翻译数据库中英对照：2021年1月8日外交部发言人华春莹主持例行记者会 [4]
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Regular Press Conference on January 8, 2021 [4]
总台国广记者我们注意到在周边新冠肺炎疫情形势严峻背景下，中国同阿富汗、巴基斯坦、尼泊尔、斯里兰卡和孟加拉国最近举行了抗疫会议，六国还讨论了减贫问题。请问有关会议在当前召开有何重要意义？
CRI Recently, a director-general virtual meeting on COVID-19 and poverty relief cooperation by China, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. Could you give us more details?
华春莹你跟踪得非常细。的确，1月6日，中国、阿富汗、巴基斯坦、尼泊尔、斯里兰卡、孟加拉国六国举行司局级抗疫合作工作组和减贫合作工作组首次会议。此次会议是去年7月中阿巴尼四国外长应对新冠肺炎疫情视频会议和去年11月中巴尼斯孟五国副外长应对新冠肺炎疫情视频会议的后续落实。
Hua Chunying You are well-informed. Indeed, on January 6, China, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh held the first meeting of director-general level working groups on COVID-19 and poverty alleviation cooperation. This meeting is a follow-up step to the video conference of foreign ministers of China, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nepal on COVID-19 in July and the video conference of vice foreign ministers of China, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh on COVID-19 in November 2020.
在6日会上，六方代表分享了抗疫和减贫经验，就应对疫情冲击、恢复经贸合作、应对非传统安全挑战、推进可持续发展议程以及消除贫困等议题深入交换意见，并就开展相关务实合作达成初步共识。会议的成功举办体现了六方加强地区抗疫合作、共同应对挑战、实现合作发展的强烈意愿和坚定信心。中方愿同各方一道，落实好会议共识，打造可视成果，为构建地区卫生健康共同体作出贡献。
At the meeting, representatives from all parties shared anti-epidemic and poverty relief experience, exchanged views on addressing COVID-19's impact, resuming economic and trade cooperation, responding to non-traditional security challenges, advancing the sustainable agenda and eradicating poverty, and reached preliminary consensus on practical cooperation in relevant fields. The successful meeting demonstrates all parties' strong will and firm confidence in strengthening regional anti-epidemic cooperation, jointly addressing challenges and achieving development through cooperation. China stands ready with all parties to implement the consensus of the meeting, produce visible outcomes and make greater contributions to building a shared community of health for the region.
《北京日报》记者我们注意到有个别西方媒体报道称,中国媒体将美国当前的暴乱与香港发生的“支持民主”的暴力活动相比较,是在借机宣传，中方对此有何回应？
Beijing Daily Some western media commented that the Chinese media are comparing the Capitol Hill riot with the violent riot Hong Kong experienced to serve its own propaganda purpose. What is your response?
华春莹对于近日美国国会发生的事情，美国媒体做了大量报道，有很多电视画面、照片。美国各界人士也发表了很多看法。世界很多领导人也都纷纷发表了评论，有的还进行了呼吁。怎么中国媒体一报道就成了“宣传”？
Hua Chunying What's happened at the Capitol Hill has been extensively covered by the US media. We've seen TV programs playing out violent scenes 24/7. We've heard world leaders commenting on it. People from all walks of life in the United States are talking about it. Then why, when the Chinese media are following this widely-reported event, it suddenly became propaganda?
昨天回答外媒提问时，我也请大家思考这个问题：为什么有些人对在美国发生的事情和在香港发生的类似场景用词和反应截然不同？为何中国媒体作了一些事实性报道，就要被扣上“宣传”，甚至是“虚假信息”的帽子？是不是只要有些人觉得不中听或者不愿意听，就不是真实报道了？这不符合新闻的真实性原则吧。不管中方媒体报还是不报，中方说还是不说，事实真相都在那里。
When I responded to a foreign journalist's question yesterday, I invited all of you to seriously think about why some people reacted differently to similar scenes played out in the United States and Hong Kong and why they termed them differently. Why are factual reports by the Chinese media being labeled propaganda or even disinformation? Is it simply because some people in the United States find them unpalatable? I don't think this complies with the truthfulness principle of journalism. Besides, facts are there, beyond anyone's denial, regardless of whether they came up in the Chinese media reports or not.
个别西方媒体的说法反映出的其实是一种双重标准，以及个别人内心深处的一种优越感和意识形态偏见。他们可能会觉得：只要是西方国家的，就是民主的、自由的，即使他们内心也有痛恨和不满；只要是中国的，就是专制的、威权的，即便他们内心可能也有些羡慕。对于美西方国家的问题，他们自己可以对骂，但中国人就说不得，一说就是“宣传”或者“虚假信息”。
However, this does uncover the ubiquitous existence of double standard when it comes to Chinese media and reflect the sense of superiority and ideological prejudice long harbored by some individuals. For some people in the west, they pride themselves on their democracy and freedom, even though deep down they have their grievances and dissatisfaction; they criticize China as being authoritarian and totalitarian, even though deep down they may hope they could lead a life as the Chinese do. For those issues that have come up in the United States or in other western countries, they in the west can argue, debate and comment in ways whatever they want, but if the Chinese side pitches in, then it suddenly morphs into "propaganda" or "disinformation".
我注意到有国际知名学者近日在社交媒体上一针见血地指出，个别西方人沉湎过去，否认现在，惧怕未来。我想，是时候清醒了。希望有些人好好反思，放弃双重标准，敞开胸怀，增进相互了解。特别是媒体一定要坚持真实性、客观性，这对当下的世界至关重要。
It has been very aptly pointed out by a very famous scholar on social media that the Western establishment is clinging to the past, in denial of the present, and living in fear of a very different future. I do think that it is time for them to wake up, do some reflection, discard their double standard, and open up their eyes and minds to the world. The media has a particularly special role to play in this, as their commitment to the principle of truthfulness and objectivity has a strong bearing on the direction the world is heading towards.
法新社记者正如不少媒体报道的那样，在香港和美国发生的事情存在一定的相似性和不同点。但是这些报道中还提到了暴乱背后的目的，在美国是为了推翻选举结果，但在香港却是为了争取更多民主。对此你怎么看？
AFP The media has noted some similarities and some differences between what happened in Hong Kong and in the United States. I think one issue that news reports pointed out was also the intent behind the unrest. In the U.S. case they were trying to overturn the results of an election, while in Hong Kong they were demanding for more democracy. I'm just wondering if you could clarify your take on this?
华春莹两者在冲击立法会这样的暴力行径上是相似的。2019年7月，激进示威者暴力冲撞香港立法会大楼，破坏立法会设施，涂污香港特别行政区区徽，煽动仇警情绪，使用有毒液体和粉末袭击、围殴，甚至刺伤警察，但香港警方保持了高度克制。
Hua Chunying The two are very similar in terms of subjecting legislature to violence. On July 2019, radical protesters stormed the legislature, trashed the place, defaced the Hong Kong emblem, fan up anti-police sentiment, and hurled toxic liquid and powder at and even stabbed police force. But the Hong Kong Police Force responded with maximum restraint.
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。