Name: 特朗普對歐盟有利嗎？ (Could Trump be Good for the EU?)
Uploaded: 2024-11-14T16:43:44.000Z
Duration: 9 min 39 s

This video was brought to you by Ground News.

On Wednesday, Donald Trump was declared the winner of the US presidential election.

本週三，唐納德-特朗普被宣佈贏得美國總統大選。

Now, American elections always matter for Europe, but this one especially so, given the stark differences in Harris and Trump's attitudes towards the EU, Ukraine, and NATO.

現在，美國大選對歐洲總是很重要，但這次尤其如此，因為哈里斯和特朗普對歐盟、烏克蘭和北約的態度截然不同。

So in this video, we're gonna take a look at how Trump's policies will affect Europe, how Europe might respond to a second Trump term, and whether this is the beginning of the end for the transatlantic alliance.

是以，在這段視頻中，我們將看看特朗普的政策將如何影響歐洲，歐洲可能如何應對特朗普的第二個任期，以及這是否是跨大西洋聯盟末日的開始。

Before we start, if you haven't already, please consider subscribing and ringing the bell to stay in the loop and be notified when we release new videos.

在我們開始之前，如果您還沒有訂閱，請考慮訂閱並按鈴，以便在我們發佈新視頻時及時收到通知。

Broadly speaking, the two policy areas from a new Trump administration that would most directly affect Europe are Trump's foreign policy and his tariff-centric economic policy.

概括地說，特朗普新政府最直接影響歐洲的兩個政策領域是特朗普的外交政策和以關稅為中心的經濟政策。

Let's start with his foreign policy though.

我們還是從他的外交政策說起吧。

From Europe's perspective, the most important foreign policy issue at stake is obviously Ukraine, and the question of NATO more widely.

從歐洲的角度來看，最重要的外交政策問題顯然是烏克蘭，以及更廣泛的北約問題。

So what actually is Trump's Ukraine policy?

那麼，特朗普的烏克蘭政策究竟是什麼？

Well, it mainly seems to revolve around ending the war as fast as possible.

嗯，似乎主要是圍繞著儘快結束戰爭展開的。

On multiple occasions, Trump has claimed that he'll negotiate a deal between Russia and Ukraine almost immediately upon taking office, or even before he's actually assumed presidency.

特朗普曾多次聲稱，他幾乎會在上任後，甚至在真正就任總統之前，立即就俄羅斯和烏克蘭之間的協議進行談判。

More recently, Trump claimed on the Lex Friedman podcast that he had, quote, a very exacting plan on how to stop Ukraine and Russia, but that he couldn't talk about the plan because if he did, then they wouldn't be a surprise.

最近，特朗普在萊克斯-弗裡德曼（Lex Friedman）的播客節目中聲稱，他有一個關於如何阻止烏克蘭和俄羅斯的非常嚴密的計劃，但他不能談論這個計劃，因為如果他談論了，他們就不會感到驚訝了。

This has unsurprisingly provoked some anxiety in Kiev and other European capitals, because Ukraine worries that any deal agreed right now would benefit Russia, or at least fall short of Ukraine's maximalist war aims, which include recapturing all of its pre-2014 territory, although we should say that this currently looks very unlikely to happen anytime soon regardless.

這毫不奇怪地引發了基輔和其他歐洲國家首都的一些焦慮，因為烏克蘭擔心現在達成的任何協議都會有利於俄羅斯，或者至少達不到烏克蘭最大的戰爭目標，其中包括奪回 2014 年之前的所有領土，儘管我們應該說，無論如何，這目前看來都不太可能很快實現。

These anxieties were exacerbated by an interview that J.D.

J.D. 的一次採訪加劇了這些焦慮。

Vance gave to the Sean Ryan Show in September, where he talked about a demilitarized zone along the current front lines, and said that Ukraine would end up as a neutral state rather than joining NATO.

萬斯在 9 月的肖恩-瑞安秀節目中談到了沿目前前線建立非軍事區的問題，並表示烏克蘭最終將成為一箇中立國，而不是加入北約。

Despite the fact that NATO has already started Ukraine's membership process, and Ukraine has made it clear that it feels that NATO membership is the only effective way of guaranteeing against future Russian aggression.

儘管北約已經啟動了烏克蘭加入北約的程序，而且烏克蘭也明確表示，它認為加入北約是防止俄羅斯未來侵略的唯一有效途徑。

Nonetheless, even if it's suboptimal from Kiev's perspective, Trump will probably be able to force Ukraine to agree to a deal by threatening to withhold much needed military aid, as he did in his first term.

儘管如此，即使從基輔的角度來看這不是最佳方案，特朗普也很可能會像他在第一任期中所做的那樣，通過威脅扣留急需的軍事援助來迫使烏克蘭同意協議。

That is, assuming that the rest of NATO doesn't massively step up to fill the void left by the US, or Ukraine decides to fight on anyway.

也就是說，前提是北約其他國家沒有大規模挺身而出填補美國留下的空白，或者烏克蘭決定繼續戰鬥下去。

Now, we should say that Trump's talk of a deal hasn't gone down well in Russia either, with Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov dismissing his claims of a quick deal as, quote, within the realm of fantasy.

現在，我們應該說，特朗普關於達成協議的說法在俄羅斯也沒有得到很好的迴應，克里姆林宮發言人德米特里-佩斯科夫（Dmitry Peskov）駁斥了他關於迅速達成協議的說法，引用他的話說，這只是幻想。

While Vance's proposed deal is arguably closer to Russia's ideal outcome than Ukraine's, giving that it would mean Ukraine ending up as neutral, it still falls short of Putin's maximalist war aims, which include the total annexation of the four oblasts claimed by Russia in 2022, Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson, and Zaporizhia.

雖然萬斯提出的協議可以說比烏克蘭的更接近俄羅斯的理想結果，因為這意味著烏克蘭最終將保持中立，但它仍然沒有達到普京的最大戰爭目標，其中包括完全吞併俄羅斯在 2022 年聲稱擁有的四個州，即盧甘斯克、頓涅茨克、赫爾松和扎波羅熱。

Russian forces currently don't control all of Donetsk, Kherson, or Zaporizhia, so a freeze along the current front lines would fall short of Putin's stated aims, especially if there's a sizable buffer zone.

俄軍目前並沒有控制頓涅茨克、赫爾松或扎波羅熱的全部地區，是以沿目前的前線實施凍結將達不到普京宣稱的目標，尤其是在有一個相當大的緩衝區的情況下。

So if Russia does refuse Trump's rapid peace plan, which seems at least possible, it'll be interesting to see how Trump responds.

是以，如果俄羅斯真的拒絕特朗普的快速和平計劃（這似乎至少是有可能的），那麼看看特朗普如何迴應將是一件有趣的事情。

While many European and Ukrainian leaders worry that he'll just make concessions to Putin, it's worth noting that in a 2023 interview with Fox News, Trump said that he'd actually step up support to Ukraine to force Russia to acquiesce, saying, quote, I'd tell Putin, if you don't make a deal, we're gonna give them a lot, more than they ever got.

雖然許多歐洲和烏克蘭領導人擔心特朗普只會向普京讓步，但值得注意的是，特朗普在 2023 年接受福克斯新聞採訪時曾表示，他實際上會加強對烏克蘭的支持，迫使俄羅斯默許，他說："我會告訴普京，如果你們不達成協議，我們會給他們很多，比他們得到的更多。

When it comes to NATO more generally, though, Trump's policy basically seems to be a more extreme form of the policy he pursued in his first term, getting other NATO member states to pay more into the budget.

不過，就更廣泛的北約而言，特朗普的政策基本上似乎是他在第一任期內推行的政策的一種更極端的形式，即讓其他北約成員國為預算支付更多的費用。

Now, while a complete withdrawal from the alliance does seem unlikely, Trump's presence in the White House does arguably undermine Article 5, which guarantees that all NATO members will protect any other member that comes under attack, given that Trump has explicitly said that he won't protect NATO members who don't pay their way.

現在，雖然完全退出北約似乎不太可能，但特朗普入主白宮確實有可能破壞第 5 條，該條款保證所有北約成員國都將保護受到攻擊的任何其他成員國，因為特朗普曾明確表示，他不會保護那些不給錢的北約成員國。

But it's not all just about foreign policy, because Trump's economic policy will also impact Europe.

但這不僅僅是外交政策的問題，因為特朗普的經濟政策也將對歐洲產生影響。

Trump has again threatened to impose tariffs on the European Union, like he did in his first term, although it's worth noting that the tariffs he did in fact impose ended up being less dramatic than his 2016 campaign rhetoric suggested.

特朗普再次威脅要對歐盟徵收關稅，就像他在第一任期內所做的那樣，不過值得注意的是，他事實上徵收的關稅最終並沒有他 2016 年競選時的言辭所暗示的那麼誇張。

This time round, Trump has floated imposing a flat tariff on all goods coming into the US, running at either 10 or 20%, and told Bloomberg in an interview a couple of months ago that the EU is like China, presumably a reference to the fact that they both run large trade surpluses with the US.

幾個月前，特朗普在接受彭博社採訪時說，歐盟就像中國一樣，這大概是指歐盟和美國都有鉅額貿易順差。

Research by LSE suggests that these tariffs would hurt the European economy, albeit far less than they'd hurt the Chinese or American economy.

倫敦政治經濟學院的研究表明，這些關稅會對歐洲經濟造成傷害，儘管傷害程度遠低於對中國或美國經濟的傷害。

But some countries, especially those that export lots to the US, like Germany, would be hit worse than others.

但是，一些國家，尤其是像德國這樣大量向美國出口的國家，受到的衝擊會比其他國家更大。

More worryingly perhaps, in the long term, these tariffs could accelerate Europe's ongoing de-industrialization by encouraging manufacturing companies to move their factories to America so that they can sell products into the American market tariff-free.

更令人擔憂的是，從長遠來看，這些關稅可能會加速歐洲正在進行的去工業化進程，因為它們會鼓勵製造企業將工廠遷往美國，這樣它們就可以免關稅向美國市場銷售產品。

All in all, both Trump's economic and foreign policy will probably present serious challenges to Europe.

總而言之，特朗普的經濟政策和外交政策都可能會給歐洲帶來嚴峻的挑戰。

Whether or not Trump's presidency ends up being good or bad for Europe, however, ultimately depends on how the continent responds to these challenges.

然而，特朗普就任總統最終對歐洲是好是壞，最終取決於歐洲大陸如何應對這些挑戰。

Here, there's an optimistic take, a neutral take, and a pessimistic take available.

這裡有樂觀的看法、中立的看法和悲觀的看法。

The optimistic take, recently outlined in a controversial Politico piece by Mushtaba Rahman, is that a second Trump presidency would actually be good for Europe.

穆斯塔法-拉赫曼（Mushtaba Rahman）最近在《政治家》（Politico）雜誌上發表了一篇頗具爭議的文章，其中概述了一種樂觀的看法，即特朗普第二次擔任總統實際上對歐洲有利。

A second Trump presidency could force the EU to cooperate more and take more dramatic action on issues of defense, security, and the economy, perhaps finally ending the continent's precarious reliance on its increasingly unpredictable transatlantic neighbor, something the French have wanted to do since de Gaulle.

特朗普的第二任總統任期可能會迫使歐盟在國防、安全和經濟問題上進行更多合作，採取更多引人注目的行動，也許最終會結束歐洲大陸對其越來越難以預測的跨大西洋鄰國的不穩定依賴，這也是法國人自戴高樂以來一直想做的事情。

The more measured, neutral take is that the EU will respond to a second Trump presidency the way it did to the first one, basically do damage control, try and avoid annoying Trump, and just hope that a more Atlanticist candidate succeeds him next time round, as Biden did in 2020.

更謹慎、更中立的看法是，歐盟將以應對特朗普第二任總統的方式來應對第一任總統，基本上是進行損害控制，儘量避免惹惱特朗普，只希望下一輪有一位更大西洋主義的候選人接替他，就像拜登在 2020 年所做的那樣。

In this scenario, the EU doesn't really change.

在這種情況下，歐盟並不會真正改變。

It sort of stumbles along, as it always does.

它就像往常一樣，磕磕絆絆地走著。

But the pessimistic take is that Trump's return divides the EU.

但悲觀的看法是，特朗普的迴歸分裂了歐盟。

There's a contingent in European politics, think Viktor Orban, Geert Wilders, and Giorgio Maloney, who agree with much of Trump's politics.

歐洲政壇上有一批人，比如維克托-歐爾班（Viktor Orban）、蓋爾特-威爾德斯（Geert Wilders）和喬治-馬洛尼（Giorgio Maloney），他們贊同特朗普的大部分政治觀點。

While the EU was able to put up a relatively united front during Trump's first term, this will be more difficult this time around, given the growing number of this more pro-Trump contingent.

雖然歐盟在特朗普第一任期內還能擺出相對統一的陣線，但考慮到這支更加支持特朗普的隊伍人數越來越多，這一次將更加困難。

And this is why Trump's second term could end up further dividing an already divided EU.

這就是為什麼特朗普的第二個任期最終可能會進一步分裂已經分裂的歐盟。

In fact, Viktor Orban, Hungary's prime minister, and the current holder of the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union, warned about this exact issue ahead of time, saying that depending on the results of the US election, the EU might have to fundamentally change their approach to Russia, with 48 different news outlets reporting on this story alone.

事實上，匈牙利總理、現任歐盟理事會輪值主席維克托-歐爾班（Viktor Orban）曾提前就這一問題發出警告，稱根據美國大選的結果，歐盟可能不得不從根本上改變對俄羅斯的態度。

Now, 36% of that reporting came from the left, while 43% came from the right.

其中，36%的報道來自左翼，43%來自右翼。

And if you compare the headlines, you start to see some interesting framing emerge.

如果比較一下這些標題，你就會發現一些有趣的框架出現了。

On the left, you have the Kyiv Independent saying that if Trump wins the US presidential election, Europe cannot remain pro-war.

在左翼，《基輔獨立報》說，如果特朗普贏得美國總統大選，歐洲就不能繼續支持戰爭。

While on the right, you have a Rego simply saying, Viktor Orban, come on, Donald Trump.

而在右翼，雷戈則簡單地說，維克托-歐爾班，來吧，唐納德-特朗普。

The framing, well, that's very different.

Now, all of this analysis is possible thanks to our sponsor, Ground News, a website and app developed by a former NASA engineer on a mission to give readers an easy, data-driven, objective way to read the news.

現在，所有這些分析都要歸功於我們的贊助商--地面新聞（Ground News），這是一個由前美國國家航空航天局（NASA）工程師開發的網站和應用程序，旨在為讀者提供一種簡單、數據驅動、客觀的新聞閱讀方式。

They put in stories from all over the world and organize them by story, with each story coming with a quick visual breakdown of the political bias, factuality, and ownership of the sources reporting, all backed by racings from three independent news monitoring organizations.

他們將來自世界各地的報道按故事分類，每篇報道都有一個快速的可視化分類，包括報道來源的政治偏見、事實性和所有權，所有這些都有三個獨立新聞監測機構的種族支持。

One of my favorite features is their blind spot feed, which shows you stories underreported by one side of the political spectrum or the other.

我最喜歡的功能之一是他們的 "盲點反饋"，它可以向你展示政治光譜中某一方報道不足的故事。

For example, if you lean right, you probably missed this story where Russia denied, quote, baseless claims about their election interference in the US.

例如，如果你傾向於右翼，你可能會錯過這篇報道，在報道中，俄羅斯否認了關於他們干預美國大選的毫無根據的說法。

Ground News is such an incredibly useful platform that captures information you just can't get anywhere else.

Ground News 是一個非常有用的平臺，它能捕捉到其他地方無法獲取的資訊。

It's especially useful when you're looking at news stories from around the world, as I'm sure our very global audience often does.

當您瀏覽世界各地的新聞報道時，它尤其有用，我相信我們的全球閱聽人也經常這樣做。

If you're not familiar with the media market, it's hard to know who you should trust.

如果你不熟悉媒體市場，就很難知道應該相信誰。

So Ground's guidance can prove invaluable whether you're a European trying to unpack the US election or an American trying to understand the Bulgarian one.

是以，無論您是試圖解讀美國大選的歐洲人，還是試圖理解保加利亞大選的美國人，Ground 的指導都會證明是非常有價值的。

好吧，後者聽起來確實不太可能。

Best of all, Ground are currently offering our viewers a 50% discount on their Vantage plan, which includes unlimited access to their election pages, blind spot feed, and many other features that empower you as a news consumer.

最重要的是，Ground 目前正在為我們的觀眾提供其 Vantage 計劃的半價優惠，該計劃包括無限制訪問其選舉頁面、盲點饋送和許多其他功能，使您成為新聞消費者。

 So go to ground.news forward slash TLDR, scan the QR code on screen, or use the link in the video's description to subscribe today.

請訪問 ground.news forward slash TLDR，掃描螢幕上的二維碼，或使用視頻描述中的鏈接立即訂閱。