翻译数据库中英对照：2020年10月23日外交部发言人赵立坚主持例行记者会 [4]
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian's Regular Press Conference on October 23, 2020 [4]
《中国日报》记者前段时间，《中国日报》发布了一个纪录片，揭露了澳大利亚战略政策研究所（ASPI），其所谓涉华研究都是接受美国政府和军工企业资助的，引发澳方强烈关注。ASPI回应称，自己是独立研究机构，中国是想要堵住外界的批评，请问中方对此有何评论？
China Daily According to a documentary published earlier by China Daily, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's so-called research on China was funded by the U.S. government and weapons manufacturers. This documentary drew a lot of attention from the Australian side. ASPI said in response that it is an independent research institute and that China wants to avoid criticism. What's your comment on this?
赵立坚这家所谓“研究所”的回应毫无道理，它向来以炮制各种涉华虚假信息为生，在事实面前一次又一次被打脸。它自称是“独立研究机构”。今天我就跟大家好好分享一下：它既不独立，也不研究，在澳大利亚国内也不得人心。
Zhao Lijian These remarks of t his so-called institute are senseless at all. It make s a living by creating all kinds of disinformation on China, but it got a slap in the face time and again by facts. Despite its claim of being an "independent research institute", the fact is, it is neither "independent" nor a "research" body, and it's highly unpopular in Australia.
说它不独立，是因为它长期接受美国国防、外交机构和军火商资助，反华意识形态色彩非常浓厚，热衷于炮制和炒作各种反华谎言。它嘴上说独立，实际很拜金，对其金主忠心耿耿，甘愿沦为美国反华势力的“急先锋”，充当他们的“牵线木偶”。澳大利亚《金融评论报》就发表文章，揭露这家所谓“研究所”背后的资助方，讽刺它实质上受到美国反华势力等操控。澳大利亚公民党在其官方刊物上发表文章，揭批这个研究所打着“学术和中立”幌子，配合美国和澳大利亚情报机构攻击中国。
ASPI is not "independent" as it has long been funded by U.S. defense and diplomatic authorities as well as arms manufacturers, which makes it full of anti-China ideology and keen to make and spread anti-China lies. It claims to be "independent" but is in fact money-driven. It is loyal to its sponsors and willing to be a vanguard and puppet for the U.S. anti-China forces. The Australian Financial Review also exposed the sponsors behind this "institute" and satirized it for being at the disposal of anti-China forces in the U.S. Australian Citizens Party also published an article to criticize this institution for cooperating with the U.S. and Australian intelligence communities to attack China under the pretext of academics and neutrality.
说它不研究，是因为它炮制的所谓“涉华报告”缺乏事实依据，毫无学术价值，完全违背学术研究应有的职业道德操守。这个研究所的报告，其观点和线索要么来自美国反动非政府组织，要么使用无从证实和溯源的所谓“目击证据”，甚至把互动式地图说成卫星照片。以所谓“新疆文化灭绝”报告为例，该报告荒谬地将新疆拥有外墙的建筑都视为“拘留中心”，报告所称的380个所谓“拘留中心”都是民事机构。比如，所谓吐鲁番市“拘留中心”实际上是当地行政机构的办公大楼，所谓喀什市“拘留中心”实际上是当地高中等院校。这些在谷歌、百度地图中均有标注，大家可以去查阅。
ASPI is not a "research" body because its reports on China are baseless, lacking academic value, and totally against professional ethics. Its views and clues are either from American NGOs that are against the trend of the times, or "eyewitness evidence" that cannot be proved or traced back. They even identified interactive maps as satellite photos. Let's take its report on so-called "genocide in Xinjiang" as an example. It ridiculously regards all buildings with exterior walls in Xinjiang as "detention centers", and all the 380 "detention centers" it identified are all civil institutions. For instance, the so-called "detention center" in Tulufan is in fact an administrative building, and the "detention center" in Kashi is a local high school. You may refer to Google Map or Baidu Map as these locations are all marked in those maps.
说它不得人心，是因为澳大利亚国内诸多有识之士都对它嗤之以鼻。澳大利亚前驻香港总领事梅卓琳批评该所学者汉密尔顿对中国的政治制度缺乏基本认知。澳大利亚前驻华大使芮捷锐批评该所是“澳大利亚‘中国威胁论的总设计师’”。澳大利亚前外长鲍勃·卡尔批评该所拥有“片面、亲美的世界观”。
ASPI is highly unpopular because many Australians with vision consider it beneath contempt. Jocelyn Chey, Australia's former consul-general to Hong Kong, criticized ASPI's Clive Hamilton for lacking the basic knowledge of China's political system. Geoff Raby, former Australian ambassador to China, criticized ASPI as "very much the architect of the China threat theory in Australia". Bob Carr, former Australian foreign minister, accused ASPI of pumping out a "one-sided, pro-American view of the world".
这家所谓“研究所”颠倒黑白、撒谎成性，早已在中国恶名昭著，并成为国际社会的笑柄。相信大家今后会擦亮眼睛，明辨是非，共同抵制这个“谣言制造机”和“谣言贩卖机”。
This institute has long been notorious in China and a laughing stock for the world due to its behaviors of distorting facts and habitual lying. I believe you will all be sharp-eyed and jointly reject this "rumor-maker" and "rumor-spreader".
《北京日报》记者根据最新数据显示，中国今年已连续6个月实现吸收外资单月正增长。分析人士普遍认为，这反映了国际社会对中国经济复苏的期待。中方对此有何评论？
Beijing Daily According to the latest data, foreign investment in China has increased for six consecutive months this year. Analysts generally believe that this reflects the international community's expectations for China's economic recovery. What is China's comment?
赵立坚这的确是个好消息。在新冠肺炎疫情全球蔓延、跨境直接投资持续低迷的形势下，这充分展现了中国经济的韧性和活力。不少外资企业将中国作为跨国投资的“避风港”，纷纷加码投资，比如，宝马、戴姆勒、西门子、丰田、LG、埃克森美孚、巴斯夫等一大批大项目在华增资扩产。1—9月外商投资企业利润再投资以美元计同比增长25.5%。
Zhao Lijian That's indeed great news. It fully demonstrates the resilience and vitality of the Chinese economy in the face of a surging global pandemic and continued weak cross-border direct investment. Many foreign enterprises have increased input into China, which they regard as a "safe haven" for transnational investment. A large number of major projects including with BMW, Daimler, Siemens, Toyota, LG, ExxonMobil, BASF have seen expanding investment and production in China. From January to September, the reinvestment of profits of foreign-invested enterprises denominated in US dollars increased by 25.5 percent year on year.
这也充分反映了中国超大规模市场对外资的吸引力和外商长期在华投资经营的预期和信心，说明越来越多的国际投资者看好中国经济增长前景，希望分享中国经济发展的红利。中国将继续全面提高对外开放水平，为各国提供广阔的市场和发展机遇，助力世界经济复苏和增长。
This also fully demonstrates the appeal of China's super-large market for foreign investment and the expectation and confidence of foreign investors in long-term investment and operation in China. It shows that more and more international investors are optimistic about China's economic growth prospects and hope to share in the dividends of China's economic development. China will continue to open wider to the outside world, provide other countries with a enormous market and development opportunities, and contribute to world economic recovery and growth.
彭博社记者关于在华外企的问题，美国太阳能 工业协会 以新疆侵犯人权为由呼吁企业 将供应 链 移出新疆。 你对此有何评论？
Bloomberg The leading US solar trade group is calling on companies to move their supply chains out of Xinjiang, citing human rights abuses. These are companies involved in the solar industry, solar panels etc. Their trade group in the US is calling on companies to move their supply chains out of Xinjiang. What is your comment?
注：为确保中英对照准确，“热词译”网站可能对中英文重新分段。