【双语】例行记者会 2021年1月20日 华春莹（下）

喜欢口译的同学，大多抱有一个外交官的理想，而双语例行记者会上快节奏的你问我答及现场翻译，则给我们提供了宝贵的学习资源。下面是小编整理的关于【双语】例行记者会 2021年1月20日 华春莹（下）的资料，希望大家在这些唇枪舌剑中，提升英语，更热爱祖国！

美国有线电视新闻网记者：第一个问题，周一你回答有关病毒溯源问题时提到美德特里克堡基地和生物实验室，相关话题上了中国社交媒体热搜，昨天晚上“外交部”的标签是热搜榜首。很多中国网民找出一些曾在网上广为流传的猜测、推断，继续炒作这个话题。中方表态是在世卫专家即将在武汉展开调查之际，那么中方立场是不是，无论世卫专家在武汉调查得出什么结论，只要他们不去美国进行类似调查，那在武汉得出的结论就都是片面的和毫无意义的？第二个问题，你刚才提到对美国新政府的一些期望，但这一表态也发表在美国新政府即将宣誓就职之际，是不是给他们发出一个信号或者是一个下马威呢？

CNN: First, you mentioned Fort Detrick on Monday while answering a question on origin-tracing, and then it became a trending topic in Chinese social media. Last night, the MFA became the hottest topic. Many Chinese netizens gathered speculations and hypothesis spreading online and continued to hype up the issue. China’s statement came as WHO experts are working in Wuhan. Do you intend to suggest that so long as they don’t conduct similar research in the US, then any conclusion reached in Wuhan would be one-sided and meaningless? Second question, you mentioned some expectations for the new administration, but it also came as the new administration is about to be sworn in. Is it meant to be a signal or a tough posture?

华春莹：你的问题让我想起了周一英国广播公司记者沙磊提的问题，但是我觉得，其实你中文那么好，你对中国社交媒体上的言论以及中方表态的理解，应该比沙磊更加准确，不应该有任何误解。你仔细回想一下中国官方表态，什么时候有过你那样的理解？中方立场一直是，溯源问题是一个非常严肃的科学问题，必须交由科学家和医学专家进行严肃科学考察研究，然后得出结论，使我们能够对这种新型病毒有个更好科学了解，便于今后更好地应对类似公共卫生危机。

Hua Chunying: This reminds me of the question posed by Mr. Sudworth of BBC on Monday. But with your fluent Chinese, you should have a more accurate understanding of comments on Chinese social media as well as our positions. There should be no misunderstanding. If you check the past remarks of foreign ministry spokespersons, can you recall anything like your interpretation? Our consistent position is that origin-tracing is a serious scientific matter that must be studied by scientists and medical experts to reach a conclusion through science-based research. It will help us gain a better understanding of this new virus so as to better deal with similar public health crises in the future.

关于德特里克堡，你可以回想一下，是不是在前年六七月份的时候，美国媒体包括社交媒体上有大量这样的报道？我们感到很好奇的是，当前年六七月份美国媒体开始有报道德特里克堡生物基地的问题，以及此后发生的“电子烟大白肺”疫情时，为什么美国没有做调查、反而删除相关报道？在国际社会多次要求美方就德特里克堡生物基地作出解释的时候，美方为什么三缄其口，始终没有任何人出来做任何说明？

With regard to Fort Detrick, if you think back, wasn’t it back in June, July 2019 when American media including social media reported a lot on this? We are curious, when there were so many media reports in the US on the bio-chemical research base at Fort Detrick and the subsequent EVALI outbreak, why didn’t the US conduct any investigation but instead removed relevant reports? When the world asked time and again for an explanation from the US on Fort Detrick, why did the US remain silent with no explanation offered whatsoever?

另外，当美国生态健康联盟跟中国武汉病毒研究所合作长达15年之久的病毒专家明确表示，根据他了解，没有任何证据表明武汉病毒研究所存在任何引发疫情的病毒，为什么美方那么快就中断了对其有关合作研究项目的资助？我注意到当时此事引发了美国科学界的谴责。

Besides, when an EcoHealth Alliance expert who had been working with WIV for 15 years said that there’s no evidence showing that the Wuhan lab had the virus that could trigger the outbreak, why did the US quickly cut funding for his joint research program? I noted the American science community condemned this.

还有，当有媒体报道指向更早的时候，比如前年秋天疫情在多点多地暴发，以及美国秋季大流感同疫情之间可能有联系的时候，美方为什么也是三缄其口，从来没有邀请世卫组织，自己也没有进行过任何调查？这些都是大家脑中的问号，需要答案。这个答案不应该由中方给，而应该由美方自己给。

Also, when media reports showed that the epidemic broke out in multiple places earlier in the autumn of 2019 and there might be links between the seasonal influenza in the US and the epidemic, why did the US remain silent and neither invite WHO to look into the matter nor investigate itself? These are just some of the question marks waiting for answers. And it is not for China, but for the US, to offer the answers.

至于中方社交媒体评论，包括你说到热搜，公平地讲，美国媒体就美国领导人撒谎做了很多报道，蓬佩奥在涉华问题包括疫情问题上对中国进行了多么恶毒的、多么频繁的污名化、标签化和种种污蔑抹黑攻击，如果美方媒体甚至领导人、高官都可以发表各种不负责任的言论、散播各种谣言和阴谋论，为什么美国媒体可以报道，中国媒体或者社交媒体上的普通人不可以发表他们的观点？你应该可以看到，现在美国就是因为谣言和阴谋论大行其道，人民才深受其害。难道其中还没有深刻教训可以汲取吗？

You mentioned comments on Chinese social media including the trending topics. Speaking fairly, the US media reported heavily on the lies of the American leadership, including all the stigmatization, labeling, and all sorts of smears and attacks. If American media, even the leadership or senior officials are free to make irresponsible comments and spread rumors and conspiracy theories, why is it that American media can report on them but Chinese media and people using social media couldn’t post their own comments? You should see how people in the US are suffering because of the rampant rumors and conspiracy theories. Aren’t there lessons to be learned?

我还是想强调一下，中方立场非常清楚，是一贯的、明确的。我们没有任何意图去误导人们的判断，或者说误导世卫组织专家组工作。中方对世卫组织相关工作一直坚定支持，并且予以密切有力的配合和合作。我们希望其他国家也能给予世卫组织同样坚定的支持和必要的帮助。

I stress that China’s position is clear and consistent. We have no intention to misguide public judgement or the WHO mission’s work. We always firmly support the work of WHO and offer our strong coordination and close cooperation. We hope other countries could offer the same firm support and assistance to WHO.

你刚提到对美国新政府一个“下马威”，我觉得“下马威”谈不上。发出什么信号？其实美国国内近期有很多工商界、学术界人士都发出了相同的声音，因为大家受够了过去几年美国个别政客的极端不负责任言论，都希望我们的生活和秩序可以回归正常。我想，如果美国新政府能够采取更加理性和负责任的态度来制定对外政策，将受到国际社会的欢迎。

You asked whether it was meant to be a tough posture for the incoming US administration, I think that’s reading too much into it. What’s the signal? Actually lately many in the business and academic circles in the US have been speaking up because they are all fed up with the extremely irresponsible remarks by a few politicians and hope that normal life and order could be restored. I think that if the new administration could be more rational and responsible in formulating domestic and foreign policies, it will be welcomed by the international community.

对于中方来讲，我们从来认为，中美关系是非常重要的一组双边关系。中美关系保持健康稳定发展，符合中美两国人民的根本利益，符合中美两国的根本利益，也符合国际社会的普遍期待，中方对于发展中美关系的政策是一贯的、明确的。我们希望美国新政府能够同中方相向而行，本着相互尊重的精神妥善处理分歧，在更多领域开展互利合作。这符合国际社会的期待，也是中美两国人民的期待。

On China’s part, we always believe that the China-US ties are a very important bilateral relationship. The sound and steady development of this relationship serves the fundamental interests of the two peoples and countries and is the shared aspiration of the international community. China’s policy on developing relations with the US is consistent and clear. We hope the new administration could meet China halfway, properly handle differences in the spirit of mutual respect, and conduct mutually-beneficial cooperation in broader areas. This is the expectation of both peoples and the whole world.

美国有线电视新闻网记者：我们注意到最近中国官方媒体大篇幅报道美国辉瑞疫苗致死事件来质疑它的安全性。最近在挪威发生23名老人死亡事件。但不少人认为这些报道有夸大其词和误导之嫌。有人觉得中国官媒这样的报道似乎是在全球公众中造成对疫苗的质疑。这些言论和有些美国或者西方反疫苗接种者的言论不谋而合，造成全球公众对疫苗信任度下降，不利于全球疫情防控，最终损害中国自己的利益。中方对这样的批评有何回应？

CNN: We’ve seen a lot of coverage by the Chinese media questioning the safety of Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine as 23 people died in Norway after receiving it. Many people believe that these reports are exaggerating and misleading. Some commented that such reports by state media will sow doubts about vaccines in the minds of the general public, which falls into the same rank as those anti-vaxxers in the United States and other western countries. All these have made people around the world less confident about vaccines, which will not help the global anti-epidemic efforts and eventually hurt China’s interests. How do you respond to such criticism?

华春莹：这里涉及到一个根本性的问题：为什么西方媒体可以大肆报道的事情，中国媒体就不可以报道？很多时候中方媒体只是报道一个客观的现象或事实就会被斥责为宣传甚至传播虚假信息。这种想法本身就反映出对中国根深蒂固的意识形态偏见和对中国非常不公平的待遇。也就是说，西方国家媒体可以随便报道，而中国媒体就不可以基于事实报道，那是什么新闻自由？什么言论自由？中国媒体、中国民众没有发表言论的自由吗？

Hua Chunying: The issue here is a fundamental one: why cannot Chinese media report on something already covered by western media? Even when Chinese media report facts objectively, they are rejected as propaganda or even disinformation. This very idea reveals the deep-seated ideological bias and appalling injustice against China. Why cannot Chinese media report facts when those in the west can say whatever they like? Where is the freedom of press and freedom of speech? Aren’t Chinese media and netizens entitled to the freedom of speech?

你提到辉瑞疫苗的问题，挪威23名老人在注射辉瑞疫苗后死亡，这是不是西方媒体首先报道的？是不是挪威首先报告的？是不是挪威药品管理局公开表态的？其中13人的死亡原因已经有官方评估，认为是注射疫苗的副作用所致。这不是中方媒体杜撰，而是西方媒体首先报道出来的。但是我们也注意到英文主流媒体的确没有在第一时间突出报道这件事。

You mentioned the incident with the Pfizer vaccine where 23 elderly people died after receiving the vaccine in Norway. Wasn’t this first reported by western media? Didn’t Norway report this first? Didn’t the Norwegian Medicines Agency make an open statement? There was official review on the reasons of death for 13 of them, pointing to side effects of the vaccine. This is not made up by Chinese media, but first reported by western media. But we also noted that English mainstream media didn’t feature this in their reporting in a timely manner.

有个非常有趣的现象，你应该注意到：一旦出现关于中国疫苗的负面传闻，西方媒体就会趋之若鹜，争先恐后报道。比如说，之前在巴西有一名参与实验的志愿者死亡，在没有调查清楚的情况下立即成为很多西方媒体的头条，但后来证明那起事件与疫苗无关。对不对？可是后来并没有西方媒体对误报向中方表示歉意。

You should have noticed this interesting phenomenon: whenever there is any negative news about Chinese vaccines, western media always rush to report on it. For example, when a volunteer taking part in Chinese vaccine trails in Brazil passed away, before the reasons were found, western media wrote headlines about the incident, which later proved to be unrelated to the vaccine. Do I remember correctly? But later not one of the western media agencies apologized to China for the mistake in their reports.

抗击疫情是大家共同面临的紧迫任务，新冠肺炎疫苗本身也是一个严肃的科学问题。在疫情形势很严峻的情况下，如果有更多疫苗投入使用，特别是在发展中国家普及，对于我们共同抵御病毒侵袭是非常有帮助的，这也事关全人类的根本利益。但现在有一种极不正常的现象：个别美英媒体带头把疫苗贴上了隐形的地缘政治标签，把他们的政治立场投射到相关报道中，他们要宣传辉瑞疫苗，打击中国疫苗。但对我们来说，中国没有这样狭隘的地缘政治偏见。中方愿意为疫苗的普及性、可负担性作出贡献，我们欢迎发达国家把他们的疫苗拿出来和发展中国家共享。我们希望看到的是这样的局面，而不是只能你输我必须赢。我想，在疫苗问题上居然出现这样的双重标准，这反映出背后令人深思、而且很深刻的一种现象，这才是真正不利于国际抗疫合作的。

It is the urgent task at hand for all of us to fight the virus. Vaccines themselves are a serious scientific issue. Against the grave situation, more vaccines being applied, especially in developing countries, would be of great help to our joint defence against the virus. At stake here is the fundamental interests of all humanity. But we are observing an abnormal phenomenon now. A handful of US and UK media have been taking the lead in pinning invisible geopolitical labels to vaccines and projecting political positions to their reporting. They want to promote Pfizer’s vaccine and trash Chinese vaccines. But China is not affected by such narrow geopolitical bias. We are ready to contribute to vaccine accessibility and affordability and would be glad to see developed countries sharing their vaccines with developing ones. That’s what we hope to see, not a zero-sum game. The double standard that has been exposed on the issue of vaccines reflect a thought-provoking and profound phenomenon that is not conducive to international anti-epidemic cooperation.

彭博社记者：关于美方认定新疆“种族灭绝”的问题，你刚才在回答中针对的是蓬佩奥，但候任总统拜登提名的国务卿布林肯在听证会上称，他也认同特朗普政府对新疆存在“种族灭绝”的认定。你对于候任国务卿布林肯支持认定“种族灭绝”的言论有何评论？

Bloomberg: Regarding the Xinjiang genocide statement, you referred to Pompeo, but the President-elect Joe Biden’s nominee for Secretary of State Antony Blinken in his confirmation hearing said he agreed with the Trump administration’s designation of what’s happening in Xinjiang as genocide. So specifically, I’m wondering if you could comment on the incoming Secretary of State’s position, Mr. Blinken’s comments and support of the designation?

华春莹：我刚才在回答CNN提问时已经说了，过去几年来，蓬佩奥和以蓬佩奥为代表的这届美国政府撒了多少谎、造了多少谣、放了多少毒，大家其实心里都是有感受的。对于他撒谎成性、毫无信誉的种种言论，美国国内其实也是深恶痛绝的，对于蓬佩奥等人的品质、诚信、信誉，心中也是有自己判断的。

Hua Chunying: Like I said to CNN, people all know the U.S. administration with Pompeo as a leading figure fabricated so many lies and rumors and spread so much poison. In fact, the American people also despise his lying character and words lacking the slightest credibility. I believe they have their fair judgment on the credibility of Pompeo and his like.

美国国内现在在涉疆问题上有很多误解，原因非常清楚，就是以蓬佩奥为首的反华反共势力串联和利用了几个反华学者针对中国编造出种种谎言。我刚才也说了，对于反华学者郑国恩和澳大利亚战略政策研究所炮制的涉疆谣言及其背后支持者，美国媒体自己也是有揭露的。我们希望美国新政府能够在包括涉疆等一系列重要问题上，有自己理性、冷静、准确的判断。现在，在涉疆问题上需要让事实来说话、让真相来说话。美国不是讲民主吗？美方应该听听新疆2500多万各族人民的声音。我们愿意本着平等和相互尊重的精神和他们进行交流，帮助他们了解更多事实真相。同时我们反对以涉疆和所谓人权问题为由干涉中国内政，将坚定维护自身主权安全发展利益。

Among the American people there are various misunderstandings on Xinjiang-related matters, and the reason is crystal clear: Pompeo and other anti-China, anti-communist forces have been colluding with and employing anti-China scholars to spin rumors about China. The American media also exposed the Xinjiang-related rumors created by Adrian Zenz and the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, as well as their sponsors. We hope the new U.S. administration will make cool-headed, rational and accurate decisions on Xinjiang and other important issues. On Xinjiang-related matters, we need to let facts and truth speak for themselves. The United States claims to champion democracy, right? Well, they should hear the voices from over 25 million Xinjiang residents of various ethnic groups. We are ready to have exchanges with them based on equality and mutual respect, and help them know more about the truth. In the meantime, we oppose interference in China’s internal affairs under the pretext of Xinjiang and human rights, and we will firmly uphold national sovereign and security.

湖北广播电视台记者：最近一段时间，中韩两国部分网民和公众人物就“泡菜”归属问题有不少争论，互相批评，甚至有些放大解读。请问发言人对此有何评论？

Hubei TV: Lately there has been much debate over the home of paocai among netizens and public figures in China and the ROK, sometimes even leading to mutual criticism and exaggerated interpretation. I wonder if you have any comment?

华春莹：我不是食品方面的专家。在我看来，泡菜作为一种腌渍发酵的食品，并不是仅存在于少数几个国家、民族和地区。中国普通话称之为“pàocài”，中国的朝鲜族以及朝鲜半岛称之为“kimchi”。凡此种种，它们有相通和相近之处，但在用料、口味、制作方法等方面又各有千秋。我想应该从美食角度对泡菜相关学术问题进行有益和友好的交流讨论，但是不应带入偏见，以免引发对立，影响感情。

Hua Chunying: I’m no culinary expert. To me, what we call paocai in Chinese is a broad variety of pickled fermented food that is not unique to a few countries, ethnic groups or regions. In China it is generally known as paocai, in the Korean Peninsula and among China’s ethnic Korean group kimchi, and the list of names goes on. Despite the similarity, each has its own unique features in terms of ingredient, flavor, recipe, etc. We support meaningful and friendly exchange and discussion over academic issues concerning paocai from a culinary perspective, but there should be no place for bias to avoid inciting confrontation and affecting people-to-people ties.

新华社记者：美国白宫国安会“印太协调员”提名人坎贝尔近日表示，中美关系如沿着当前道路走下去，将进入非常可怕的境地。双方应暂停针锋相对的做法，设立合适的接触渠道和机制，并采取一些温和步骤，向对方发出改善关系的积极信号。中方对此有何评论？

Xinhua News Agency: Biden’s incoming NSC Indo-Pacific coordinator Kurt Campbell recently said that the current path that the China-US relationship is taking will only lead the two countries to a horrible situation. The two sides should suspend tit-for-tat actions, establish proper channels and mechanisms for contacts, and take some moderate steps to send positive signals of improving ties with each other. What is your comment?

华春莹：中方一贯认为，一个良好的中美关系符合两国人民的根本利益，也是国际社会的共同期待。中美之间虽然存在分歧，但也拥有广泛共同利益和合作空间，并对世界和平与发展负有特殊责任。

Hua Chunying: China always maintains that a sound China-US relationship serves the fundamental interests of the two countries and the shared aspiration of the international community. Differences aside, China and the United States do share a wide range of common interests and space for cooperation, and we two shoulder special responsibility to world peace and development.

中方对美政策是一贯、明确的。我们致力于同美方实现不冲突不对抗、相互尊重、合作共赢，同时坚定捍卫国家主权安全发展利益。希望美国新一届政府同中方相向而行，加强对话，管控分歧，拓展合作，推动中美关系尽快回到正确发展轨道，更好造福两国人民和世界人民。

China’s policy toward the United States is consistent and clear. We are committed to developing a relationship with the United States featuring non-confrontation, non-conflict, mutu