翻译数据库中英对照：2022年4月7日外交部发言人赵立坚主持例行记者会 [3]
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian’s Regular Press Conference on April 7, 2022 [3]
《赫尔辛基新闻报》记者芬兰正在考虑不久后申请加入北约。俄罗斯对乌克兰的攻击极大改变了芬兰对加入北约的态度。中国此前表示反对北约扩张。那么如果芬兰不久后申请加入北约，中国将作何反应？
Helsingin Sanomat Finland is considering if it should apply to join NATO very soon. Russia’s attack on Ukraine changed dramatically Finland’s attitude toward NATO membership. China has earlier stated that China is against NATO’s enlargement. If Finland applies to join NATO soon, how will China react?
赵立坚首先我不回答假设性的问题。中方在北约东扩问题上的立场是十分明确的。北约是冷战的产物，早就应该成为历史。我们奉劝有关国家在同北约发展关系时要审慎行事。
Zhao Lijian First, I don’t answer hypothetical questions. China’s position on NATO’s eastward expansion is very clear. NATO was born out of the Cold War and should have long become a past tense. We advise relevant countries to exercise prudence in developing relations with NATO.
湖北广电记者《禁止生物武器公约》审议大会筹备会正在日内瓦举行，俄罗斯指控美国在乌克兰开展的生物军事活动违反《禁止生物武器公约》。美国则继续指责俄罗斯散布虚假信息，还将国际社会批评美国独家反对建立《禁止生物武器公约》核查机制称为“历史修正主义”。中方对此有何评论？
Hubei Media Group The Preparatory Committee meeting for the 9th Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) was being held in Geneva these days. Russia said the US biomilitary activities in Ukraine have violated the BWC. The US accused Russia of spreading disinformation and called international criticism of US standing alone in opposing a BWC verification mechanism “revisionist history”. Do you have any comment?
赵立坚美国是世界上生物军事活动最多的国家，也是唯一反对建立核查机制的国家。国际社会对此早就有严重关切，相关问题一直是《禁止生物武器公约》会议的焦点。此次会上，俄方指控美国的生物军事活动违反公约，并提出了明确、具体的关切。令人遗憾的是，美方仍然没有作出直接回应，而是一再指责俄方散布虚假信息。这种做法本身就不符合公约的规定。按照公约，俄方有权对美方的遵约情况提出质疑，美方有义务配合作出澄清，最终应由国际社会评估并作出判断。
Zhao Lijian The US has conducted more biomilitary activities than any other countries and is the only country that opposes the establishment of a BWC verification mechanism in the world. The international community has long held grave concerns over this and the relevant issues remain the focus of the BWC meetings. At the second PrepCom this week, Russia made the accusation that the US’ biomilitary activities have violated the convention and raised explicit and specific concerns. Regrettably, the US has not directly responded to that yet. Instead, it just kept accusing Russia of spreading disinformation. Such practice in itself is not consistent with the stipulations of the convention. According to the BWC, the Russian side has the right to question the US’ compliance with the convention, and the US has the obligation to make clarifications, and the final judgment should be passed by the international community through assessment.
我还想给大家介绍一个基本事实。根据美方2021年11月向《禁止生物武器公约》缔约国大会提交的工作文件，在“减少生物威胁项目”项下，美方在境外建成的所谓“合作设施”共有336个，包括在乌克兰的26个。然而，美国国防部2022年3月11日公布的所谓“事实文件”又说美国在乌克兰有46个“合作设施”。为什么仅仅在4个月内，美国就在乌克兰增加了20个“合作设施”呢？不仅如此，我刚才提到的美方上述工作文件本身就有错误，文中有一个国家出现了两次。因此，336这个总数也肯定是不准确的。国际社会对此提出质疑，美方有什么理由不作出澄清？又有什么理由说成是虚假信息呢？
Also, I need to draw your attention to a basic fact. According to the working document the US submitted to the BWC Meeting of States Parties in November 2021, under the Biological Threat Reduction Program (BTRP), the US has 336 so-called cooperation facilities overseas, including 26 in Ukraine. However, the so-called Fact Sheet released by the US Department of Defense on March 11, 2022 claimed that there are 46 such facilities in Ukraine. Why did the number increase by 20 in just four months? Besides, there are mistakes in the above-mentioned working document, in which a country was listed mistakenly for twice. So the total number of “336” must be inaccurate, too. This gives good reason for the international community to raise doubt, but what reason is there for the US to refuse to make any clarifications and call that disinformation?
我也注意到，美方将国际社会批评美国独家反对建立《禁止生物武器公约》核查机制称为“历史修正主义”。这顶帽子可不小啊！美方甚至声称这事应该翻篇，不必再谈什么核查机制。美方上述表态令人震惊。2001年7月，正是美国突然单方面宣布退出谈判，导致各方七年谈判的成果付诸东流。当时国际社会一片哗然。正在举行的公约审议大会筹备会上，绝大多数国家，包括美国的盟国，都主张重启多边谈判，以尽快建立核查机制，但只有美国独家表示反对。
I also noticed that the US cited “revisionist history” to describe the international community’s criticism over the US sole opposition to establishing a BWC verification mechanism. What an accusation! The US side even claimed that the resumption of Protocol negotiations should be “put behind” and “a new chapter” should be started. Such statement is shocking. It was the US’ abrupt announcement of unilateral withdrawal from the negotiations in July 2001 that let the outcomes of the seven-year negotiations go to waste and set off an uproar in the international community. At this PrepCom, the vast majority of countries, including US allies, called for the resumption of multilateral negotiations to establish a verification mechanism as soon as possible. The US was the only state that voiced opposition.
多边核查机制的特点就是公平、公正地赋予各国同等的权利和义务。美国想要的是随意指责别国违约，并要求开展“有罪推定”式的核查。而美国对自己的遵约情况却拒不接受任何监督核查。这才是美国独家反对核查机制的实质。
A multilateral verification mechanism is characterized by fair and just entitlement of equal rights and obligations to all countries. But the US wants to arbitrarily accuse others of violating the convention and demands verification with “the presumption of guilt”, while refusing to accept any supervision and verification of its own compliance. This lies at the heart of the US’ sole opposition to a verification mechanism.
《禁止生物武器公约》属于国际社会，遵约问题事关国际和平与安全，不能由美国按自己的双重标准来随意界定。美国是公约存约国之一，在遵约方面理应作出表率，而不能成为例外。我们再次敦促美方对其生物军事活动作出全面、具体的澄清，并停止独家反对建立多边核查机制，以恢复国际社会对美国遵约的信心。
The BWC belongs to the international community. Bearing on international peace and security, compliance of the BWC cannot be casually defined by the US based on its double standards. As one of the BWC depository states, the US ought to be an example, not an exception, when it comes to compliance. We once again urge the US to give comprehensive and detailed clarification of its biomilitary activities and stop single-handedly opposing the establishment of a multilateral verification mechanism to restore the confidence of the international community in the US’ compliance.
路透社记者你刚刚说如果佩洛西议长访问台湾，中方将“采取坚决有力措施”。中方具体将采取什么措施？
Reuters You just said that if US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visits Taiwan, China will respond with strong measures. What kind of strong measures will China respond with?
赵立坚我刚才说的已经非常清楚了。如果此访成行，中方将采取坚决有力措施作出回应，由此带来的后果完全由美方承担。
Zhao Lijian I just made my point very clear. If this visit is made, China will take firm and strong measures in response. The ensuing consequences will be completely borne by the US.
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。