翻译数据库中英对照：2023年2月24日外交部发言人汪文斌主持例行记者会 [2]
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Wang Wenbin’s Regular Press Conference on February 24, 2023 [2]
总台CGTN记者日前，美国哥伦比亚大学教授萨克斯就“北溪”管线爆炸事件调查问题致函安理会部分成员国。萨克斯表示，如此复杂的破坏行动需要多方合作才能完成，背后无疑存在阴谋，关键问题在于查明真相。丹麦、德国、瑞典开展国别调查，尽管有用但还不够。由安理会授权开展调查将确保结果公正、客观、可信。中方对此有何评论？
CGTN Jeffrey Sachs, a professor at Columbia University, recently sent a letter to some members of the UN Security Council over the investigations into the Nord Stream blast, noting that the complexity of the destruction suggests that multiple parties may have participated in the sabotage with a hidden agenda. The key issue is to find out the truth. Denmark, Germany and Sweden conducted national inquiries, which are helpful but still not enough. An investigation mandated by the Security Council will help to ensure the findings are impartial, objective and credible. What’s your comment?
汪文斌“北溪”管线是重大跨国基础设施和能源运输动脉，“北溪”爆炸事件对全球能源市场和生态环境都产生了重大负面影响。对此事开展客观、公正、专业的调查并追究有关责任十分必要。
Wang Wenbin The Nord Stream gas pipelines are major transboundary infrastructure and energy transportation arteries. The explosions had a major negative impact on the global energy market and the ecological environment. China believes that there should be an objective, impartial and professional investigation into the explosions, and those responsible must be held to account.
虽然丹麦、德国、瑞典正在开展国别调查，但正如萨克斯教授指出的，丹麦和德国是北约成员，瑞典正寻求加入北约，而破坏行动可能是由一个或多个北约成员国所实施的。有评论认为，由北约成员国进行的所谓国别调查，无异于自己调查自己，自然缺乏国际公信力。
National inquiries are ongoing in Denmark and Germany, both NATO countries, and Sweden, which is seeking to join the organization. And yet as Professor Sachs noted, the destruction may have been carried out by one or more NATO members. Some people also commented that the so-called national investigations conducted by NATO countries are no different from asking a person to probe into himself, which would naturally lack credibility for the world.
中方支持联合国作为最具权威性和代表性的国际机构，为开展国际调查、保障跨国基础设施安全发挥积极、建设性作用，支持安理会就此进行讨论。我们敦促美方就近日关于美国是“北溪”爆炸案策划者的报道早日给出令人信服的解释，切实回应国际社会的诸多疑问和关切。
China supports the UN, as the most authoritative and representative international organization, in playing an active and constructive role in conducting an international investigation and ensuring the safety of transboundary infrastructure. And we support the Security Council in holding discussions about it. We urge the US to give credible explanations as soon as possible for the revelation that the US was behind the Nord Stream blast, and credibly respond to the questions and concerns in the international community.
《环球时报》记者我注意到，美国驻华大使伯恩斯发推特称，中方发布的涉美报告是粗暴的宣传，不是大国应有的风范。中方对此有何回应？
Global Times US Ambassador to China Nicholas Burns said on Twitter that a report entitled US Hegemony and Its Perils released by the Chinese side “is crude propaganda and unworthy of a great power”. How do you respond to it?
汪文斌新华社发布的报告，不过是讲了一些真话，把美国霸权霸道霸凌的行为客观地展现给世人。从伯恩斯大使的推特来看，美国不习惯听真话，更不愿正视自身的问题，把所有对美国的批评都称为宣传。我们要告诉美国大使，强权外交和胁迫外交才不是大国应有的风范。美国大使要做的，应该是把真实的声音报告给华盛顿。美方要做的，应该是摒弃霸权、尊重别国主权和领土完整，摒弃霸道、共谋和平相处之道，摒弃霸凌、致力于互利共赢。
Wang Wenbin The report released by Xinhua News Agency contains nothing but some plain facts about US hegemonism. Given Ambassador Burns’s tweet, it seems that the US is not quite used to hearing the truth and is reluctant to acknowledge its problems, to the extent that it would simply dismiss all criticism as propaganda. We would like to say to the US ambassador that strong-arm and coercive diplomacy is what is truly unworthy of a great power. The job of a US ambassador is to report the truth and facts back to Washington D.C.. What the US needs to do is relinquish its hold on hegemony and seek peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation with other countries on the basis of respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity.
总台央视记者我们注意到美国相关部门正在对中国无人飞艇进行分析调查。中方对此有何回应？
CCTV Relevant US authorities are conducting analysis of and investigation into the unmanned airship from China. Do you have any response?
汪文斌中方已经多次表明，中国民用无人飞艇飘入美国上空完全是一起由不可抗力导致的意外、偶发事件。美方在没有任何证据的情况下，就将中国民用无人飞艇污蔑为“间谍气球”并滥用武力，公然违反《芝加哥公约》义务和多项国际法基本原则。
Wang Wenbin We have made it clear time and again that the unmanned Chinese civilian airship which drifted over the US was a purely unexpected and isolated event caused by force majeure. Without any evidence, the US wrongly called the airship a “spy balloon” and responded with abuse of force. That was a flagrant violation of the Chicago Convention and multiple basic principles of international law.
美方从打捞残骸再到碎片分析，完全是单方面暗箱操作。中方早已通过领事保护途径明确要求美方通报进展，但美方拒不回应。同许多方面一样，中方不得不对所谓调查的独立性、公开性、透明性提出强烈质疑。这样的调查又有什么公信力？
All collection and analysis of the debris of the downed airship has so far been done by the US by itself behind closed doors. The Chinese side has explicitly asked the US side through the consular protection channel to keep China informed of the progress. But the US has so far given no response. Like many others, China cannot but seriously question the independence, openness and transparency of the so-called investigation. What gives such an investigation credibility anyway?
美方对飞艇事件的立场早已预设，完全为国内政治所绑架，完全服务于对华遏制打压战略。如同拜登总统早就于2月1日下令武力击落飞艇一样，所谓调查报告是不是也早已炮制好了？报告里的所谓结论不外乎就是重复美方这些天经常散布的不实之词和无端指控。这样的报告除了用于对华诋毁攻击，还能有什么价值？
The US position on the airship was preconceived. The way it handles the incident has been entirely taken hostage by domestic politics and designed to serve the strategy to contain and take down China. The fact that President Biden ordered the Pentagon to take down the balloon as early as February 1 makes people wonder whether the conclusions of the so-called investigation have already been pre-drawn as well. The conclusions will most likely not go beyond the disinformation and unfounded allegations coming from the US over and over for the past few weeks. What value can such an investigation possibly have apart from serving the purpose of smearing and attacking China?
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。