新脱欧协议生死未卜（欧盟拒绝了约翰逊提出的在渔业方面的）

正文翻译EU Rebuffs Boris Johnson’s Latest Brexit Concession on Fish-Britain had proposed the EU accept a 30% reduction on Monday-Member states will be briefed by Barnier on Tuesday afternoon欧盟拒绝了约翰逊提出的在渔业方面的“最新脱欧让步”——周一，英国提议欧盟接受30%的（捕鱼量）削减——周二下午，巴尼耶将向欧盟成员国通报谈判情况

(A French worker fillets salmon in a fish processing plant in the port of Boulogne-sur-Mer, France, January 29, 2020. Picture taken January 29, 2020. EU fishermen will lose the automatic right to fish in British waters once Britain leaves the European unx.)（2020年1月29日，法国布洛涅港，一名法国工人在一家鱼类加工厂里切鲑鱼。照片摄于2020年1月29日。一旦英国脱离欧盟，欧盟渔民将失去在英国水域捕鱼的自动权利。）新闻：

Johnson spoke with Commission President Ursula von der Leyen twice by phone on Monday to try and break the deadlocked negotiations. The U.K. put forward a proposal that would see value of the fish EU boats catch in British waters shrink by 30%, a substantially smaller drop than the 60% it was demanding last week.约翰逊周一两次与欧盟委员会主席乌苏拉·冯·德莱恩通电话，试图打破谈判僵局。英国提出的一项提议将使欧盟渔船在英国水域捕捞的鱼的价值减少30%，大大低于上周要求的60%的降幅。The bloc, however, refused to accept a reduction of more than 25%, saying even that was hard for countries like France and Denmark to accept, according to officials with knowledge of the discussions.但据了解谈判情况的官员说，欧盟拒绝接受25%以上的降幅，称即使是25%的降幅，法国和丹麦等国也难以接受。With only nine days left before the U.K. leaves the single market and customs unx -- with or without an agreement -- there are few signs a deal is within reach. Without an agreement on how much fish EU boats will be allowed to catch in British waters, the wider accord risks collapse.现在离英国离开单一市场和关税联盟只有九天了——要么达成脱欧协议，要么无协议脱欧，几乎没有迹象表明可以达成协议。如果没有就欧盟船只允许在英国水域捕捞多少鱼达成协议，这个范围更广的协议将面临崩溃的风险。But it’s not as simple as just the raw numbers, which is why, as the two sides continue to talks, a compromise still isn’t out of the question.但这并不像讨论基本数字那么简单，这就是为什么，随着双方继续谈判，妥协仍然不是不可能的。Alongside the percentage value of catch, the two sides are haggling over how long a period of time fishermen will be given to adjust to the rules. The U.K. has demanded the EU accept a five-year transition period after previously suggesting three years. The bloc had initially called for 10 years, and has now offered seven.除了捕获量的（降幅）百分比之外，双方还在就给予渔民多长时间来调整规则而讨价还价。英国要求欧盟接受5年过渡期，此前的提议为3年。欧盟最初提出的期限是10年，现在已经降到了7年。Cross-Retaliation跨领域报复

Michel Barnier, the bloc’s chief negotiator, said the negotiators were at a “crucial moment” and that they were giving the deal “a final push” as he arrived to upxe ambassadors from the EU’s 27 member states on the talks at a meeting in Brussels.欧盟首席谈判代表米歇尔·巴尼耶在抵达布鲁塞尔，向欧盟27个成员国的大使通报有关谈判的最新情况时表示，谈判代表正处于一个“关键时刻”，他们正在为该协议“做最后努力”。Speaking before the briefing, an EU diplomat with knowledge of the talks said there had been no breakthrough on Tuesday afternoon, and both sides were still at loggerheads over fishing. Another said that there were also unresolved disagreements around the level competitive playing field for business.一名了解谈判情况的欧盟外交官在简报会前表示，周二下午谈判没有取得突破，双方仍在捕鱼问题上争执不休。另一位表示，在企业公平竞争的环境方面，也存在尚未解决的分歧。While fishing is financially insignificant in the context of the wider trade deal -- the two sides are haggling over the equivalent of roughly 33 million euros ($40 million) annually -- the British see control of their fishing waters, previously under the jurisdiction of the EU, as a key element of the sovereignty that it is regaining with Brexit. For its part, the EU doesn’t want to give access to its single market without maintaining fishing rights in return.而在更广泛的贸易协定背景下，捕鱼在经济上无关紧要（双方正在为每年大约3300万欧元（4000万美元）的费用讨价还价），英国人将以前由欧盟管辖的捕鱼水域的控制权，视为英国通过脱欧重新获得主权的一个关键因素。而就其本身而言，欧盟不愿在无法保持自己捕鱼权的情况下给予英国单一市场准入。

“It’s vital that everybody understands that the U.K. has got to be able to control its own laws completely and we’ve also got to be able to control our own fisheries,” Johnson said. He reiterated that even if the U.K. failed to get a deal, trading with the EU on terms set by the World Trade Organization would be “more than satisfactory.”约翰逊说：“每个人都要明白，英国必须能够完全控制自己的法律，我们也必须能够控制我们自己的渔业，这一点至关重要。”他重申，即使英国无法达成协议，按照世贸组织设定的条款与欧盟进行贸易也会“非常令人满意”。

评论翻译

aleaha123 5 The EU position is that there is just one deal, one relationship, and that they will not allow sectoral limitation. If the UK wants to further reduce access to EU fisherman in the future, the EU wants the right to retaliatory discretion, for example imposing restrictions on financial services access, or car exports, or even the potential to suspend the entire free trade agreement.This is an anathema to the UK position; they simply cannot take it on good faith that the EU will not abuse this privilege for political reasons (see EU ban on Swiss Exchange access when the Confederation failed to sign the multilateral frxwork agreement).Both stance are perfectly understandable. I'd be british, I'd be scared shitless. Unfortunately, that's the world they live and made for themselves. The EU/US/China will strong harm anyone on their way.The UK absolutely can't be taken seriously on what will be their stance in 10 years. I think UK should have their fish. It belongs to them after all. It's their natural/geographic advantage.I also think we should be able to blockage embargo the island in a fingersnap from our market if we don't find our interest. It's our natural/geographic advantage.“但欧盟的立场却是，只有一项协议、一种关系，他们不允许对行业进行限制。如果英国希望在未来进一步减少对欧盟渔民的准入，那么欧盟希望获得报复性自由裁量权，例如对英国的金融服务准入或汽车出口施加限制，甚至可能暂停整个自由贸易协定。这是对英国立场的诅咒；他们完全不能相信欧盟不会因为政治原因而滥用这一特权（参见当瑞士联邦未能签署多边框架协议时，欧盟禁止瑞士进行外汇交易）。”这两种立场都完全可以理解。如果我是英国人，我会吓得屁滚尿流。不幸的是，这就是他们为自己生活和创造的世界。欧盟/美国/中国将强烈地伤害挡在它们途中的任何人。英国在未来10年的立场上也绝对不会被认真对待。我认为英国应该有他们的鱼。毕竟是属于他们的水域。这是他们的自然/地理优势。但我也认为，我们应该能够在弹指间就把这个岛从我们的市场上隔离出去，如果我们找不到我们的利益的话。这是我们的自然/地理优势。duisThias United States of America I also think we should be able to blockage the island in a fingersnap if we don't find our interest. It's our natural/geographic advantage.Countries are permitted not to trade with others for various reasons.This is not the same as blockading a country. To blockade it is to set up warships outside their ports and forcibly prevent anything from going in or out, even from other sources.A blockade is an act of war -- that is, if EU members were to blockade the UK, it would be akin to the German World War I U-boat effort or the Battle of the Atlantic, an attempt to starve the UK into submission, comparable to invading the UK.To wage war on a country that is (a) a nuclear power and (b) a NATO member would be, I would say, probably not the wisest move available.“但我也认为，我们应该能够在弹指间就把这个岛从我们的市场上隔离出去，如果我们找不到我们的利益的话。这是我们的自然/地理优势”由于种种原因，一些国家被允许不和其他国家进行贸易。这和封锁一个国家不一样。封锁，就是在港口外设置战舰，强行禁止一切进出，甚至禁止其他来源进出。封锁是一种战争行为——也就是说，如果欧盟成员国封锁英国，这将类似于德国在第一次世界大战中的U艇做法或大西洋战役，试图饿死英国，使其屈服，相当于入侵英国。我想说，对一个（a）是核国家（b）是北约成员国的国家发动战争可能不是最明智的举动。aleaha123 Yeah I used the wrong word. I meant "disallow product from UK in EU". That would be more "embargo"好吧，我用错词了。我的意思是“禁止英国产品进入欧盟”。那将更多的是一种“禁运”iseetheway On what legal basis?有什么法律依据？aleaha123 We are perfectly allowed to disallow production from a specific country. If you wanted thing to be different, maybe UK shouldn't have vote for Brexit.我们完全可以禁止某一特定国家的生产。如果你想改变这一点，那么当初也许英国就不应该投票支持脱欧。Rulweylan United Kingdom You are, except, of course, that it breaches WTO rules, and would allow literally every other member of the WTO to impose any tariff they liked on EU goods until you stopped.你们当然可以，除了这么干违反了世贸组织的规则，并且会导致世贸组织的其他成员对欧盟商品征收任何他们喜欢的关税，直到你们中止这种行为。aleaha123You over estimate the importance the UK has for the world. Also, i'm sorry to inform you that WTO only check that "agreed rules" between countries are applied. Not the nature of the rules.If we decide that UK can be cut off from our market, there is nothing the WTO can do.你高估了英国对世界的重要性。另外，我很抱歉地通知你，世贸组织只检查国家之间的“商定规则”是否适用。而不是规则的性质。如果我们决定了把英国从我们的市场上切断，就算世贸组织也无能为力。Rulweylan United Kingdom You misunderstand how WTO rules work.The WTO requires that every country without an FTA be treated as well as the 'most favoured nation' without one. So unless the EU were to cut off everyone, including the USA and China, it would breach the rules by cutting off the UK.The result would be that everyone was suddenly entitled to enact punitive tariffs on EU goods, without fear of EU retribution, since the WTO would rule against the EU. Basically free money for China and the USA, who'd take the opportunity to fuck up EU industries which compete with their domestic ones.你误解了世贸组织的规则。世贸组织要求，所有没有签订自由贸易协定的国家都应得到与没有签订自由贸易协定的“最惠国”同等的待遇。所以，除非欧盟切断包括美国和中国在内的所有国家，否则切断英国就将违反规则。其结果将是，所有国家突然都有权对欧盟商品征收惩罚性关税，而不必担心欧盟的报复，因为世贸组织将做出不利于欧盟的裁决。基本上就是在给中国和美国送钱，它们会抓住机会搞砸与它们国内产业竞争的欧盟产业。aleaha123 You overestimate both the weight of UK and weight of the WTO's autority. Obviously considering WTO is your last hope, that's understandable. That being said, I have no time nor care to correct your bullshit. Feel free to be wrong.你高估了英国的影响力和世贸组织的权威。显然考虑拉世贸组织当后盾是你最后的希望，这是可以理解的。话虽如此，我没时间也没心思纠正你的扯淡。不管什么错误想法，你随意好了。MrZakalwe United Kingdom On an optimistic note the two sides positions on this are much, much closer than they started.乐观地说，双方在这个问题上的立场比开始时更接近了。Gareth321 DenmarkIt seems so. I’m also surprised to see the UK moving so much. Given the comments I’ve been seeing in this sub I had assumed the UK would never make any kind of deal, and it was in their best interests not to.看起来是的。我也很惊讶地看到英国会让步这么多。鉴于我在这个主题中看到的评论，我本来认为英国永远不会达成任何形式的协议，并且不达成协议符合他们的最佳利益。DomesticatedElephant The Netherlands This is an anathema to the UK position; they simply cannot take it on good faith that the EU will not abuse this privilege for political reasons (see EU ban on Swiss Exchange access when the Confederation failed to sign the multilateral frxwork agreement).And the EU cannot take it on good faith that the UK will grant access again in 5 years. Which is why they will not give up their leverage. If a deal on fishing is restricted to 5 years, why should other deals be indefinite?If the UK doesn't want a deal that's fine, but the outrage over obvious EU positions is a little tiring. The UK could have saved everyone a headache and left right away.“这是对英国立场的诅咒；他们完全不能相信欧盟不会因为政治原因而滥用这一特权（参见当瑞士联邦未能签署多边框架协议时，欧盟禁止瑞士进行外汇交易）”欧盟也不能善意地认为，英国将在5年后再次批准准入。这就是为什么他们不会放弃他们的筹码的原因。如果一项渔业协议的期限是5年，那为什么其他协议要无限期？如果英国不希望达成协议，那也没关系，但对欧盟明显立场的愤怒有点令人讨厌。英国本可以不让所有人头痛，并立即卷铺盖的。telendriaI honestly have no idea why some EU countries are so entitled to UK fisheries anyway? If they choose not to renew in 5 years, that's completely up to them, not up to France or NL.老实说，我不知道为什么一些欧盟国家有权拥有英国的渔业？如果他们选择5年后不续签，那完全取决于他们自己，而不是法国或荷兰。DomesticatedElephant The NetherlandsThose countries have been fishing in those waters for about 500 years. So there's a long lasting precedent that EU countries are not willing to give up.For France, there's also the issue around Jersey island. Those waters are closer to mainland France than mainland UK, so it's not like the French fishermen are going out of their way to fish in UK waters.这些国家在这些水域捕鱼已经有500年了。因此，欧盟国家不愿放弃一个长期存在的先例。对法国来说，泽西岛也有同样的问题。比起英国本土，这些水域离法国本土更近，所以法国渔民并没有特意去英国水域捕鱼。DKDOTDrenthe (Netherlands) The UK want's something from the EU and vice versa. With the EU being the stronger power (by far) and having more leverage.英国想从欧盟得到一些东西，反之亦然。欧盟是更强大的力量（到目前为止是的），拥有更多的影响力。Tso Norway This sounds like the kind of thing that makes Norway bend over again and again when it comes to EU directives, even though there is a right to refuse in the EEA agreement. Because there is a fear of broad sanctions if that right is actually used.This is the true face of EU in action. They may seem sometimes to be good for the people. But that is because they are targeting foreign companies in sectors where EU companies are underdogs. Enemy of my enemy and all that.In the end EU was created and exist to favor capital within its borders. And these days that mostly means German capital.这听起来像是让挪威一次又一次屈服于欧盟指令的经历，即使它在欧洲经济区协议中有拒绝的权利。因为人们担心，如果这一权利真正得到使用，将会受到广泛的制裁。这就是欧盟实际行为的真实面貌。它们有时似乎对人们有好处。但这是因为它们在瞄准欧盟公司处于劣势的行业的外国公司。以及“我的敌人的敌人是朋友”法则等等。最终，欧盟的创建和存在是为了在其境内支持资本。如今，这主要指的是德国资本。peterstiglitzCzechoslovakiaThat is how negotiations work. They will go on like this until the last day possible, otherwise they would risk to lose.这就是谈判的运作方式。他们将这样继续纠缠下去，直到可能的最后一天，否则他们将冒着谈判失败的风险。iseethewaySo if the EU reject all offers on fish and there is no deal then surely they will have no fishing rights in UK waters the day after? How is that going to go down with their fishermen?所以，如果欧盟拒绝所有关于渔业的提议，并且没有达成协议，那么他们第二天肯定就没有在英国水域的捕鱼权了？这对他们的渔民来说会有什么影响？Rulweylan United Kingdom They'll blame the UK.他们会骂英国。