德法意隨英國加入亞投行

【注】為什麽是大事兒？

不論英德法意加入後亞投行運作如何，這將是一個中國為主導，美國之外的係統，完成了脫離美國控製的一步，對美肯定是個巨大的打擊。

【快訊】澳大利亞已經決定申請亞投行，見下麵《澳大利亞人》的專題評論，新加坡、印度、新西蘭已經申請了。給評論·該評論對美國做了極其尖酸的諷刺和尖刻的駁斥（我加了黑體字）。






華爾街見聞翻譯英國金融時報：

歐洲公然"忤逆"美國 紛紛同意加入亞投行

據英國《金融時報》援引某官員的消息，德國、法國、意大利也都同意追隨英國，申請加入中國主導的亞洲發展銀行。這一舉動可能使美國試圖在自己建立的體係內領導西方國家的願望落空。

上周，英國向中方正式提交申請，加入亞洲基礎設施投資銀行（亞投行，AIIB），成為首個申請加入亞投行的主要西方國家。而如今德、法、意三國政府也希望加入這一機構，對美國主導的世界銀行（World Bank）形成了潛在挑戰。

此外，澳大利亞——美國在亞太地區最核心的夥伴之一，據稱正在承受美國的壓力，要求其不要參與中國主導的亞洲基礎設施投資銀行。但澳大利亞總理周一表示可能考慮加入亞投行，或在下周做出決定。新西蘭、新加坡也在就加入亞投行展開談判。

《金融時報》評論認為，歐洲一係列國家的決定對奧巴馬政府來說是重大的打擊，如果這些國家在亞投行之外聯合起來，可以創造屬於西方國家的更大的影響力，且可以推高借貸標準。

亞投行旨在支持亞洲國家基礎設施建設，促進地區互聯互通，推動區域經濟發展。籌建亞投行係中國國家主席習近平、國務院總理李克強2013年10月訪問東南亞時先後提出的倡議，旨在以此滿足亞洲地區基礎設施融資的巨大需求。

亞投行的法定資本為1000億美元，各意向創始成員同意以國內生產總值衡量的經濟權重作為各國股份分配的基礎，因此中國持有最大股份。

日本和美國主導現有的亞洲開發銀行（ADB）。亞投行由中國主導，這引起了日本和美國的不滿。此前，亞洲開發銀行總裁中尾武彥表示，不歡迎成立一家目的基本相同、由中國牽頭成立的另一家區域性銀行。中尾武彥稱對此表示理解但不歡迎，不過也不太擔心。

《金融時報》認為，通過亞投行的建立，中國在國際上可以獲得更大的影響力，這也是決定未來中國和美國之間誰能在亞洲領導經濟和貿易規則的核心問題。


【附錄】
澳大利亞"投誠" 下周或申請加入亞投行
英國“投奔”亞投行 為主要西方國家中首個
英國《金融時報》傑夫•代爾亞投行背後的美中較量

此報道很逗：
亞投行申請日期今截止 法國德國意大利追隨英國加入



Abbott’s decision on China regional bank a poke in eye for Obama
Greg Sheridan, Foreign Editor, Melbourne
The Australian, March 16, 2015

THE decision by the Abbott government to sign on for negotiations to join China’s regional bank, foreshadowed by Tony Abbott at the weekend, represents another defeat for Barack Obama’s diplomacy in Asia.

The Abbott government is right to make this decision. It had well-founded concerns about the vague and unsatisfactory governance arrangements of the institution when Beijing first invited Canberra to join.

Those arrangements have ­improved since then and Australia is only signing on to negotiate terms of accession.

If the terms are no good, Australia will ultimately walk away.

Canberra’s move follows similar decisions by Britain, Singapore, India and New Zealand.

Make no mistake — all this represents a colossal defeat for the Obama administration’s incompetent, distracted, ham-fisted dip­lomacy in Asia.

The Obama administration didn’t want Australia to sign up for the China Bank. The Abbott government rightly feels that it owes Obama nothing.

Obama treats allies shabbily and as a result he loses influence with them and then seems perpetually surprised at this outcome.

The Asian professionals in Washington regard the Obama administration as particularly ineffective in Asia.

The consensus is that the Obama White House is insular, isolated, inward-looking, focused on the President’s personal image and ineffective in foreign policy.

Obama went out of his way to embarrass the Prime Minister politically on climate change with a rogue speech at the G20 summit in Brisbane.

The speech had been billed as dealing with American leadership in Asia and instead was full of ­material designed to embarrass Abbott.

Since then, the Abbott government has felt absolutely zero subjective good will for Obama.

This is an outlook shared by many American allies.

It’s important to get all the distinctions right here.

The Abbott government operates foreign policy in Australia’s national interest.

That includes full fidelity to the American ­alliance and to supporting US strategic leadership.

But the Obama administration has neither the continuous presence, nor the tactical wherewithal nor the store of goodwill or personal relationships to carry Canberra, or other allies, on non-essential matters.

The Obama administration has tried to convince both its friends and ­allies not to join the China Bank.

This was probably a bad call in itself, but, as so often with the Obama administration, it was a bad call badly implemented.

The characteristically bad implementation has helped shred Obama’s diplomatic credibility.

The Chinese have been the US’s best friends in Asia, diplomatically. Their territorial aggressiveness in the East and South China Seas has driven Asia to embrace America’s security role more tightly than ever.

The American military are now the best American diplomats in Asia by far.

Such prestige as the US enjoys in Asia these days rests disproportionately on the shoulders of the US military.

Obama has neglected and mistreated allies and as a result Washington has much less influence than previously.

The saga of the China Bank is almost a textbook case of the failure of Obama’s foreign policy.