2021年8月20日交际部发言人华春莹

掌管例行记者会

Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's

Regular Press Conference on August 20, 2021

１

总台央视记者：咱们看到最新音讯，受疫情影响，原定本年10月在昆明举办的联合国《生物多样性》条约第十五次缔约方大会（COP15）将分两阶段举办。你能否介绍有关状况？

　　CCTV: It is learned that due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity which was originally scheduled for October 2021 in Kunming will be convened in two parts. Can you brief us on the situation?

华春莹：经《生物多样性条约》缔约方大会第十四届主席团决议并经我国政府赞同，《生物多样性条约》缔约方大会第十五次会议（COP15）将分两阶段举办。第一阶段会议将于2021年10月11日至15日以线上线下相结合方法在昆明举办；第二阶段会议将于2022年上半年以线下方法在昆明举办。生态环境部和《生物多样性条约》秘书处网站均已发布了有关音讯。

Hua Chunying: As decided by the Bureau of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and approved by the Chinese government, the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP15) to the Convention on Biological Diversity will be convened in two parts. The first part will be held online and offline from October 11 to 15, 2021 in Kunming. The second part will be held in a face-to-face format in the first half of 2022 in Kunming. For your reference, the relevant information has been released by the Chinese Ministry of Ecology and Environment and the Secretariat of the CBD on their websites.

　　此次会议以“生态文明：共建地球生命一起体”为主题，将拟定“2020年后全球生物多样性结构”，为全球生物多样性保护拟定新方针。中方将继续有序推动各项筹备工作，并愿与各方一道，战胜全球疫情带来的晦气影响，一起尽力保证办成一届圆满成功的大会，助力全球生物多样性管理。

Under the theme of "Ecological Civilization-Building a Shared Future for All Life on Earth", COP15 will formulate the post-2020 global biodiversity framework and set new goals for global biodiversity conservation. China will continue to advance the preparations for COP15 in an orderly manner, and work with all parties to overcome the negative impact of the pandemic to ensure a successful event and contribute to global biodiversity governance.

2

《我国日报》记者：最近阿富汗局势发生严峻改变。美国前驻阿大使麦金利在《交际》杂志网站撰文称，美继续20年妄图将西方民主方式强加于阿的尽力宣告失利。德国总统标明，阿富汗喀布尔机场的严酷现象令西方蒙羞。布鲁金斯学会以为，阿富汗问题等充沛露出美在推行西方民主价值理念上口头与举动严峻纷歧，给美拟于本年底举办的首届全球民主峰会蒙上暗影。中方对此有何谈论？

　　China Daily: The Afghanistan situation has undergone major changes recently. Former US ambassador to Afghanistan P. Michael McKinley published an article in the Foreign Affairs saying that the US efforts to impose a Western democratic model on Afghanistan which continued over two decades failed. German President said the cruel scenes at Kabul airport are shameful for the West. The Brookings Institution said that issues like Afghanistan fully reveal the gap between US rhetoric and actions in its promotion of Western democratic values, which will cast a shadow over the world's first global summit for democracy to be held by the US at the end of this year. Do you have any comment?

华春莹：阿富汗局势发生的严峻改变再次标明，外部强加和移植民主不会持久、不会结实。我今日刚刚从新闻中得知，从美飞机起落架摔下身亡的人中，有一位是阿富汗19岁的国足球员Zaki Anwari（安瓦利），真是令人十分怜惜。Hua Chunying: The major changes in Afghanistan once again show that democracy imposed and transplanted by others will not last or be firm. I learned from news today that one of the people who died after falling from the landing gear of a US plane was 19-year-old Afghan national team football player Zaki Anwari. This is heart-breaking.

　　实际标明，民主不能先入为主，不能越俎代庖。民主没有固定方式。就像我国胃不适合每天喝冷牛奶，美国人不习惯用筷子，并不是每天用刀叉吃牛排或汉堡包才是吃饭。民主也不该是可口可乐，美国出产原浆，全国际一个滋味。我知道许多我国人喜爱北冰洋汽水。

Facts show that democracy cannot be predetermined or overstretched. There is no set model of democracy. To give you an analogy, cold milk on a daily basis doesn't agree with a Chinese stomach and chopsticks are not often used by Americans. A meal of hamburger or steak with fork and knife is not the only way to get one well fed. Democracy is not Coca-Cola, which, with the syrup produced by the United States, tastes the same across the world. Many Chinese prefer Beijing-based soda drink branded Arctic Ocean.

　　究竟什么是民主？应该由谁来界说民主？怎么评判一个国家是否实在民主？这些权力不该由美国及其少量几个盟友来独占。在咱们看来，评判民主的规范，要害的一条是是否契合公民的等待、需求和要求。从这个意义上讲，我国是公民民主，美国是金钱民主；我国公民享有的是实质民主，而美国是方式民主；我国施行的是全过程民主，而美国是每四年一次的投票民主。

What is democracy? Who gets to define it? How to judge whether a country is democratic? These rights should not be monopolized by the US and its few allies. For us, a key criterion is whether the country can meet people's expectations, needs and aspirations. In this sense, Chinese democracy is people's democracy while the US' is money democracy; the Chinese people enjoy substantial democracy while Americans have democracy only in form; China has a whole-process democracy while the US has voting democracy that comes every four years.

　　我国施行的社会主义民主政治，是一种全过程、最广泛的民主，体现公民毅力，契合我国国情，得到公民支撑。我国共产党代表最广大公民底子利益，没有任何自己特别的利益，从来不代表任何利益集团、任何权势集体、任何特权阶级的利益。我国坚持以公民为中心，把公民拥不支撑、赞不赞成、高不高兴、答不容许作为衡量全部工作得失的底子规范，着力处理好公民最关怀最直接最实际的利益问题。我国全部严峻立法决议计划都依照程序、经过民主酝酿、并经过科学、民主决议计划发生。比方，我国政府在拟定“十四五”规划时，重视寻求各方定见，仅网上就收集到100多万条定见主张。正是由于我国坚持了公民民主，我国公民才干释放出令人惊叹的发明力和出产力，在具有14亿人口的超大规模国家发明了经济快速增长和社会长时间安稳两大奇观，我国公民对我国政府的满意度和支撑率比年高达95%以上。

　China's socialist democracy is whole-process and the most broad-based. It reflects people's will, suits China's realities and is acclaimed by the people. The Communist Party of China represents the fundamental interests of all the Chinese people. It has no special interests of its own and has never represented the interests of any interest group, group of power, or privileged class. China puts the people front and center. The fundamental criteria for assessing all the work we do is whether we can win people's backing, approval and endorsement, and make them satisfied. China strives to solve the most practical and immediate problems of the greatest concern to the people. All major legislative decisions in China are made in accordance with procedures, through democratic deliberation, and through scientific and democratic decision-making. For example, when formulating the 14th Five-Year Plan, the Chinese government paid great attention to soliciting opinions from all sides. More than one million opinions and suggestions were collected online alone. Thanks to China's commitment to democracy of the people, the Chinese people have unleashed their amazing creativity and productivity, creating two miracles of rapid economic growth and long-term social stability in a huge country with a population of 1.4 billion. The Chinese people's satisfaction and approval rate of the Chinese government has been above 95% for years.

　　而美国把一人一票当作所谓民主的最高方式，这十分狭窄。美国推举遭到利益集团操作，是“没有钞票就没有选票”的金钱政治。同我国共产党把国家和公民利益放在首位不同，美国政客把能不能得到选票放在首位，目光盯着的是4年乃至两年后的选票。在美国不计其数公民面临新冠肺炎疫情苦苦挣扎时，美国政党还在继续攻讦恶斗，将政治私益凌驾于公民生命健康之上，60多万美国公民逝去的生命也没能唤醒他们的良知和职责。曩昔三四十年，美国富者愈富、贫者愈贫，1%具有、1%管理、1%享用，这是民主吗？“弗洛伊德们”无法呼吸，枪支暴力众多，长时间的种族歧视和仇视问题根深蒂固，美国究竟是谁的美国？美国政府能得到一半公民的支撑吗？美国哪个政党能代表整体美国公民的利益？我注意到美国政治学者福山日前宣告了一篇文章，其间一个观念是应对疫情体现差异巨大，有力提醒了美西方国家民主才能有限，社会信赖下降，政治领导不力等西式民主恶化。再看看美国在国际范围内推行美式民主的效果，哪一个被美国干与的国家公民享遭到了实在的平和、安全、自在和民主？伊拉克吗？叙利亚吗？仍是阿富汗？

But the US has been seeing "one person, one vote" as the supreme form of democracy, which is very narrow-minded. The US elections, manipulated by interest groups, are money politics meaning "no money, no votes". Unlike the Communist Party of China that puts the interests of the country and the people first, American politicians put their votes first and focus on the votes four or even two years from now. When tens of thousands of American people are struggling against COVID-19, the two parties are attacking each other ferociously and putting their own political interests above people's life and health. The loss of more than 600,000 American lives still cannot awaken their conscience and responsibility. Over the past thirty or forty years, the rich in the US have become richer and the poor poorer. The top one percent own, govern and have it all. Is this democracy? People like George Floyd cannot breathe, gun violence runs rampant and racial discrimination and hate crimes are deeply entrenched. To whom the US belongs? Can the US government win support from half of its people? Which party in the US can represent the interests of all American people? American political scientist Francis Fukuyama recently wrote that the difference in COVID-19 response has shown limited state capacity, low social trust, poor political leadership and other signs of democratic deterioration. Look at the consequence of US promotion of the American democracy across the world. In which intervened country have the people enjoyed real peace, security, freedom and democracy? Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan?

　　民主应是实在存在的，而不是空泛标语，不该成为忽悠或麻痹公民的精力鸦片，更不该成为进犯抹黑其他国家、保护本身霸权的幌子和托言。打着所谓“民主”旗帜拉帮结派、任意干与别国内政乃至霸道镇压遏止其他国家正常开展和享用更好日子的权力，这恰恰是最大的不民主，是独裁、是霸权、是极权。Zaki Anwari’s fallen; American myth down（安瓦利掉落了，美国神话幻灭了）。越来越多的人正在觉悟。

Democracy should be tangible rather than empty slogans. It should not become spiritual opium that fools or numbs the people, still less an excuse for attacking and smearing other countries and maintaining one's own hegemony. Ganging up in the name of democracy, wantonly interfering in other country's internal affairs and even arbitrarily suppressing normal development of other countries and people's legitimate right to better lives is more undemocratic than anything else. It is autocracy, hegemony and totalitarianism. Zaki Anwari's fallen, American myth down. More and more people are awakening.

3

我国国际电视台记者：咱们注意到最近有许多关于军事干与是否有用的谈论。其间美国闻名学者杰弗里·萨克斯在《辛迪加报业》网站宣告题为《沙中之血》的文章，批判美国军事干与方针给国际形成严峻后果并指出，美国自省认识的缺失令人惊奇。美国在阿富汗的失利是美国政治文明的失利，也是美国热心经过军事手段处理政治问题或经过中情局损坏安稳的交际信仰的失利。你是否认同上述观念？对此有何谈论？ 　　CGTN: We note that recently there has been a lot of discussion about whether military intervention works. A renowned US scholar Jeffrey Sachs published an article titled "Blood in the Sand" on the US website Project Syndicate, criticizing US military intervention policies which have brought about severe consequences to the world. He also wrote that the lack of American self-awareness is startling. United States' failure in Afghanistan is an abiding failure of American political culture and a failure of the belief that the solution to every political challenge is military intervention or CIA-backed destabilization. Do you agree with these observations? Do you have any comment?华春莹：你的调查很精确。近期，国际社会都在热议美国曩昔这些年的对外军事干与和交际方针。有美国媒体称，从上世纪的“越南综合征”到现在的“阿富汗综合征”，美国再三妄图依照本身毅力刻画其他国家，导致美国一次次跌入灾祸和深渊。Hua Chunying: Your observation is accurate. Recently, the international community has had heated discussions about the US' military intervention and foreign policy over the past years. Some US media commented that from the "Vietnam Syndrome" in the last century to the "Afghanistan Syndrome" today, the US once and again tries to mould other countries according to its own will. This has led the US into disastrous abyss time and again.　　我也看到了你方才说到的萨克斯的文章。萨克斯教授指出，朝鲜战役以来，美国对多个开展我国家发起的军事干与全都失利，几无破例。无论是东南亚的越南、老挝、柬埔寨，仍是中东的伊拉克、叙利亚、利比亚，或是拉美、非洲，再到现在的阿富汗。美国在阿富汗的开销中，仅有2%，乃至不到2%用在实在能惠及阿富汗公民的底子基础设施或减贫服务。美国本能够同其他国家一道，更多出资于清洁水、校园、医院、农业等帮忙阿富汗脱节贫穷的项目，建造一个愈加安稳和昌盛的阿富汗。但美国领导人向大众着重不会把钱花在这些小事上。萨克斯教授以为，美国控制阶级和媒体毫不留情、不计后果地干与这些国家，并鄙视其公民，留给当地公民的只要烽火屠戮和颠沛流离。I also saw the article you mentioned. Professor Sachs pointed out in the article that almost every modern US military intervention in the developing world has come to rot. It's hard to think of an exception since the Korean War, be it Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in Southeast Asia, Iraq, Syria and Libya in the Middle East, Latin America, Africa, or today's Afghanistan. Professor Sachs also said that less than 2% of the US spending on Afghanistan, and probably far less than 2%, reached the Afghan people in the form of basic infrastructure or poverty-reducing services. The US could have worked with other countries to invest in clean water, sanitation, school buildings, clinics, agriculture and many other programs to lift the country from economic deprivation, and foster a more stable and prosperous Afghanistan. Yet American leaders go out of their way to emphasize to the American public that they won't waste money on such trivialities. The American political class and mass media hold the people of these nations in contempt, even as they intervene relentlessly and recklessly in those countries. What they left behind is only wars, killings and displacement.

　　我注意到闻名英国学者马丁·雅克最近也就这方面问题宣告了一些谈论，他以为军事力量一向是美国全球人物的底子。长时间以来，美国一向以为，强壮的军事力量是它能够在国际范围内完成美国方针的主要要素。1945年以来，美国在70多个国家建立了近800个军事基地。在每一个美国海外军事干与的事例中，美国都享有巨大的军事优势，但都失利了，由于决议胜败的实在要害要素是公民、是民意，而不是军事优势。

British scholar Martin Jacques noted in a recent article that military power has been fundamental to America's global role. America has long believed that overweening military strength was the primary factor in enabling it to get its way in the world. Since 1945, it has set up nearly 800 military bases in over 70 countries across the whole world. In every case of US military intervention overseas, though it enjoys great military advantage, it failed anyway. This is because what really matters is people's approval, not military advantage.

　　实际再三标明，军事干与没有出路，用强权及军事手段处理问题只会使问题越来越多。把美式民主生搬硬套到历史文明、国情天壤之别的国家只会不服水土，终究以失利告终。

Facts have repeatedly shown that military intervention leads nowhere, and that the use of power and solving problems with power and military means would only lead to even more problems. The copy of American democracy model can hardly fit or stand in a country with distinctively different history, culture and national conditions, which will end up in failure.

　　上世纪70年代，美国有一首反越战的歌曲，歌中有一句词，Let Saigons be bygones（让西贡成为曩昔），惋惜的是这一幕在喀布尔又重现了。我国有句话叫“吃一堑，长一智”。美国吃的堑现已够多了，应该长长智了。美国真的应该深刻反思本身动辄干与他国内政、穷兵黩武、始乱终弃的过错方针了，美方真的应该认真思考一下作为一个大国对国际平和安稳开展应该负起什么职责，不要再执迷于做国际平和的损坏者和动乱的制作者。

There was an anti-Vietnam War song in the 1970s in which the lyrics read "Let Saigons be bygones". But regrettably, history is repeating itself in Kabul. The Chinese people often say that a fall into the pit, a gain in the wit. The US has fallen into the pit for too many times. It is time for it to gain some wit. The US should deeply reflect on its wrong policy of belligerence and forsaking commitments, think seriously about its responsibilities for the world and stop undermining world peace and creating instability. 4香港中评社记者：8月19日，美国领导人承受采访时称，台湾、韩国、北约与阿富汗局势有底子不同。美国已就北约宪章第五条作出庄重许诺，假如有国家侵略北约盟友或采纳举动，美将作出回应，对日本、韩国和台湾也是如此。中方有何谈论？ 　　China Review News: US leader said in an interview on August 19 that there's a fundamental difference between Taiwan, South Korea, NATO and Afghanistan. The US side made a commitment to Article Five that if in fact anyone were to invade or take action against its NATO allies, the US would respond. Same with Japan, same with South Korea, same with Taiwan. Do you have any comment?

华春莹：我注意到有媒体称这也许是一个口误。台湾的确和阿富汗有底子不同。阿富汗是一个主权国家，而台湾是我国领土不可分割的一部分。一个我国准则是任何国家都不可逾越的红线和底线。我国有必要一致，也必定一致。任何人都不要轻视我国公民保卫国家主权和领土完整的刚强决计、坚决毅力和强壮才能！

Hua Chunying: I noticed that some media have suggested that this may have been a slip of the tongue. There is indeed a fundamental difference between Taiwan and Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a sovereign state, while Taiwan is an inalienable part of China's territory. The one-China principle is a red and bottom line that cannot be crossed. China must and will be reunified. No one should underestimate the strong determination, firm will and strong capability of the Chinese people to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

5

中新社记者：咱们注意到，近来有报导称，美国政府高层正在以疫苗帮忙等为筹码对我国周边国家威逼利诱，交换后者帮忙炒作“我国病毒源头论”，分解我国和周边国家，保护美国的区域主导权。发言人对此有何谈论？　　China News Service: Recent reports say that using vaccine aid as a bait, high level officials of the US government are stepping up the efforts to coerce China's neighboring countries to participate in its campaign to smear China as the "source of the coronavirus" and to drive a wedge between China and its neighbors so as to maintain US' regional dominance. Do you have any comment? 华春莹：咱们注意到有关报导。当我国急人之所急、战胜困难为有需求的国家出产和供给抗疫物资时，美国则在全国际买断、独占抗疫物资。当我国首要宣告并践即将疫苗作为全球公共产品，向国际供给超越8亿剂疫苗时，美国却在大搞“疫苗民族主义”和“美国优先”。 Hua Chunying: We noted relevant reports. When China's overcoming difficulties to produce and provide anti-epidemic supplies to countries in urgent need, the US bought up and hoarded supplies. When China first announced and took the lead in implementing the pledge of making vaccines a global public good and has so far provided more than 800 million doses to the world, the US was practicing "America First" and "vaccine nationalism". 　　现在，美国总算把自己的疫苗拿出来，但假如真像报导中所说的那样，美国却已在背面标好了价码，将疫苗和溯源问题挂钩，把疫苗作为钳制他国参加反华遏华同盟的东西。这种做法是不品德、不担任的，理应遭到谴责。　Now the US is offering vaccines, but with a price tag, as media reports said, in exchange for support on the origins tracing issue, making vaccines a tool to coerce other countries into joining its anti-China alliance. If this is true, such behavior is immoral and irresponsible, which should be condemned.当时，国际仍面临疫情严峻应战，迫切需求联合和协作。疫苗是抗击病毒的利器，是解救生命的期望，不该被政治病毒污染。期望美方中止政治操弄溯源，污染毒化国际协作。The world is still facing severe challenges from COVID-19 and there is a crying need for solidarity and cooperation. Vaccines are a powerful weapon against the virus and bring hope for saving lives, and should not be used as a tool for political manipulation. We hope the US will stop politicizing origins tracing, poisoning international cooperation and return to the right track of international anti-epidemic collaboration and origins tracing cooperation.

６

汹涌新闻记者：据报导，新任美国空军部长弗兰克·肯德尔在承受媒体采访时说，他的方针是制作“让我国感到恐惧”的超前技能，比方当时美国空军正在推动的F-35隐形战斗机晋级项目。中方对此有何谈论？　　The Paper: According to reports, the new Secretary of the US Air Force Frank Kendall said in an interview that his goal is to field leap-ahead technologies that "scare China" such as upgrade program of the F-35 stealth fighter jets that the US Air Force is developing. What is China's comment?

华春莹：肯德尔说要“让我国感到恐惧”，主张他问问咱们我国公民解放军空军同不赞同。

Hua Chunying: Kendall said they want to "scare China". I suggest he ask the Air Force of the PLA whether they would agree to this.

　　英国学者马丁·雅克最近标明，美国在伊拉克、阿富汗等每一个事例中都享有巨大的军事优势，但无一破例都以失利告终。赢得战役的要害是赢得人心，而不是军事优势。我想美国在越南、伊拉克、阿富汗这样的经历现已许多了。

I noticed that British scholar Martin Jacques recently said, the US enjoys massive military advantage in each case of Iraq, Afghanistan and so on. But in all circumstances, it failed in the end. The key to the victory of a war is to win over the people instead of military superiority. The US must have drawn many lessons in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

7

《北京青年报》记者：19日，美国财政部以侵略人权和糜烂为由，对古巴中心陆军参谋长等3人施行制裁。中方对此有何谈论？ 　　Beijing Youth Daily: On the 19th, the US Department of the Treasury imposed sanctions on three Cuban individuals including the chief of the Central Army on the grounds of human rights violation and corruption. What is China's comment?

华春莹：近期关于美国制裁古巴的问题，中方已屡次标明态度，坚决对立美方对古巴滥施单边制裁霸凌和干与古巴内政。实际现已无数次证明，越是打着人权旗帜乱舞制裁大棒，就越露出出美方虚伪的品德双标和胡作非为的实质。中方坚决支撑古巴政府为保护社会安稳所作尽力。咱们也想再次敦促美方与国际社会相向而行，多做一些实在有助于古方改进经济民生、有利于保证古巴公民底子权力的事。

Hua Chunying: China has made its position clear on multiple occasions recently. We are firmly opposed to the US unilateral sanctions on Cuba and interference in its internal affairs. Facts prove that the more the US wields the big stick of sanctions in the name of human rights, the more it exposes its hypocritical moral double standards and bullying nature. China firmly supports the Cuban government's efforts in maintaining social stability, and again urges the US side to work together with the international community to do more that helps Cuba improve its economy and livelihood, and ensure the basic rights of the Cuban people.

8

路透社记者：中方是否乐意帮忙应对阿富汗公民大规模撤离？是否会接纳逃离的阿富汗公民？ 　　Reuters: Is China willing to help with the current large-scale evacuations from Afghanistan? Would China itself accept any Afghan citizens who are fleeing the Taliban?

华春莹：当时局势下，燃眉之急是国际社会一道鼓舞和支撑阿富汗各派系、各民族加强联合，经过对话洽谈找到一个阿公民能够承受、契合阿公民利益和国情、打开容纳的政治结构，赶快完成政治平稳过渡，防止发生新的内战或人道主义灾祸，最大极限防止无谓伤亡和发生大规模难民。这是处理问题的底子之道。

Hua Chunying: Under the current circumstances, the top priority for the international community is to help and encourage different factions and ethnic groups in Afghanistan to strengthen solidarity, find an open and inclusive political framework that is accepted by the Afghan people and is in line with the people's interests and national conditions and achieve smooth political transition as soon as possible. Efforts should be made to avoid a new civil war, humanitarian disaster and unnecessary casualties, and prevent causing a large number of refugees. This is the fundamental way out on this issue.

9

路透社记者：中方近来加大了对西方国家人权问题的批判力度。中方此举是否如西方国家官员所说，这是为了搬运外界对本身方针的批判，比方对维吾尔人“种族灭绝”的方针？中方暗示新冠病毒可能是从美方实验室走漏的，是否也是在搬运美方对我国应对失算导致疫情延伸的批判？中方是否抛弃改进与美国等西方国家的联系？　　Reuters: China has recently stepped up criticism of Western countries' human rights records. Is China doing this, as Western officials say, to try to deflect criticism of its own policies, such as accusations of genocide against the Uyghurs? China has also suggested COVID-19 could have escaped from a lab in the US. Is this also an attempt to deflect criticism from some in the US that China's missteps allowed the pandemic to emerge? Given the increase in China's criticisms on the issues, is China giving up on improving its relations with the US and other Western countries?

华春莹：你的问题里的逻辑我不能赞同。

Hua Chunying: I can't agree with the logic of your question.

　　首要，你说我国加强在人权问题和溯源问题上对美批判力度是为了搬运美国对我国的批判。这是过错的。咱们屡次着重，美国及其少量西方盟友在人权和溯源问题上对我国发起了毫无底线的进犯，而这些对我国的批判是依据流言和谎话的。而我国所罗列的一件件一桩桩都依据实际，许多都是依据美国媒体自己报导的揭露信息。

First of all, I think it is wrong to say that China has been stepping up its criticism on the issues of human rights and origins tracing in order to deflect US slamming of China. As we have stressed many times, the US and a few of its allies have launched unscrupulous attacks on China on the issues of human rights and origins tracing, which are based on nothing but rumors and lies. But what China has listed, piece by piece, is based on facts, and mostly on the public information reported by the US media.

　　第二，莫非你以为美方依据流言谎话责备我国便是“新闻自在”，而中方依据实际说话便是“虚伪信息”吗？仍是说只要美国等西方国家有资历批判诋毁我国，而中方就没有权力指出这些过错？假如是这种逻辑，那便是在搞言语霸权和霸凌，便是在言语和新闻方面的不民主、独裁和极权。

Second, do you think that the US accusations against China based on rumors and lies are "freedom of the press", while China's accusations based on facts are "disinformation"? Or is it only the Western countries, including the US, that has the right to criticize China, even on the basis of unfounded rumors, lies and slander, and China has no right to point out their mistakes? I think such logic is discourse hegemony and bullying. It is non-democracy, authoritarianism and totalitarianism in discourse and press.

　　第三，你问假如中方对美国进行批判，是否意味着要抛弃与其改进联系？我想你问题中的逻辑是：中方为了改进与美国的联系，就有必要抛弃准则，就有必要要对美方的无理责备和抹黑进犯委曲求全，做缄默沉静的羔羊。这也是过错的。中方一向期望同包含美国在内的国际各国开展杰出联系，可是独立主权国家间开展友好联系有必要依据相互尊重，相等互利，不能盼望一方毫无底线、无休止地进犯另一方，而另一方却保持缄默沉静，打不还手，骂不还口。

You also asked whether China's criticism of the US means it is giving up on improving its relations with the US. I think the logic in your question is that in order to improve relations with the US, China must give up its principles and behave like a silent lamb, grinning and bearing all the unreasonable accusations and slanders of the US. I think that's wrong, too. China always hopes to develop good relations with other countries, but the friendly relations between sovereign, independent countries must be based on mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit. We cannot expect one side to remain silent and not to retaliate while the other side keeps attacking without scruples.

　　我国公民是崇尚正义、不畏强暴的公民，中华民族是具有激烈民族自豪感和自信心的民族。我国公民从来没有欺压、压榨、役使过其他国家公民，曩昔没有，现在没有，将来也不会有。一起，我国公民也绝不允许任何外来实力欺压、压榨、役使咱们。中方一向在活跃学习和学习其他国家全部有利经历，欢迎全部有利的主张和好心的批判，但咱们绝不承受“教师爷”般颐指气使的说教。期望美方规矩心态，学会实在尊重、相等对待其他国家，中止进犯抹黑我国，中止干与我国内政，中止危害中方利益。在此基础上，咱们的大门是打开的，乐意本着好心和诚心，与美国及其盟友国家开展杰出协作联系，这不仅是我国公民，也是美国公民和国际各国公民的一起等待。

We Chinese are a people who uphold justice and are not intimidated by threats of force. As a nation, we have a strong sense of pride and confidence. We have never bullied, oppressed, or subjugated the people of any other country, and we never will. By the same token, we will never allow any foreign force to bully, oppress, or subjugate us. We are eager to learn what we can from the achievements of other countries, and welcome helpful suggestions and constructive criticism. We will not, however, accept sanctimonious preaching from those who feel they have the right to lecture us. We hope that the US will adopt a correct mindset, learn to truly respect and treat other countries as equals, stop attacking and smearing China, stop interfering in China's internal affairs and harming China's interests. On this basis, our door is open and we are willing to develop good cooperative relations with the US and its allies with goodwill and sincerity. This is the shared aspiration of not only the Chinese people, but also the American people and people around the world.

10

总台央视记者：据报导，我国赞同出资5500万美元帮忙塞拉利昂建造一座深海渔港。但有外媒以为该项目会对环境发生负面影响。中方对此有何谈论？ 　　CCTV: According to reports, China has agreed to offer Sierra Leone $55 million to help it build a harbour for deep-sea fishing boats. But some believe the project will have negative impact on the environment. Do you have any comment on this?

华春莹：我看到了《经济学人》的这篇报导，有关报导是不精确的。塞拉利昂政府、行业协会和社会各界人士已屡次就塞拉利昂渔码头项目弄清并表达支撑，前不久塞议会予以赞同。从塞各界人士表态中，咱们能够清楚看到，建造现代化的渔码头，是塞公民自上世纪70年代以来的夙愿。渔码头建造将极大改进塞渔业基础设施。关于环境评价和土地拆迁，塞政府也已屡次指出，项目选址是依据水深丈量、环境等多种要素考量作出的最合适组织，塞方已托付专业组织进行环境评价，并已组织专项资金用于对当地土地全部者进行补偿。依据塞渔业部分挂号，现有来自16个国家和区域100余艘工业化渔船在塞作业，渔码头建成后不光将谋福当地公民，也将惠及各国在塞运营的相关企业，是多方共鸁的。所谓“鱼粉厂”、损坏热带雨林、不管当地居民、为中方获取资源等说法都不事实、站不住脚。

Hua Chunying: I noticed this Economist report, which I think is inaccurate. The Sierra Leonean government and industry associations, as well as various sectors of society, have repeatedly clarified and expressed support for the project in Sierra Leone, which the parliament recently approved. The remarks of people from all walks of life in Sierra Leone clearly show that the construction of a modern fishing harbour has been the long-cherished wish of the Sierra Leonean people since the 1970s. The construction of the fishing harbour will significantly improve Sierra Leone's fishing infrastructure. On the issue of environmental assessment and land requisition, the government of Sierra Leone has pointed out that the siting of the project is the most appropriate arrangement based on considerations of multiple factors including the water depth and the environment. The Sierra Leonean side has commissioned a professional institution to conduct an environmental assessment and earmarked funds for compensation for the local landowners. According to the registration records of Sierra Leone's fishery authorities, there are now more than 100 industrial fishing vessels from 16 countries and regions operating in Sierra Leone. The completion of the fishing harbour will benefit not only the local people, but also the relevant enterprises operating in Sierra Leone. It is a win-win project for all parties. So the claims in this article about the fishmeal plant, destruction of surrounding rainforest, disregard for the local people, China hoovering up resources, are all untrue and untenable.

　　中塞友好协作已历经50年，效果累累，众所周知。相等洽谈、一起开展、协作共鸁、绿色、可继续是中方一向秉持的协作理念。中方是否诚心期望、实在帮忙当地经济开展和公民日子改进，塞拉利昂公民自会作出判别，并且这样的工作也只要塞公民说了算，中方彻底尊重塞方的挑选。

Over the past 50 years, China-Sierra Leone friendly cooperation has yielded fruitful results for all to see. We have always adhered to the principles of equal consultation, common development, win-win cooperation, green and sustainable development. Is China genuinely helping local economic development and improving people's lives? I think the people of Sierra Leone will make their own independent judgment. In such a matter, only the Serbian people have the final say. China fully respects the choice of the Sierra Leonean side.

11

香港中评社记者：19日，阿富汗塔利班发言人穆贾希德在交际网站声明，塔利班建立“阿富汗伊斯兰酋长国”。中方是否计划供认？

　　China Review News: On the 19th, the Afghan Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid issued a statement on social media that the Afghan Taliban has announced the establishment of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Does China plan to recognize it?

华春莹：咱们注意到有关阿富汗塔利班的声明，也注意到阿富汗国内各派仍在就未来政权架构等进行洽谈。中方在阿富汗问题上的态度是一向和清晰的，咱们期望阿富汗组成打开容纳、有广泛代表性的政府，奉行温文稳健的表里方针，适应本国公民希望和国际社会遍及等待。

Hua Chunying: We have taken note of the Afghan Taliban's statement. We have also noticed that parties in Afghanistan are still holding consultations on the future political framework. China's position on the Afghan issue is clear and consistent. We hope Afghanistan can form an open, inclusive and broadly-based government, uphold moderate and prudent domestic and foreign policies and respond to the shared aspiration of the Afghan people and the international community.

交际部发言人办公室

官方发布我国交际方针

威望阐释我国态度态度