????美國前財政部長拉里?薩默斯最近在英國《金融時報》發表評論，批評美國政府不該冷漠對待亞投行，這家由中國牽頭發起的新國際銀行將為亞太地區的重要基礎設施項目提供資金。薩默斯認為，美國政府犯下了一場“戰略和戰術上的失敗”，并呼吁其“全面檢討對全球經濟該采取的姿態”。

????無獨有偶，就在薩默斯措辭尖銳地指責美國政府前不久，另一位克林頓時期的政府要員、前國務卿奧爾布賴特上個月也批評了奧巴馬政府。她表示，美國政府費那么大力氣想把其他國家攔在亞投行之外，最后卻把事情“搞得一團糟”。

????這邊薩默斯和奧爾布賴特的責備不斷，那邊亞洲和歐洲的外交官和企業高管已經開始對亞投行積極示好。盡管美國一直在質疑亞投行成立的目的，還擔心亞投行“沒法遵守高質量的、經得起時間考驗的標準”，但英國、德國、法國、意大利、韓國和澳大利亞等40多個國家并未理會，仍然申請加入。亞投行的初始資金規模為1000億美元，大部分來自中國，預計該行將在今年年底前正式運行，為交通運輸、水利以及能源等基礎設施項目提供資金。

????今后，美國很可能得找機會與亞投行合作，挽回點顏面，跟美國一樣未參與亞投行的日本也一樣。若真能如此，將對各方都有利。然而，要想亞投行真正成功，領導人還應該考慮到以下幾個問題：

????鑒于亞投行的重點是基礎設施開發，而不是為了消除貧困這樣更為宏遠的目標，那么有一點很重要，就是相關政策和程序都要落實到位，確保基礎設施投資不會導致大批民眾突然陷入貧困，也要避免對周邊環境造成嚴重污染。

????亞投行的資金規模龐大，覆蓋范圍也很廣，水電站和公路等大型基礎設施項目可能迫使很多社區的原住民背井離鄉，喪失務農、捕魚等傳統謀生手段。2007年初到2010年底，我在亞洲開發銀行任職期間實地考察了一些電力和交通運輸項目，就曾遇到過此類情況。

????要確保項目的可持續開發，就需要采取強有力的社會保障措施和環境保護手段。設計項目早期就應該充分考慮當地相關社區的意見，而且應有居民代表參與。否則，如果項目設計有問題，有可能給當地社會和環境造成危害，借款方的成本將超支，最終可能導致社會動蕩、項目延誤甚至取消。

????亞投行應當迅速行動起來，證明懷疑論者的觀點是錯的。比如說，它可以用實際行動證明，在資助基礎設施建設方面，亞投行的融資效率比世界銀行和其他地區性開發銀行更高；而在應付社區搬遷時提出的合理訴求、提供相應房屋或收入補償方面，亞投行也有能力處置妥當。

????最近，世界銀行承認“在工程移民安置政策方面存在嚴重缺陷”，同時宣布將解決這個問題，具體途徑是制定方案，改善移民安置過程中的監督和管理，確保受項目影響的民眾和企業得到妥善安排。

????新成立的亞投行還可以建立強有效的新型問責機制，并爭取所有股東支持。要實現這樣的機制，必須成立一個強勢的獨立評估部門，不能受任何一家股東牽制。另一點也很重要，就是建立相應內控制度，確保亞投行嚴格遵守內部章程。

????正如薩默斯所說，美國應該清醒地認識到，新經濟時代已經來臨，應該積極參與亞洲事務，與亞洲所有重要的金融機構多打交道也是其中的一部分。（財富中文網）

????本文作者陳天宗曾任美國駐亞洲開發銀行大使。目前是咨詢公司RiverPeak Group, LLC的董事總經理。

????譯者：Charlie

????審校: 夏林

????In a recent op-ed in The Financial Times, Larry Summers criticized the U.S. for not backing the creation of a new China-led international bank that would finance major infrastructure projects across the Asia Pacific region; the former U.S. secretary of treasury decried it a “failure of strategy and tactics” and called for “a comprehensive review of the U.S. approach to global economics.”

????Summers’ pointed words followed those of another Clinton Administration alumnus. Madeleine Albright, America’s former top diplomat, who late last month said the United States had “screwed up” in its unsuccessful efforts to dissuade other countries from supporting the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

????Both Summers’ and Albright’s remarks came as diplomats and business executives from Asia and Europe have embraced the bank. Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy, South Korea and Australia, are among more than 40 nations who have brushed aside the White House’s concerns over the intentions of the bank and whether it will follow “high quality, time-tested standards.” China will provide much of the AIIB’s initial $100 billion in funding. The bank is expected to be up and running by the end of this year, helping finance transport, water, energy and other infrastructure projects.

????Going forward, the U.S. and Japan, which also has withheld support, may well seek to save face and work with the bank. Such a move will be good for all parties, but for the bank to be successful, leaders should bear a few measures in mind:

????With the bank’s focus on infrastructure development instead of on the broader goal of poverty reduction, it is important that policies and procedures be put in place to ensure that infrastructure investments do not lead to the unintended impoverishment of thousands of people or significant harm to the surrounding environment.

????Given their size and scope, major infrastructure projects such as hydroelectric power plants and road networks can lead to forced resettlement of communities and the loss of traditional livelihoods, such as in agriculture and fishing. I saw this during my own visits to a range of power and transport projects in my oversight role from early 2007 to the end of 2010 on the Board of Directors of the Asian Development Bank.

????Strong social and environmental safeguards are needed to make sure development projects are done in a sustainable manner. Views and input from affected communities should be incorporated in a meaningful way from the earliest stages of project design. Otherwise, poorly designed projects can contribute to social and environmental harm, costs overruns for borrowers and ultimately unrest and delayed or cancelled projects.

????The new bank should move quickly to prove skeptics wrong. It has the chance, for example, to demonstrate that it can be more effective than the World Bank and other regional development banks in financing infrastructure while addressing legitimate community concerns about relocation and compensation for any loss of housing or income.

????Recently, the World Bank admitted to “serious shortcomings in the implementation of its resettlement policies,” adding that it plans to fix its problems with a “plan that will improve the oversight and management of resettlement practices to ensure better protection of people and businesses affected by bank-funded projects.”

????The new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has the chance to develop strong, new and effective accountability mechanisms all shareholders would support. A strong independent evaluations department not beholden to any single shareholder must be part of that. Mechanisms to review and ensure compliance with the bank’s own rules are also critical.

????As Summers noted, it is time for the US to wake up to a new economic era. Strengthened engagement with Asia and all its major financial institutions must be part of that.

????Curtis S. Chin, a former U.S. Ambassador to the Asian Development Bank, is managing director of advisory firm RiverPeak Group, LLC.