Ashraf Ghani: How to fix broken states

譯者: Zhang Jing 審譯者: Adrienne Lin

A public, Dewey long ago observed,

很早以前，杜威就觀察到一國的民眾，

is constituted through discussion and debate.

是通過相互討論、辯論聯繫在一起的。

If we are to call the tyranny of assumptions into question,

如果我們討論專制政權存在的問題，

and avoid doxa, the realm of the unquestioned,

避免歌頌那些毋庸置疑的，

then we must be willing to subject our own assumptions

我們就必須樂意提供我們的議題

to debate and discussion.

來討論和辯論。

It is in this spirit that I join into a discussion

這是本著這種精神，我參與到一個

of one of the critical issues of our time,

本時代最重要的事件，

namely, how to mobilize different forms of capital

即，如何動員各種資本

for the project of state building.

參與到政權建設項目中來。

To put the assumptions very clearly:

爲了清楚的討論這個設想，

capitalism, after 150 years, has become acceptable,

資本主義，在存在了150年之後，已經被大眾所接受，

and so has democracy.

民主亦是如此。

If we looked in the world of 1945

如果我們回顧到1945年，

and looked at the map of capitalist economies and democratic polities,

看看當時世界上資本主義經濟和民主政體的地圖，

they were the rare exception, not the norm.

它們在當時是極少數的例外，不是常態。

The question now, however,

然而，到現在問題變成

is both about which form of capitalism

是什麽樣的資本主義，

and which type of democratic participation.

以及什麼樣的民主參與形式。

But we must acknowledge

我們必須承認

that this moment has brought about

現在這個時代

a rare consensus of assumptions.

人們很難達成共識。

And that provides the ground

這就為某類的行為

for a type of action,

提供了舞臺，

because consensus of each moment

因為每一刻達成的共識

allows us to act.

都允許我們去行動。

And it is necessary, no matter how fragile

這是非常必要的，無論

or how provisional our consensus,

我們的共識多麼脆弱或者不完整，

to be able to move forward.

難以向前推進。

But the majority of the world

但是，世界上絕大多數人口

neither benefits from capitalism

既沒有從資本主義受益

nor from democratic systems.

也沒有從民主政體中受益。

Most of the globe

大部份人認為

experiences the state as repressive,

國家是用來鎮壓民眾的，

as an organization that is concerned

認為國家是關於

about denial of rights,

否認人們權利的組織，

about denial of justice,

是否定正義

rather than provision of it.

而非提供正義的組織。

And in terms of experience of capitalism,

至於資本主義體驗，

there are two aspects

有兩個方面

that the rest of the globe experiences.

是被全世界的人感受到了。

First, extractive industry.

一是，精工業。

Blood diamonds, smuggled emeralds,

血汗鑽石，走私的綠寶石，

timber,

木材

that is cut right from under the poorest.

正是從最貧窮的國家砍伐的木材。

Second is technical assistance.

二是技術支持。

And technical assistance might shock you,

聽到技術支持可能你會感到吃驚，

but it's the worst form

但是它是

of -- today -- of the ugly face

當今發達國家呈現給

of the developed world to the developing countries.

發展中國家最醜惡的一面。

Tens of billions of dollars

千百億美元

are supposedly spent on building capacity

花在積累財富上

with people who are paid up to 1,500 dollars a day,

這些人一天掙1500美元，

who are incapable

卻缺乏

of thinking creatively,

創新的

or organically.

和全面的思考。

Next assumption --

下一個設想

and of course the events of July 7,

是7月7號發生的事件，

I express my deep sympathy, and before that, September 11 --

我為之表示最深切的同情，之前，911

have reminded us

已經提醒過我們

we do not live in three different worlds.

我們並非生活在三個不同的世界。

We live in one world.

我們生活在一個世界上。

But that's easily said.

但是這說起來容易。

But we are not dealing with the implications

但是我們並未提到

of the one world that we are living in.

生活在一個世界上的意義。

And that is that if we want to have one world,

這個重點是，如果我們想共同擁有一個世界，

this one world cannot be based

這個世界不是建立在

on huge pockets of exclusion,

把大多數人排除在外，

and then inclusion for some.

只包含一些人。

We must now finally come

現在，我們必須最後

to think about the premises

設想真正全球化

of a truly global world,

的基礎，

in relationship to the regime of rights

與真正全球化的政權

and responsibilities and accountabilities

責任、義務

that are truly global in scope.

的關係。

Otherwise we will be missing

不然，我們就錯過了

this open moment in history,

這一歷史性的開放時代，

where we have a consensus

我們在

on both the form of politics

政權形式和

and the form of economics.

經濟形式上都達成了共識。

What is one of these organizations to pick?

這些國家會選擇什麽樣的形式呢？

We have three critical terms:

我們又三個關鍵詞：

economy,

經濟、

civil society

公民社會

and the state.

和政權。

I will not deal with those first two, except to say

我不講前兩個方面，只說一句

that uncritical transfer of assumptions,

當情境不同時，

from one context to another,

如果觀念沒有進化，

can only make for disaster.

只會帶來災難。

Economics

經濟

taught in most of the elite universities

雖然最著名的大學都在開設這門課程，

are practically useless in my context.

但是在我的語境中式完全無用的。

My country is dominated

我的祖國北

by drug economy and a mafia.

毒品貿易和黑手黨控制。

Textbook economics does not work in my context,

書本上的經濟學在我的家鄉沒有用處，

and I have very few recommendations from anybody

我沒有得到任何人的建議，

as to how to put together a legal economy.

告訴我如何建設法治經濟。

The poverty of our knowledge

我知識的貧乏

must become the first basis

是我前進的

of moving forward,

第一步，

and not imposition of the framework

而非在數學模型基礎上

that works on the basis of mathematical modeling,

建立的框架，

for which I have enormous respect.

雖然我很尊重這樣一個模型。

My colleagues at Johns Hopkins were among the best.

我在約翰霍普金斯的同事在這方面做的最好。

Second,

第二，

instead of debating endlessly

與其無休止地討論

about what is the structure of the state,

政權結構的是什麼

why don't we simplify

為什麼我們不簡化一下

and say, what are a series of functions

考慮哪些功能是

that the state in the 21st century must perform?

21世紀，政權必須執行的？

Clare Lockhart and I are writing a book on this;

克萊兒‧洛克哈特和我正在寫本有關這主題的書，

we hope to share that much widely with --

我們希望和更多的人分享

and third is that we could actually construct an index

第三，我們實際上可以製作一個索引，

to measure comparatively

測量出相對來說，

how well these functions that we would agree on

這些我們達成共識的政府功能

are being performed in different places.

在世界各地開展的情況如何

So what are these functions?

都有哪些功能呢？

We propose 10.

我們假設有10個。

And it's legitimate monopoly of means of violence,

包括合法化地壟斷暴力，唯一合法使用暴力的機構，

administrative control, management of public finances,

行政控制，管理公共經濟，

investment in human capital, provision of citizenship rights,

投資人力資源，保障人權，

provision of infrastructure,

建設國家基礎設施，

management of the tangible and intangible assets of the state

管理國家的有形和無形資產

through regulation, creation of the market,

通過制定規範，建立市場和

international agreements, including public borrowing,

達成國際認同-包括公共借貸-

and then, most importantly, rule of law.

最重要的，建立法律秩序。

I won't elaborate.

這些功能我就不詳述了。

I hope the questions will give me an opportunity.

我希望這些問題能夠給我一個機會。

This is a feasible goal,

這是一個可以實現的目標，

basically because, contrary to widespread assumption,

根本上是因為，與大多數人持有的假定意見不同，

I would argue that we know how to do this.

我認為我們其實知道如何實現這個目標。

Who would have imagined that Germany

誰能想到德國

would be either united or democratic today,

今日是民主體制或是聯邦體制呢，

if you looked at it from the perspective of Oxford of 1943?

如果你是從1943年的英國牛津人的角度考慮的話。

But people at Oxford prepared for a democratic Germany

但是牛津人準備迎接的是民主的德國

and engaged in planning.

已經開始籌畫。

And there are lots of other examples.

還有一些其他例子。

Now in order to do this -- and this brings this group --

爲了實現這些目標-正是因為相信這一點才有了我們今天這樣一群人-

we have to rethink the notion of capital.

我們必須重新考慮資本的概念。

The least important form of capital, in this project,

這個項目中最不重要的資本形式是

is financial capital -- money.

經濟資本，也就是錢。

Money is not capital in most of the developing countries.

金錢在大部份發展中國家算不上是資本。

It's just cash.

僅僅是現金。

Because it lacks the institutional,

因為它缺乏制度上、

organizational, managerial forms

組織上和管理上的形式

to turn it into capital.

來把它變成資本。

And what is required

需要的是

is a combination of physical capital,

物理資本，

institutional capital, human capital --

制度資本和人力資本三者的結合

and security, of course, is critical,

安全性當然是重要的，

but so is information.

信息也同樣重要。

Now, the issue that should concern us here --

在此我們需要考慮的問題是

and that's the challenge

這也是我

that I would like to pose to this group --

想給在座各位提出的挑戰--

is again, it takes 16 years

重述一遍就是，

in your countries

你的國家花了16年時間，

to produce somebody with a B.S. degree.

把某個人培養成碩士。

It takes 20 years

花20年時間

to produce somebody with a Ph.D.

把有些人培養成博士。

The first challenge is to rethink,

需要各位重新考慮的第一個挑戰是，

fundamentally,

也是最根本的，

the issue of the time.

就是時間。

Do we need to repeat

我們有必要去重複

the modalities that we have inherited?

那些我們繼承來的特質？

Our educational systems are inherited from the 19th century.

我們的教育體制是從19世紀傳過來的。

What is it that we need to do fundamentally

根本上，我們必須做的是

to re-engage in a project,

重新做個項目，

that capital formation is rapid?

資本形成很快嗎？

The absolute majority of the world's population

世界上絕大多數的人

are below 20,

小於20歲，

and they are growing larger and faster.

這個數字在迅速變大，

They need different ways

這些年輕人需要

of being approached,

不同的對待方式。

different ways of being enfranchised,

需要新的方式實現自治。

different ways of being skilled.

需要新的獲得僅能的方式。

And that's the first thing.

這是第一個問題。

Second is, you're problem solvers,

第二個，你是問題解決者，

but you're not engaging your global responsibility.

但是你並沒有承擔你全球性的責任。

You've stayed away

你遠離那些

from the problems of corruption.

有關貪污腐敗的問題。

You only want clean environments in which to function.

你只想在純潔無污染的環境中行動。

But if you don't think through the problems of corruption,

但是如果你不考慮貪污腐敗考慮的問題，

who will?

那誰來考慮呢？

You stay away from design for development.

你不參與設計發展方案。

You're great designers,

你是一個偉大的設計師，

but your designs are selfish.

但是你設計的作品是自私的。

It's for your own immediate use.

是為了自己當前的需求。

The world in which I operate

我管理的這個世界

operates with designs

是通過設計

regarding roads, or dams,

道路，水壩，

or provision of electricity

提供電力

that have not been revisited in 60 years.

這些60年來都沒有得到更新。

This is not right. It requires thinking.

這有問題，需要我們去思考。

But, particularly, what we need

但是，尤其是，

more than anything else from this group

我們這群人更需要做的是

is your imagination

發揮你們的想像力，

to be brought to bear on problems

設想

the way a meme is supposed to work.

米姆（文化傳播的最小單位）是如何起作用的。

As the work on paradigms, long time ago showed --

很多年前，有關範式的研究就顯示

Thomas Kuhn's work --

托馬斯庫恩做的這項研究

it's in the intersection of ideas

正是在思想交匯的地方

that new developments --

得以出現新的發現

true breakthroughs -- occur.

真正的突破

And I hope that this group

我希望這個組織

would be able to deal with the issue of state and development

能夠處理這些政府間事務，

and the empowerment of the majority of the world's poor,

使世界上的窮人擁有權利，得到發展，

through this means.

通過這種方式。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Chris Anderson: So, Ashraf, until recently,

克里斯‧安德森： 所以，阿什拉夫，

you were the finance minister of Afghanistan,

之前你一直是阿富汗的財政大臣，

a country right at the middle

阿富汗正處於

of much of the world's agenda.

世界事務的中心。

Is the country gonna make it?

這個國家能夠做到上面所說的嗎？

Will democracy flourish? What scares you most?

民主能夠得以實現嗎？你最擔心的是什麽呢？

Ashraf Ghani: What scares me most is -- is you,

阿什拉夫 加尼：我最擔心的就是-你，

lack of your engagement.

怕你不參與進來。

(Laughter)

（笑）

You asked me. You know I always give the unconventional answer.

你剛才那麼問我。要知道，我總是會給出的非同尋常的答案。

No. But seriously,

不，嚴肅的說，

the issue of Afghanistan

阿富汗要做的事情，

first has to be seen as,

首先，

at least, a 10- to 20-year perspective.

需要以最近10-20年的眼光來看。

Today the world of globalization

當今，世界全球化的程度

is on speed.

越來越快。

Time has been compressed.

時間被壓縮了。

And space does not exist for most people.

對大部份人來說，生存的空間很有限。

But in my world --

但是，在我看來，

you know, when I went back to Afghanistan after 23 years,

要知道，23年後，當我回到阿富汗，

space had expanded.

我發現我們的空間變大了。

Every conceivable form of infrastructure had broken down.

所有能夠想到的基礎設施都被摧毀了。

I rode -- traveled --

我騎車旅行

travel between two cities that used to take three hours

過去需要三個小時到達的另外一個城市，

now took 12.

現在需要花12個小時。

So the first is when the scale is that,

所以首先，

we need to recognize

我們需要意識到，

that just the simple things that are infrastructure --

最簡單的基礎設施

it takes six years to deliver infrastructure.

在我們國家，也需要

In our world.

6年時間來建成。

Any meaningful sort of thing.

任何事情都是有意義的。

But the modality of attention,

但是，人們關注的方式，

or what is happening today, what's happening tomorrow.

是說當前發生了什麽，明天會怎樣。

Second is,

第二個，

when a country has been subjected

當一個國家被

to one of the most immense, brutal forms of exercise of power --

最強大、蠻不講理的權利機構所控制-

we had the Red Army

我們被“紅軍”

for 10 continuous years,

連續控制了10年，

110,000 strong,

他們有11萬之多。

literally terrorizing.

聽起來就很恐怖。

The sky:

天空：

every Afghan

每一個阿富汗人

sees the sky as a source of fear.

都會害怕天空。

We were bombed

我們被轟炸的很慘，

practically out of existence.

幾乎被夷為平地。

Then, tens of thousands of people were trained in terrorism --

之後，成千上萬的人處於恐怖主義之中-

from all sides.

來自世界各地。

The United States, Great Britain, joined for instance,

例如，美國、英國合伙，

Egyptian intelligence service

埃及的情報機構

to train thousands of people

訓練了數千人

in resistance and urban terrorism.

來抵抗，實行城市恐怖主義。

How to turn a bicycle

如何把自行車改裝車

into an instrument of terror.

實施恐怖襲擊的工具。

How to turn a donkey, a carthorse, anything.

如何改裝驢車、馬車等。

And the Russians, equally.

俄國人也這麼做。

So, when violence erupts

所以，當暴力發生在

in a country like Afghanistan,

像阿富汗這樣的國家，

it's because of that legacy.

這是因為它的資源豐富。

But we have to understand

但是我們必須承認

that we've been incredibly lucky.

我們是非常幸運的、

I mean, I really can't believe how lucky I am here,

我的意思是，我感到無比的幸運，

standing in front of you, speaking.

站在這裡，站在你們面前，演講。

When I joined as finance minister,

當我當選財政大臣時，

I thought that the chances of my living more than three years

我想，我能活過3年的機會

would not be more than five percent.

不超過5%。

Those were the risks. They were worth it.

我冒了很大的險，但，是值得的。

I think we can make it,

我認為我們可以成功，

and the reason we can make it

成功的原因就是

is because of the people.

我們有這些人。

You see, because, I mean -- I give you one statistic.

因為--- 我可以給你們展示一些數據。

91 percent of the men in Afghanistan,

阿富汗人中91%的男人，

86 percent of the women,

和86%的女性，

listen to at least three radio stations a day.

每天聽至少三個電臺的節目。

In terms of their discourse,

就所聽的內容而言，

in terms of their sophistication of knowledge of the world,

就他們對世界知識的瞭解，

I think that I would dare say,

我想我敢說，

they're much more sophisticated

他們的見識

than rural Americans with college degrees

遠比具備大學學歷的鄉下美國人多

and the bulk of Europeans --

也超過很多歐洲人。

because the world matters to them.

因為世界對他們來說非常重要。

And what is their predominant concern?

他們最關心的是什麽呢？

Abandonment.

放棄。

Afghans have become deeply internationalist.

阿富汗人變得非常國際化。

You know, when I went back in December of 2001,

當我2001年12月份返回阿富汗時，

I had absolutely no desire to work with the Afghan government

我根本不想與阿富汗政府工作人員一起工作。

because I'd lived as a nationalist.

因為我一直是個民族主義者。

And I told them -- my people, with the Americans here --

我告訴他們-我的民族，和這裡的美國人-

separate.

是不同的。

Yes, I have an advisory position with the U.N.

我在聯合國也擔任顧問。

I went through 10 Afghan provinces very rapidly.

我很快走遍了阿富汗其中10個省。

And everybody was telling me it was a different world.

每個遇到的人都跟我說，形勢不同了、

You know, they engage.

要知道，他們參與進來了。

They see engagement, global engagement,

他們把全世界人的參與，

as absolutely necessary to the future of the ordinary people.

視為對普通阿富汗人的未來所不可缺少的。

And the thing that the ordinary Afghan is most concerned with is --

普通阿富汗人最關心的是

Clare Lockhart is here,

-- 克萊兒‧洛克哈特在這裡 --

so I'll recite a discussion she had

我重複她和阿富汗北部

with an illiterate woman in Northern Afghanistan.

不識字的女性的討論

And that woman said she didn't care

這個女人說她不在意

whether she had food on her table.

飯桌上是否有食物。

What she worried about was whether there was a plan for the future,

她最關心的是未來是否有計劃，

where her children could really have a different life.

她的孩子們是否會有不一樣的生活。

That gives me hope.

這給我了希望。

CA: How is Afghanistan

CA：阿富汗如何

going to provide alternative income

為那些靠販賣毒品

to the many people

的人們

who are making their living off the drugs trade?

提供別的收入來源？

AG: Certainly. Well, the first is,

AG：當然，首先，

instead of sending a billion dollars

與其花10億美元

on drug eradication

消除毒品

and paying it to a couple of security companies,

花到幾個保全公司裡，

they should give this hundred billion dollars

他們會把這成千億美元

to 50

花到50個

of the most critically innovative companies in the world

全世界最具革新精神的公司

to ask them to create one million jobs.

讓這些公司的人，創造出一百萬個工作。

The key to the drug eradication is jobs.

消除毒品最重要的是，要有工作提供給人們。

Look, there's a very little known fact:

這裡有一個很少人知道的事實：

countries that have a legal average income per capita of 1,000 dollars

每人平均合法收入超過1000美元的國家裡

don't produce drugs.

是不生產毒品的。

Second, textile.

第二個，紡織品。

Trade is the key, not aid.

貿易是關鍵，而非幫助。

The U.S. and Europe

美國和歐洲

should give us a zero percent tariff.

與我們貿易是零關稅的。

The textile industry is incredibly mobile.

紡織品交易時非常靈活的。

If you want us to be able to compete with China and to attract investment,

如果想讓我們與中國競爭，吸引投資，

we could probably attract

我們大概可以吸引到

four to six billion dollars

40-60億美元

quite easily in the textile sector,

在紡織品領域這是非常容易的，

if there was zero tariffs --

如果關稅為零的話

would create the type of job.

就會帶來此類的工作崗位。

Cotton does not compete with opium;

棉花無法與鴉片競爭；

a t-shirt does.

但是T恤可以。

And we need to understand, it's the value chain.

我們必須瞭解價值鏈。

Look, the ordinary Afghan is sick and tired

看，普通的阿富汗人

of hearing about microcredit.

已經聽煩了小額貸款計劃。

It is important,

這很重要，

but what the ordinary women and men who engage in micro-production want

參與小作坊生存的男人和女人們想要的是

is global access.

接觸世界市場的機會。

They don't want to sell to the charity bazaars

他們不想把東西賣給慈善機構，

that are only for foreigners --

而是打算賣給外國人的-

and the same bloody shirt

同一件衣服

embroidered time and again.

需要花很多時間刺繡。

What we want is a partnership

我們需要和

with the Italian design firms.

義大利設計公司合作。

Yeah, we have the best embroiderers in the world!

我們有著世界上最優秀的刺繡能手！

Why can't we do what was done with northern Italy?

爲什麽我們不能像義大利北部所做的那樣做呢？

With the Put Out system?

與資助系統？

So I think economically,

所以很經濟地想，

the critical issue really is to now think through.

最重要的事情就是仔細思考。

And what I will say here is that aid doesn't work.

我想說幫助並不起作用。

You know, the aid system is broken.

援助系統已經被破壞掉了。

The aid system does not have the knowledge,

援助機構沒有這樣的知識、

the vision, the ability.

視野和能力。

I'm all for it; after all, I raised a lot of it.

我很支持援助，畢竟我募款了很多。

Yeah, to be exact, you know,

更準確的說，

I managed to persuade the world that

我成功地說服了各國

they had to give my country 27.5 billion.

讓他們給我們國家275億美元。

They didn't want to give us the money.

他們不想給我這個錢。

CA: And it still didn't work?

CA：仍然沒有成功嗎？

AG: No. It's not that it didn't work.

AG：沒有，並不僅僅是沒有成功。

It's that a dollar of private investment,

私人投資的一美元，

in my judgment,

依據我的判斷，

is equal at least to 20 dollars of aid,

相當於資助的20美元，

in terms of the dynamic that it generates.

根據它所產生的能量。

Second is that one dollar of aid could be 10 cents;

或者一美元援助可以看做10分錢，

it could be 20 cents;

或者是20分，

or it could be four dollars.

也或者是4美元。

It depends on what form it comes,

這取決於資助的形式，

what degrees of conditionalities are attached to it.

以及附加的條件是什麽。

You know, the aid system, at first, was designed to benefit

要知道，資助系統剛開始是

entrepreneurs of the developed countries,

為發達國家的企業服務的，

not to generate growth in the poor countries.

而不是爲了促進貧窮國家的發展。

And this is, again, one of those assumptions --

這也是其中一個設想-

the way car seats are an assumption

就像汽車裡安裝座位最初也是一種設想

that we've inherited in governments, and doors.

我們生下來就有政府、門。

You would think that the US government

你或許會認為美國政府

would not think that American firms needed subsidizing

美國企業不會資助

to function in developing countries, provide advice,

發展中國家的建設，提供服務等，

but they do.

但是事實上他們這麼做了。

There's an entire weight of history

歷史上，

vis-a-vis aid

面對面資助非常重要

that now needs to be reexamined.

現在這種形式需要被重新檢視。

If the goal is to build states

如果資助的目標是建立政權

that can credibly take care of themselves --

能夠自力更生的政權-

and I'm putting that proposition equally;

我會說的儘量公平一些；

you know I'm very harsh on my counterparts --

要知道我對我的對手非常嚴厲-

aid must end

在一個明確的時刻，

in each country in a definable period.

對每個國家的資助必須停止。

And every year there must be progress

每年都應該有所進步

on mobilization of domestic revenue

在國內收入

and generation of the economy.

以及經濟增長方面。

Unless that kind of compact is entered into,

唯有建立正式的合約，

you will not be able to sustain the consensus.

才能夠維持先前達成的共識。