Politicians propose; markets dispose.

政治家提出计划；市场决定结果。

Last week began with a statement by Theresa May, the UK prime minister, of her plans for Brexit.

上周初，英国首相特里萨•梅(Theresa May)发表了一份声明，阐述她的退欧计划。

The foreign currency markets responded by writing down the value of UK assets.

外汇市场对此做出的反应，是使英国资产贬值。

The UK is determined to take back control of its fate.

英国决定拿回自身命运的控制权。

But formal sovereignty is not power.

但正式主权并非决定力量。

The UK government announces its intentions.

英国政府宣布了自己的计划。

The reaction of others determines results.

决定结果的是其他方面的反应。

The two speeches made by Mrs May at the party conference last week make a hard Brexit by far the most probable outcome.

从梅在上周保守党大会上发表的两次演讲来看，硬退欧(hard Brexit)显然是可能性最大的结果。

That is so for both procedural and substantive reasons.

这既有程序上的原因，也有实质性原因。

The procedural reason is that she has decided to trigger the EU’s Article 50 exit procedure by no later than March next year.

程序上的原因是，她已决定，英国触发《里斯本条约》第50条、从而启动退出欧盟程序的时间将不晚于明年3月。

This would give the initiative to the other members and focus the negotiations on a divorce, to be finalised within just two years.

这将把主动权交给其他成员国，把谈判的焦点完全放在与欧盟分道扬镳上，并且要在短短两年内完成谈判。

Given the complexity of EU decision-making, this is too short for negotiating a bespoke deal.

考虑到欧盟决策过程的复杂性，要磋商一项量身打造的专门协议，这点时间太短。

The substantive reason why a hard Brexit is overwhelmingly likely is that the prime minister has also ruled out all but such a bespoke deal.

硬退欧可能性非常大的实质原因是，除了谈判这样一项专门协议，梅排除了其他所有可能性。

In her words, We are going to be a fully independent, sovereign country, a country that is no longer part of a political union with supranational institutions that can override national parliaments and courts . . . So it is not going to a ‘Norway model’. It’s not going to be a ‘Switzerland model’. It is going to be an agreement between an independent, sovereign United Kingdom and the EU.

用她的话来说，我们即将成为一个完全独立的主权国家，不再是一个拥有凌驾于国家议会和法庭的超国家制度的政治联盟的一部分……因此，结果既不会是‘挪威模式’，也不会是‘瑞士模式’，而是一个独立自主的联合王国与欧盟之间的协议。

The procedure and goal she has outlined would in practice put the country on a timetable to exit not just from the EU, but from the preferential terms of access to EU markets on which investors, both foreign and domestic, rely.

她概述的程序和目标实际上为英国启动了一份时间表，英国不仅将脱离欧盟，还将退出欧盟市场特惠准入条款——这些条款是国内外投资者所看重的。

This would be a hard Brexit.

这将是一场硬退欧。

Furthermore, UK trade negotiators simply could not negotiate offsetting agreements with the rest of the world.

另外，英国的贸易谈判代表们根本无法与全球其他地区谈判补偿性的协议。

This is partly because no such possibility plausibly exists, since the EU takes almost half the UK’s exports.

部分原因是，这种可能性十之八九是不存在的，因为欧盟市场占到英国出口的近一半。

It is also because the UK will not be deemed a credible negotiating partner until its EU deal is finalised.

还有一个原因是，在英国与欧盟敲定协议之前，其他地区不会把英国视作可信的谈判伙伴。

By March 2019, then, the UK is likely to find itself without preferential access to any markets.

到2019年3月，英国可能发现自己享受不到任何一个市场的特惠准入待遇。

Yet this is far from all.

然而，这远非全部。

Mrs May also stated that if you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere.

梅还声称，如果你认为自己是一位世界公民，那么你就不会是任何一个国家的公民。

She denied the possibility that one might be both a citizen of the world and a citizen of somewhere.

她否认一个人既是世界公民又是某个国家公民的可能性。

But many of the skilled foreigners on whom the UK depends view themselves as just that.

但英国所依赖的很多具备专业技能的外国人就把自己视为这种公民。

Why should they wish to stay in a country whose prime minister appears to despise them? Xenophobia was also an important part of the Brexit campaign, whatever Brexiters claim.

他们为什么要留在一个其首相似乎轻视他们的国家呢？不管退欧支持者们怎么说，排外心理也是退欧运动中的一个重要元素。

Does anybody believe such language has no effect on potential workers and investors or, not least, our EU partners?

有人认为梅的这番言论不会对潜在的员工和投资者还有我们在欧盟的伙伴们造成影响吗？

Unwise words have consequences.

不明智的言论会造成后果。

The UK government’s extreme goals are now clear.

英国政府的极端目标现在已明确无误。

Investors have duly marked down the value of the country’s assets in the simplest way, by selling the pound.

投资者们采取了恰当的做法，用最简单的方式，也就是抛售英镑，降低了英国资产的价值。

The real effective exchange rate is close to where it was in late 2008, immediately after the financial crisis.

目前英镑的实际有效汇率接近2008年底金融危机爆发后的水平。

In dollar terms, stock market indices are lower than before the referendum and also relative to other markets.

以美元计算，英国股指低于退欧公投之前的水平，也逊于其他市场。

Such a devaluation of UK assets was inevitable.

英国资产的此番贬值是不可避免的。

It reflects investors’ correct belief that its economic prospects have worsened.

它反映了投资者所抱持的正确观点，即英国的经济前景已经恶化。

But its poor past export performance suggests that the depreciation is still not big enough to generate the needed shift in the structure of the economy towards production of tradeable goods and services.

但英国过往糟糕的出口表现表明，此番贬值仍不足以带来经济结构的必要转型，使生产转向可贸易的商品和服务。

Moreover, it is quite likely that today’s huge current account deficits will be unsustainable post-Brexit.

此外，在英国退欧后，当前庞大的经常账户赤字很有可能将无法维持。

If so, the UK will need a big decline in aggregate spending relative to incomes.

如果是这样的话，相对于收入，英国将需要大幅降低总支出。

The depreciation alone is most unlikely to deliver that.

而仅靠资产贬值不大可能实现这一点。

Macroeconomic policy might also need to be tighter.

宏观经济政策或许也需要收紧。

But such a tightening is precisely what the Bank of England and the new Treasury team wish desperately to avoid.

但紧缩正是英国央行(Bank of England)及新的财政部班子极力想要避免的。

True, the inflows of capital needed to finance the UK's huge external deficit might continue, supported by the perception that the land of the depreciated pound had at last become a bargain.

为英国巨额外部赤字提供资金所需的资本流入的确有可能会持续，因为外界会认为英镑贬值后，至少英国地产变得便宜。

But suppose the inflows ceased, instead, as investors became ever more nervous about the path the government had chosen.

但假设资本停止流入——在投资者对英国政府所选择的道路越来越感到不安的情况下，这是有可能的。

Then the currency might collapse.

那么英镑或许会崩盘。

Yields on gilts might also jump.

英国国债的收益率可能也会飙升。

Policymakers could face a predicament familiar to emerging economies that lose the confidence of investors: the need to raise interest rates and close fiscal deficits during a crisis.

类似于让投资者丧失了信心的新兴经济体，政策制定者将面临这样的困境：在危机期间需要加息并填补财政赤字。

Is this likely? No.

这可能做到吗？不可能。

Is the government’s loose talk making it rather more likely? Yes.

英国政府失之严谨的讲话是否增加了出现这种局面的可能性？是的。

The government would then learn the limits of sovereignty in an open economy.

到那时，英国政府将会认识到开放型经济中主权的极限。

The views of Philip Hammond, chancellor of the exchequer, who reminded his party last week that the British people did not vote on June 23 to become poorer, or less secure, might then count for more, and those of the Brexiters in the cabinet for less.

财政大臣菲利普•哈蒙德(Philip Hammond)上周提醒他所在的保守党，英国人民在6月23日的投票不是为了变得更贫穷，或更不安全。他的观点将变得更加重要，而内阁中那些退欧派的观点将不会有多大用处。

In a crisis, the unthinkable becomes thinkable.

在危机中，不可想象的事情也会变成可能。

Triggering Article 50 without parliamentary approval might be impossible.

但在未经议会批准的情况下触发第50条或许是不可能的。

It surely ought to be impossible.

理应如此。

By a thin margin the country voted for some kind of Brexit.

支持以某种方式退欧的人数只占微弱优势。

But the government has no mandate for the rather extreme version it is choosing.

但是政府目前选择的这种相当极端的退欧方式并未获得授权。

Moreover, Brexiters insist that their goal is to restore parliamentary sovereignty.

此外，退欧派坚称他们的目标是恢复议会主权。

Why then does the government plan to ignore parliament when these decisions are taken?

那为什么政府做这些决策时却打算忽略议会呢？

What drove Leavers was, we are also told, the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK.

退欧派还说，他们秉持的是与英国有关的决策应在英国作出的原则。

The currency markets demonstrate the emptiness of that principle.

但外汇市场证明了这一原则毫无实质意义。

Britain’s EU partners are about to do the same.

英国的欧盟伙伴们将会如法炮制。

The premise of the Leave campaign was false: a host of decisions that affect the UK will always be taken outside it.

退欧运动的前提假设就是错误的：大量影响英国的决策总是会在英国以外作出。

But this truth is unlikely to stop the train towards a complete Brexit from departing on its timetabled journey.

但这一真相不大可能阻止通往完全退欧的列车出发，踏上已定好了时间表的旅程。

Stopping it would take a miracle, or rather a crisis.

要阻止这趟列车需要一个奇迹，或者更确切地说需要一场危机。

Is that likely? No.

可能出现奇迹吗？不可能。

Is it possible? Yes.

彻底退欧可能吗？是的。