui Nal则描述了甫加入OECD的大韩民国受到1997年亚洲金融风暴的牵连，在密室政治的掌权下，吹哨者无法对国民及早预警，剧中人物甚至以国耻来描述要嘛饮鸩止渴接受IMF安排：“至少保留住大企业与财阀，继续压榨大部分民众，导致中小企业连带破产、失业、自杀”以极端贫富差距换得IMF协助；要嘛宣布国家破产，无法进口粮食能源等民生必需品使面临全面大混乱失序的两难。

正文10.3 支持独裁政权 | Support of dictatorships

文中可能包含无法从中国内地访问的链接。

The role of the Bretton Woods institutions has been controversial since the late Cold War, because of claims that the IMF policy makers supported military dictatorships friendly to American and European corporations, but also other anti-communist and Communist regimes, such as Socialist Republic of Romania. An example of IMF's support for a dictatorship was its ongoing support for Mobutu's rule in Zaire, although its own envoy Erwin Blumenthal provided a sobering report about the entrenched corruption and embezzlement and the inability of the country to pay back any loans.[170] In 2021 IMF approved a US$1 billion loan to the autocratic Uganda despite protests from Ugandans in Washington, London and South Africa.[171][172] Critics also claim that the IMF is generally apathetic or hostile to democracy, human rights, and labour rights. The controversy has helped spark the anti-globalization movement.
【参考译文】自冷战末期以来，布雷顿森林机构的作用一直备受争议，因为有人声称国际货币基金组织的决策者支持对美国和欧洲企业友好的军事独裁政权，以及其他反共主义和共产主义政权，如罗马尼亚社会主义共和国。国际货币基金组织支持独裁政权的一个例子是其对扎伊尔蒙博托政权的持续支持，尽管其自己的特使埃尔温·布鲁门塔尔（Erwin Blumenthal）提供了一份关于该国根深蒂固的腐败4和贪污以及无力偿还任何贷款的令人警醒的报告。[170] 2021年，尽管乌干达人在华盛顿、伦敦和南非的抗议，国际货币基金组织还是批准了向专制政权乌干达提供10亿美元的贷款。[171][172] 批评者还声称，国际货币基金组织通常对民主、人权和劳工权利持冷漠或敌视态度。这一争议助长了反全球化运动。

Arguments in favour of the IMF supporting dictatorships is the claim that economic stability is a precursor to democracy. A 2017 study found no evidence of IMF lending programs undermining democracy in borrowing countries,[173] it found "evidence for modest but definitively positive conditional differences in the democracy scores of participating and non-participating countries".[173]
【参考译文】支持国际货币基金组织支持独裁政权的论点是，经济稳定是民主的前提。2017年的一项研究发现，没有证据表明国际货币基金组织的贷款计划破坏了借款国的民主，[173] 该研究发现“参与国和非参与国在民主得分上存在适度但明确积极的条件差异”。[173]

A 2020 study found the reverse causality with democracy as a precursor to economic stability.[174] Critics highlight various examples in which democratised countries fell after receiving IMF loans.[175]
【参考译文】2020年的一项研究发现，民主是经济稳定的前提，这与之前的观点相反。[174] 批评者指出了多个例子，说明在获得国际货币基金组织提供的贷款后，民主化国家陷入了困境。[175]

Party-based autocracies and democracies can face similar incentives when considering agreements with IMF, in contrast to personalist and military regimes.[176]
【参考译文】与个人主义和军事政权相比，基于政党的独裁政权和民主政权在考虑与国际货币基金组织达成协议时可能面临类似的激励措施。[176]

正文12. 丑闻 | Scandals

文中可能包含无法从中国内地访问的链接。

Managing Director Lagarde (2011–2019) was convicted of giving preferential treatment to businessman-turned-politician Bernard Tapie as he pursued a legal challenge against the French government. At the time, Lagarde was the French economic minister.[201] Within hours of her conviction, in which she escaped any punishment, the fund's 24-member executive board put to rest any speculation that she might have to resign, praising her "outstanding leadership" and the "wide respect" she commands around the world.[202]
【参考译文】拉加德（2011-2019年担任总裁）因在商人转型为政治家的贝尔纳·塔皮 (Bernard Tapie) 对法国政府提起法律诉讼时给予其优惠待遇而被定罪。当时，拉加德是法国经济部长。[201] 在她被定罪后几小时内，尽管她逃脱了任何惩罚，但该基金会的24名执行董事会成员平息了有关她可能不得不辞职的猜测，并赞扬了她的“杰出领导才能”以及她在世界各地享有的“广泛尊重”。[202]

Former IMF Managing Director Rodrigo Rato was arrested in 2015 for alleged fraud, embezzlement and money laundering.[203][204] In 2017, the Audiencia Nacional found Rato guilty of embezzlement and sentenced him to 4+1⁄2 years' imprisonment.[205] In 2018, the sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court of Spain.[206]
【参考译文】前国际货币基金组织总裁罗德里戈·拉托 (Rodrigo Rato) 因涉嫌欺诈、贪污和洗钱于2015年被捕。[203][204] 2017年，国家法院裁定拉托犯有贪污罪，并判处他四年半监禁。[205] 2018年，西班牙最高法院确认了这一判决。[206]