翻译数据库中英对照：2021年4月8日外交部发言人赵立坚主持例行记者会 [2]
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian's Regular Press Conference on April 8, 2021 [2]
在武汉“解封”一周年之际，让我们祝福武汉、祝福湖北越来越好！欢迎大家有机会去“打卡”武汉，去吃“热干面”，去登黄鹤楼。
As we mark the first anniversary of the lifting of lockdown in Wuhan, let's give our best wishes for an even better tomorrow for Wuhan and Hubei. Welcome to visit Wuhan to try its famous hot-dry noodles with sesame paste and enjoy the view up from the Yellow Crane Tower.
《环球时报》记者据报道，7日，来自欧洲、美国、澳大利亚、日本的24名科学家和研究人员发表公开信称，中国—世卫组织新冠病毒溯源联合研究未就新冠大流行起源提供可靠答案。溯源工作受到政治因素影响。公开信起草者、美智库大西洋理事会高级研究员孟天行称，中国实验室病毒数据库、工作记录和科学家均无法接触，中国应披露有关信息以推翻“实验室泄露假设”。中方对此有何评论？
Global Times According to media reports, 24 scientists and researchers from Europe, the United States, Australia and Japan said in an open letter that the joint China-WHO study into COVID-19 has provided no credible answers about how the pandemic began, and that the study was tainted by politics. Jamie Metzl, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank, who drafted the letter, said that "China has databases of what viruses were being held... there are lab notes of the work that was being done...there are all kinds of scientists who are actually doing the work and we don't have access to any of those resources, or any of those people". He said China should disclose information that would allow the lab hypothesis to be disproved. I wonder if China has any comment on that?
赵立坚我还清楚地记得上一封所谓的“科学家”公开信是发表在3月4日，几乎是同样的一批人干的，同样由前美国白宫国家安全委员会委员孟天行起草。这两封所谓公开信，一封发表在世卫组织即将发布溯源联合研究报告前夕，一封发表在报告发布之后，这个时间绝非巧合，其目的也不言而喻，就是要对世卫组织和专家组施压。他们究竟是秉持科学、专业态度为溯源研究建言献策，还是“换汤不换药”对特定国家进行“有罪推定”，我想大家应该都看得清清楚楚。
Zhao Lijian This reminds me of the previous so-called "open letter of scientists" that came out on March 4. It was also drafted by Jamie Metzl, a former member of the White House National Security Council and signed by almost the same group of people. The purpose of these two so-called open letters, one issued right before the WHO joint study report was to be made public and the other shortly after the report was released, is obviously to mount pressure on the WHO and the joint mission. These signatories can deceive no one as to whether their letters are meant to make a true proposal for scientific and professional origin-tracing or target a specific country with presumption of guilt.
中方对联合专家组在华开展溯源研究提供了大量人力和物力支持，完全尊重并尽力安排专家组自主提出的的参访需求，专家组也对中方的开放和透明给予积极评价。没错，溯源工作的确受到了政治因素干扰，但不是来自中方，而是美国等个别国家。他们执意将溯源问题政治化，破坏和干扰中国同世卫组织合作，对中国进行攻击抹黑，公开挑战科学家们的独立性和科学研究结论。这不仅损害全球溯源合作，也影响全球抗疫努力。
The Chinese side has provided an abundance of manpower and material support to the joint mission for its origin-tracing study in China. We fully respect and have made every effort to meet the requests independently put forward by the mission as to the places they would like to see. China's openness and transparency is well commended by the mission. The origin-tracing study was indeed affected by political factors, but that did not come from China, but from the United States and some other countries, who are bent on politicizing the origin-tracing issue in an attempt to disrupt China's cooperation with WHO and discredit China. By blatantly questioning the independence and research conclusions of real scientists, they will not only cripple international cooperation on origin tracing, but also undercut global anti-epidemic efforts.
关于“实验室泄漏”问题，在此次联合溯源研究中，联合专家组走访了湖北省疾控中心、武汉市疾控中心、武汉病毒研究所等机构，参观了各类生物安全实验室，与相关机构的专家进行了深入、坦诚的科学交流。经过在中国的实地走访和深入了解，专家组一致认为，关于中国实验室事件引发病毒这种假说是极为不可能的。当然，如果在世界其他地区发现线索和证据，则是另外一回事。
As for the lab hypothesis, experts on the mission all agreed that lab leaking is extremely unlikely, after visiting disease control centers in Hubei and Wuhan, the Wuhan Institute of Virology and various biosafety labs, and after having in-depth, frank and science-based exchanges with their Chinese peers from relevant research institutions. That said, if clues and evidence are found in other parts of the world, that will be quite another matter.
我们希望有关各方包括美国也像中方一样，采取科学合作态度，同世卫组织开展溯源合作，邀请世卫组织专家去本国开展溯源科学研究。
We hope that all parties concerned, including the United States, will adopt the same attitude of science-based cooperation as China, carry out origin-tracing cooperation with WHO, and invite WHO experts for origin-tracing study in their own countries.
最近我注意到，俄罗斯再次对美国在其国内，特别是德特里克堡基地，以及在乌克兰等其他国家所开展的生物军事化活动表达了关切，实际上这也是很多国家共同的关切。中方也多次强调，美国相关活动不透明、不安全、不合理。
I noticed that Russia recently expressed concern once again over the bio-military activities by the US on its own territory including at Fort Detrick and in other countries like Ukraine. This concern is actually shared by many other countries. As China has said repeatedly, relevant US activities are not transparent, safe or justified.
以俄方提及的乌克兰为例，据公开报道，美国仅在乌克兰一国就设立了16个生物实验室。为什么美国需要满世界建这么多实验室呢？美国军方在这些实验室以及德特里克堡基地开展了什么活动？为什么美国独家反对《禁止生物武器公约》设立核查机制？是不是这些实验室和基地存在美方不敢接受国际核查的地方？
We may take Ukraine for example, which was mentioned by the Russian side. According to openly available reports, the US has set up 16 bio-labs in Ukraine alone. Why does it need to build so many labs all over the world? What activities has the US military been conducting in these labs and the base at Fort Detrick? Why does the US stand alone in opposing the establishment of a verification mechanism under the Biological Weapons Convention? Could it be that there are places within these labs and base where the US dare not allow in international verification?
我们再次呼吁美方本着负责任态度，切实回应国际社会的关切，对美国境内外的生物军事化活动作出全面澄清，并停止独家阻挡《禁止生物武器公约》设立核查机制。
We once again call on the US to adopt a responsible attitude, earnestly respond to international concerns, offer a full clarification on its bio-military activities at home and abroad, and stop obstructing the establishment of a verification mechanism under the Biological Weapons Convention.
印度广播公司记者 你提到第 十一 轮中印 军长级 会谈，具体日期是否已经确定？另外，你提到责任在印方，但是印方已表明立场，即双方都应恢复2020年前的状态 。 中方是否会考虑印方提议？
Prasa Bharati You mentioned about the 11th round of talk between the two countries. Is there any date finalized for this talk? You said that the responsibility lies with India, so India has stated its position that both countries should restore the status quo of 2020. Will China consider this proposal by India in this regard?
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。