编者按：固然调度好意思元霸权均是民主党和共和党政策的中枢方针之一，但他们的权略可能会产生天悬地隔的经济收尾。2024年10月20日，中国东谈主民大学重阳金融谋划院谋划员李珊珊在《南华早报》刊文How Harris and Trump will seek to preserve US dollar hegemony。著作指出，这次好意思国大选竞争的热烈内容上反应了好意思国在应付“吉尔平逆境”中策略选拔的极重性。现将著作中英版发布如下：
本文英文版10月20日刊发在《南华早报》
“吉尔平逆境”（Gilpin Dilemma）是国皮毛干表面中的一个热切见地，源自好意思国粹者罗伯特·吉尔平（Robert Gilpin）对霸权谨慎表面（Hegemonic Stability Theory）的分析。该逆境描述了当霸权国度在保管国外规律中弘扬沟通作用时所濒临的永远挑战，体现时霸权国度为调度全球大家家具（如国外安全、解放买卖、全球金融体系谨慎等）而承担雄壮成本，但跟着时候推移，若是保管这一沟通地位的成本向上了它所能赢得的收益，就会导致霸权国的经济实力与其快乐之间出现差距。这种情况下，霸权国常常会濒临奈何均衡提供全球大家家具和国内资源敛迹的逆境。“吉尔平逆境”关于推敲历史上霸权国度的更迭尤为热切，也适用于国外货币体系的权利转机问题。这一逆境在这次好意思国大选热烈的竞争态势中得到充分体现。
固然2024年好意思国总统大选最终得票情况仍存变数，但其好像率会成为好意思国近代历史上竞争最热烈的大选之一。这次好意思国大选竞争的热烈内容上反应了好意思国在应付“吉尔平逆境”中策略选拔的极重性。固然两党均意图通过我方的策略调度好意思国的霸权地位和根蒂利益，但不同的策略选拔会产生不同的着力。瞻望哈里斯大多延续拜登政府的多边宗旨，悉力于调度全球原有规律，至少在全球大多数“非敌国”规模内连接担当大家家具提供者的扮装，而特朗普奉行单边宗旨，但愿放松全球大家家具提供者的扮装，这试验上反应出对调度霸权的样式选拔和收益成本的评估存在不合。全球大家家具的提供波及政事、经济、军事等多个规模，但其中最为中枢的是对调度好意思元霸权收益和成本的衡量，即奈何最大化好意思元看周全球霸权货币所带来的收益，同期限度和摊派调度这一地位的成本。
从酬酢军事政策看，拜登主张加强与盟友国外联接，褂讪好意思国在国外机构中的地位，这种政策倾向于保持全球金融体系的谨慎，连接撑持以好意思元为主导的全球货币体系。而特朗普则倾向于减少好意思国在国外组织的参与，并将好意思国排斥在伊朗核公约和跨太平洋伙伴相干等要津公约以外，这可能导致全球对好意思元的信任着落。在军事规模，固然拜登试图通过在俄乌战斗建造“调度国外正义规律”的形象，对好意思元地位有正面促进，但其对制裁器具依赖的加大和在巴以问题上的双标态度在一定程度上放松了这一努力的收效。特朗普愈加顽强地推论“重回亚洲”策略，胁迫要退出北约及对乌克兰的撑持，这有助于好意思国短期内更集结元气心灵地应付中国挑战，但从长久角度看，拜登的酬酢军事策略可能更故意于调度好意思元的国外地位，因为好意思元现存的霸权地位不仅来自经济实力、科技转换才智和金融发展水平，还来自政事规模的全球沟通地位，军事规模的一些认真同盟相干和非认果然安全保险快乐。
从买卖和经济政策看，哈里斯瞻望举座上会连接拜登政府的大政方针，特朗普在其竞选摘要中快乐“调度好意思元宇宙储备货币的地位（Keep the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency）”。但从其具体经济政策导向看，从长久看，反而可能对好意思元地位起到放松作用。
第一，从财政政策看，若是好意思国要保持债务水平可控，就需要冉冉减少广博赤字。拜登政府提交的2025年财政预案调动版提出异日十年再减少大要3万亿好意思元的联邦赤字，但特朗普快乐大幅减税，又不减少社会保险开销。他快乐对入口商品关税广博增多10%，对中国入口家具征收60%或更高的关税，对逃避好意思元的国度施加“100%的关税”。固然在短期内这些政策可能通过增多通货推广风险推升好意思元需求，但永眺望可能也会增多债务背负，使这些国度愈加隔离好意思元。
第二，固然两党王人倾向于放纵违规外侨，但特朗普的态度愈加果断，外侨政策固然不会平直影响好意思元的国外地位，但可能和会过影响好意思国经济增长、技能转换、国皮毛干和全球成本流动等方面辗转放松好意思元的国外地位。
第三，民主党供应链多元化策略，鼓动振奋联接、技能转换等政策，悉力于调度全球经济可络续发展，辗转调度好意思元的国外地位，而特朗普以致对振奋变化持怀疑派头，放浪撑持化石燃料产业，退出巴黎振奋协定，这将放松好意思国在应付振奋变化、绿色经济这些紧要议题上的国外沟通力，辗转影响好意思元的国外地位。
表面上民主党的政策可能更故意于好意思元的长久地位。奈何更好地调度好意思元的霸权地位是两党竞争中的中枢议题，仅仅技能、策略和试验着力有所不同。哈里斯的政策倾向于通过国外联接和适应的经济金融政策，加强好意思国在国外组织中的影响力，鼓动全球经济解决的谨慎以保管全球投资者的信任，调度好意思元的全球主导地位。此外，其对加密货币可能继承愈加严格的监管，确保比特币等数字钞票不会对好意思元酿成平直胁迫。而特朗普的单边宗旨、政策不笃定性和宽松的加密货币监管政策可能加速去中心化进度。总体上说，民主党的策略在调度好意思国全球沟通力和照顾大家品提供策略方面谋局更为深化，从长久看可能更故意于调度好意思元的国外地位。
但关于接近的选举和处于“吉尔平逆境”的霸权国来说，这种预测具有挑战性，相称是辩论到政策的动态变化和影响链条的复杂性。比如，特朗普的关税擢升了入口商品的成本，但若是好意思国在全球多数地区仍悉力于产业链的多元化，也可能会引发出好意思国经济更强的增长动能，增多好意思国国内家具需求，从而改善好意思国的买卖均衡，增强好意思元需求；而拜登在俄乌战斗、制裁样式和力度上的“悉心布局”关于场面的把控才智条目极高，一朝莫得掌抓好分寸，也可能最终对好意思元地位产生放松着力。
以下为著作英文版原文：
How Harris and Trump will seek to preserve US dollar hegemony
The “Gilpin dilemma”, an essential concept in international relations theory, stems from the analysis of hegemonic stability theory by American scholar Robert Gilpin. It illustrates the long-term challenges faced by a hegemonic power as it plays a leading role in maintaining international order. The hegemon shoulders the burden of providing global public goods at great cost.
Over time, however, the cost of sustaining the international status quo can exceed the benefits, creating a discrepancy between the hegemon’s power and its commitments. In such a situation, the hegemonic power can face the dilemma of balancing the provision of global public goods and constraints on its resources. The Gilpin dilemma also applies to the shifting influence in the international monetary system.
The 2024 US presidential election is likely to be one of the most fiercely contested in recent American history. This also fundamentally reflects the challenges the country faces in navigating its strategic choices amid the Gilpin dilemma.
While both major political parties aim to preserve US hegemony and safeguard core national interests, their divergent strategies are likely to produce different outcomes. Democratic Party nominee and US Vice-President Kamala Harris is expected to largely continue US President Joe Biden’s multilateral approach, aiming to uphold the existing global order and maintain the role of public goods provider.
In contrast, the unilateralism of former US president Donald Trump – the Republican Party’s nominee – seeks to scale back this role, highlighting a divergence in strategies on how to sustain US hegemony. The provision of global public goods spans political, economic and military dimensions, but at its core lies the calculus of maintaining the dominance of the US dollar and maximising the benefits of the dollar’s status while managing the costs of upholding this position.
From the perspective of foreign and military policy, Biden advocates strengthening international cooperation with allies and reinforcing the US position in global institutions. His aim is to preserve the stability of the global financial system and support the dollar-centric international monetary framework. In contrast, Trump favours reducing US engagement in international organisations and key agreements.
While Biden’s positioning in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a defender of international justice and order has provided a boost to the US dollar’s standing, his reliance on sanctions and a perceived double standard over Israel’s conduct in its war in Gaza have somewhat undermined the effectiveness of these efforts.
However, Biden’s diplomatic and military strategy is likely to be more favourable for maintaining the dollar’s global status in the long run, as political and military alliances are indispensable for the formation of today’s US dollar hegemony.
In terms of trade and economic policy, Harris is expected to broadly adhere to the major policy directions of the Biden administration while Trump’s campaign platform includes a pledge to “keep the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency”. Even so, his specific economic policy orientation could inadvertently undermine the dollar’s status.
Trump vows high tariffs on China-made cars in his first speech after assassination attempt
First, on the fiscal policy front, Biden’s revised fiscal budget proposes an additional reduction of about US$3 trillion in the federal deficit in the next 10 years. In contrast, Trump promises sweeping tax cuts without meaningful reductions to social security spending.
He also proposes a universal 10 per cent tariff on imported goods, a 60 per cent or higher tariff on imports from China and even a “100 per cent tariff” on countries moving away from using the US dollar. While these measures might temporarily boost demand for dollars by driving up inflation, they could also exacerbate the US debt burden and push more countries away from relying on the dollar.
Second, Trump’s stance on immigration is markedly tougher. While immigration policy might not directly affect the dollar’s global standing, it could indirectly undermine its position by affecting the country’s economic growth, technological innovation, international relations and global capital flows.
Third, the Biden administration’s strategy to diversify supply chains, promote climate cooperation and advance technological innovation aims to uphold sustainable global economic development, thereby indirectly supporting the dollar’s international status.
In contrast, Trump’s rejection of climate change, staunch backing of the fossil fuel industry and withdrawal from the Paris climate accord undermine US leadership on these critical issues, indirectly weakening the dollar’s standing on the global stage.
Fourth, on the subject of cryptocurrency, Harris is expected to introduce a regulatory framework for digital assets such as bitcoin. On the other hand, Trump’s looser approach to regulation of cryptocurrencies could accelerate the trend towards decentralisation.
Overall, the Democratic Party’s strategy is more forward-looking in terms of preserving US dollar hegemony and managing the strategy of public goods provision. However, for a hegemonic power facing the prospect of close elections and the Gilpin dilemma, such predictions are fraught with uncertainty, especially considering the dynamic nature of policies and the intricacies of their impact.
For instance, Trump’s tariffs might raise the cost of imported goods, but if the US remains committed to diversifying supply chains across the globe, this could also unlock stronger economic growth and improve the trade balance, thereby being beneficial to the dollar’s power.
Meanwhile, Biden’s meticulous layout of sanctions and strategic moves in Russia’s war in Ukraine requires a high degree of control over the situation. If not handled deftly, it could ultimately have a weakening effect on the dollar’s standing.