口譯材料：外交部例行記者會-18

Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Regular Press Conference on April 29, 2016

外交部發(fā)言人華春瑩主持例行記者會(2016年4月29日)

At the invitation of Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Paolo Gentiloni, Foreign Minister Wang Yi will pay an official visit to Italy and attend the 7th joint meeting of the China-Italy Governmental Committee from May 4 to 5.

應(yīng)意大利外交與國際合作部長保羅·真蒂洛尼邀請，外交部長王毅將于5月4日至5日對意大利進(jìn)行正式訪問并出席中意政府委員會第七次聯(lián)席會議。

Q: Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida said yesterday that the Japanese side has lodged a protest with Taipei for not recognizing waters off Okinotori as Japan's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). He said that Okinotori's status as an island has been established under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Japan cannot accept Taiwan's position. What is China's comment?

問：日本外相岸田文雄28日稱，日方已就臺灣當(dāng)局不承認(rèn)沖之鳥礁海域是日專屬經(jīng)濟(jì)區(qū)向臺方提出抗議。根據(jù)《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》，沖之鳥礁的島嶼地位已確立，日無法接受臺方主張。中方對此有何評論?

A: Okinotori is an isolated rock in the West Pacific far away from the homeland of Japan. As prescribed in the UNCLOS, rocks like Okinotori which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone nor continental shelf. In April, 2012, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf gave its recommendations in regard to the submission made by Japan on the limits of its outer continental shelf,not recognizing Japan's claim of an outer continental shelf based on Okinotori. Japan has violated the UNCLOS by categorizing Okinotori as "island" for the purpose of claiming for EEZ and continental shelf based on that. China does not recognize the illegal assertion by Japan.

答：沖之鳥礁是西太平洋上遠(yuǎn)離日本國土的孤立巖礁。根據(jù)《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》有關(guān)條款，沖之鳥礁是不能維持人類居住或其本身的經(jīng)濟(jì)生活的巖礁，無權(quán)主張專屬經(jīng)濟(jì)區(qū)和大陸架。2012年4月，大陸架界限委員會對日本外大陸架劃界案作出建議，不認(rèn)可日本依據(jù)沖之鳥礁主張外大陸架。日本自行將沖之鳥礁認(rèn)定為“島嶼”，并據(jù)此主張專屬經(jīng)濟(jì)區(qū)和大陸架，違背《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》。中國對日本非法主張不予承認(rèn)。

Q: US Secretary of State John Kerry and White House National Security Council spokesperson Ned Price expressed concerns about the NPC's adoption of the foreign NGO management law. What is China's comment?

問：4月28日，美國國務(wù)卿克里、白宮國安會發(fā)言人普萊斯就中國全國人大日前審議通過的《境外非政府組織境內(nèi)活動管理法》表達(dá)關(guān)切。中方對此有何評論?

A: The NPC Standing Committee deliberated and passed the foreign NGO management law, meeting China's requirement of pursuing law-based state governance and building a country under the rule of law. It is also an important measure which will guide and regulate foreign NGOs in China and safeguard their lawful rights and interests. While making the law, China has solicited opinions from all sectors both in and outside China, and amended some provisions in the law accordingly. Different countries have different practices in managing and serving foreign NGOs, as their national conditions vary. Only when it meets the national conditions and realities in China, can the relevant legislation play its due role. It is hoped that relevant countries would respect China's legislative sovereignty, and view the legislation in a positive and objective manner.

答：中國全國人大常委會審議通過《境外非政府組織境內(nèi)活動管理法》，是中國全面推進(jìn)依法治國、建設(shè)法治國家的客觀要求，也是引導(dǎo)和規(guī)范境外非政府組織在中國境內(nèi)的活動、保障其合法權(quán)益的一項(xiàng)重要舉措。中方在立法過程中充分征求了國內(nèi)外各方面意見建議，并對相關(guān)條款作出了修改。我想強(qiáng)調(diào)，各國國情不同，對境外非政府組織管理和服務(wù)的實(shí)際做法不同。相關(guān)立法必須符合中國國情和管理實(shí)際，才能真正發(fā)揮實(shí)效。希望有關(guān)國家尊重中國立法主權(quán)，積極、客觀看待中國相關(guān)立法。

Q: Will Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida jointly meet the press after their talks tomorrow?

問：王毅外長明天與日本外相岸田文雄會談后是否有共見記者的安排?

A: The two foreign ministers will hold talks tomorrow morning. I have not heard about any arrangement for their joint meeting with the press. We will release the information about their talks in a timely fashion.

答：30日上午，王毅外長將與岸田文雄外相舉行會談。據(jù)我了解，目前沒有共見記者的安排。會談有關(guān)消息我們會及時發(fā)布。

Q: US Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on April 28 that China cannot have it both ways by being a party to the UNCLOS but rejecting its provisions, including the binding nature of any arbitration decision. What is your response?

問：美國常務(wù)副國務(wù)卿布林肯28日稱，中國不能一方面作為《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》締約國，一方面拒絕公約條款，不承認(rèn)仲裁決定的約束性質(zhì)。你對此有何評論?

A: I cannot but say with regret that Mr. Blinken is either knowing nothing about the nature of relevant disputes over the South China Sea and what is said in the UNCLOS or labeling China at will.

答：我不得不遺憾地說，布林肯先生要么是真的不了解有關(guān)南海爭議的實(shí)質(zhì)以及《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》的內(nèi)容，要么是故意給中國亂扣帽子。

China has stated clearly its principled position on the relevant issue on multiple occasions. I would like to reiterate the following points.

中方已多次就有關(guān)問題表明有關(guān)原則立場。我愿再重申幾點(diǎn)：

First, the nature of the South China Sea issue is territorial dispute over islands and reefs and demarcation dispute over relevant waters. However the Philippine side disguises its claim, it cannot cover up its real intention of negating China's territorial sovereignty over relevant islands and reefs in the South China Sea as well as China's maritime rights and interests. When it comes to issues relating to territorial sovereignty, no country in the world will accept a solution imposed on it by a third party dispute settlement mechanism not of its own choice.

一、南海問題實(shí)質(zhì)是島礁領(lǐng)土爭端和有關(guān)海域劃界爭端。不論菲方對其訴求如何包裝，其真實(shí)意圖都是要否定中國對南海有關(guān)島礁的領(lǐng)土主權(quán)和相關(guān)海洋權(quán)利。對這樣涉及國家領(lǐng)土主權(quán)的問題，世界上沒有任何國家會接受一個并非其自愿選擇的第三方機(jī)制強(qiáng)加的解決方案。

Second, the UNCLOS has nothing to do with issues concerning territorial sovereignty. As for issues on maritime demarcation, the UNCLOS allows optional exceptions to applicability of compulsory dispute settlement proceedings such as compulsory arbitration. China made a declaration in 2006, excluding disputes concerning maritime delimitation from arbitral proceedings. More than 30 other countries have made similar declarations as well. This kind of declaration has become an indispensible part of UNCLOS dispute settlement proceedings, binding on all state parties.

二、《聯(lián)合國海洋法公約》根本不涉及領(lǐng)土主權(quán)問題，而對于海域劃界問題，《公約》允許締約國排除適用強(qiáng)制仲裁等強(qiáng)制爭端解決程序。中國已于2006年作出聲明，明確將海域劃界等問題排除適用強(qiáng)制程序。另有30多個國家也作出了類似聲明。此類聲明構(gòu)成《公約》爭端解決程序不可或缺的組成部分，對《公約》所有締約國都具有法律效力。

Therefore, what the Philippines submitted are not suitable for compulsory arbitration at all. And there is no basis for the formation of the arbitral tribunal. How can it be binding, if the ruling is given by an institution that obviously has no jurisdiction? By not accepting nor participating in the arbitration, China is upholding the sanctity of international law, including that of the UNCLOS, and opposing the abuse of law. If some country or some people say that non-acceptance of the so-called arbitration means violating international law, then it reveals their ignorance of international law. If they keep making an issue of it, their hidden motives are nowhere to hide.

因此，菲律賓的那些所謂訴求，根本不是可以提交強(qiáng)制仲裁的爭端，仲裁庭的組建也根本沒有依據(jù)。對于一個明顯沒有管轄權(quán)的機(jī)構(gòu)作出的裁決，其約束力從何而來?中方不接受、不參與仲裁，正是為了維護(hù)包括《公約》在內(nèi)的國際法的嚴(yán)肅性，反對濫用。而某些國家、某些人表示，不承認(rèn)、不接受所謂仲裁就是違反國際法，這種說法本身就是不懂國際法的表現(xiàn)。刻意炒作，更是別有用心。

Third, the US is not a state party to the UNCLOS. It neglects the nature of the arbitration case initiated by the Philippines, ignores the fact that the arbitral tribunal acts beyond its authority, selectively forgets what it used to do with international rulings and indulges in talks about the binding nature of arbitral rulings. I think everybody knows well what is really on its mind.

三、美國作為《公約》的非締約國，無視菲律賓所提南海仲裁案的本質(zhì)，無視仲裁庭越權(quán)裁判的事實(shí)，也選擇性地忘記自己以往對待國際裁決的做法，奢談什么仲裁庭裁決的約束性質(zhì)，真實(shí)目的是什么?恐怕大家都很清楚。

Last but not least, the US who is yet to join the UNCLOS took a preemptive move in 1979 before the signing of the UNCLOS and put forward the so-called "freedom of navigation operations" to contend with international law. It makes and dominates the American-style maritime order outside the framework of the UNCLOS, which is nothing but the logic and practice of hegemony. It is an open secret that the US abides by international law only when the law meets its interests. In this connection, the US is in no position to make critical remarks against China.

此外,美國不僅迄今沒有加入《公約》，反而在1979年《公約》簽訂前搶先推出所謂“航行自由計(jì)劃”，以對抗國際法，在《公約》框架外制訂和主導(dǎo)美式海洋秩序，這是赤裸裸的霸權(quán)邏輯、霸權(quán)行為。美國對國際法合則用，不合則棄，這已是世人皆知的秘密。在這一問題上，美國沒有資格對中國說三道四。