2017年翻譯資格(CATTI)考試很快就要舉行了，你做好準備了嗎?下面yjbys小編爲大家準備了關於初級口譯譯文的文章，歡迎閱讀。
Why China Says No to the Arbitration on the South China Sea
中國爲什麼對南海仲裁案說不
Fu Ying
傅瑩
July 10, 2016
2016年7月10日
The Hague tribunal in the much-discussed South China Sea arbitration case between China and the Philippines has notified the world that it will issue a final verdict on July 12. Many Western countries seem to think they already know the result of the arbitration – that China will lose. They have already started urging China to accept the ruling. But Beijing’s position is clear: no acceptance, no participation, no recognition, and no implementation. There is solid international legal basis for China to oppose this case. And by doing so, China is not only safeguarding its national interests, but also protecting the integrity and legitimacy of the international maritime order.
菲律賓單方提起的南海仲裁案備受關注，海牙仲裁庭已經宣佈將於7月12日公佈最終裁決結果。一些西方國家和媒體似乎知曉裁決結果將對中國不利，早早開始敦促中方接受裁決。但中國對仲裁案的立場十分明確，即“不接受、不參與、不承認、不執行”。中國反對南海仲裁案有充分的國際法理依據。中國這樣做不僅是在維護自身的國家利益，也是在捍衛國際海洋秩序的完整性和合法性。
Why does China refuse to accept and participate in the proceedings of this tribunal, being heard at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague? Because China, as a sovereign state, is entitled to choose its preferred means of dispute resolution – a legitimate right under international law. Moreover, the Philippines’ case is inherently flawed and illegitimated by such irregularities as the country’s abuse of the dispute settlement procedures, its distortion of concepts, and its deliberate disguise of the real nature of the disputes.
爲什麼中國拒絕接受和參與仲裁程序?因爲中國作爲主權國家，有權選擇解決爭議的方式，這是國際法賦予主權國家的合法權利。同時也是因爲菲律賓單方提起的南海仲裁案存在濫用爭端解決程序、偷換概念和刻意掩蓋爭議實質的諸多問題，自始就存在瑕疵，因此缺乏合法性。
The Philippines’ arbitration relates to the dispute over the sovereignty of islands and reefs in the South China Sea, and to maritime delimitation. But these territorial issues are not regulated by – and therefore beyond the scope of – the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). And in 2006, China declared it would exclude “disputes concerning maritime delimitation” from compulsory arbitration, under Article 298 of UNCLOS. Second, the Philippines’ unilateral initiation of compulsory arbitration did not meet UNCLOS preconditions for such initiation. The “no arbitration without the existence of a dispute” principle requires that before resorting to compulsory arbitration, there must have existed a real dispute between the parties. However, China has not yet presented specific claims with individual islands: Instead, it has always treated them as part of its Zhongsha Islands or Nansha Islands in the South China Sea.
首先，菲律賓提起仲裁的訴求涉及與中國一些島礁爭議和兩國之間的海域劃界問題。領土主權問題不屬於《聯合國海洋法公約》(以下簡稱《公約》)調整範圍;對於海域劃界問題，中國已於2006年依據《公約》298條規定作出排除性聲明，因而不再接受使用強制爭端解決程序。
第二，菲方單方面提起的強制仲裁未滿足《公約》規定的前置條件。根據“無爭議不仲裁”的原則，提起任何強制仲裁前，雙方就仲裁事項須確實存在爭議。但是，例如菲律賓在仲裁中提出關於單個島礁法律地位的問題，而中方從未就單個島礁主張海洋權益，是一直將其當作羣島的組成部分。
UNCLOS also stipulates that the Philippines must exchange views related to the arbitration over the dispute with China. But the Philippines has never consulted with China on the subject matters of the arbitration. And it was not telling the truth when it reported an “impasse” with China in “the bilateral exchanges” and “the great many subsequent exchanges.” In fact, it was China that tried in vain to engage in meaningful dialogue with the Philippines.
《公約》也規定，提起訴訟前相關方須充分交換意見，但菲律賓從未與中國就仲裁事項進行任何溝通。菲在申訴報告中聲稱，因與中國的“雙邊磋商”以及“後續的衆多溝通”都“陷入僵滯”無法解決問題而提起仲裁。這不是實話，事實上，是中方一直試圖與菲律賓進行有意義的溝通而得不到迴應。
Therefore, the Philippines’ unilateral initiation of arbitration has fallen short of meeting the UNCLOS conditions. Besides, by unilaterally initiating the arbitration, the Philippines has violated an earlier agreement it reached with China: Both countries previously stated their commitment to bilateral negotiations and consultations as the means to settle disputes.
因此，菲單方面提起的仲裁併未滿足《公約》規定的法定前置條件。此外，菲方單方面提起仲裁也違反了其先前與中方達成的共識，即：雙方承諾通過雙邊談判和協商解決爭議。
Why does China find it impossible to recognize and implement the tribunal’s upcoming decision? Although Article 288(4) of UNCLOS stipulates that the tribunal should decide whether it has jurisdiction, the application of this provision is not unconditional. Indeed, there is no such thing as absolute power in international law. This tribunal, whose authority and power are conferred by states, is an international dispute settlement mechanism under UNCLOS. If the tribunal abuses its power, China – along with any other members in the international community – would have the right to reject its decisions. And in this case, the tribunal has acted in a reckless and arbitrary fashion. In doing so, it has violated the basic principles of international rule of law and undermined China’s and other nations’ faith in UNCLOS.
爲什麼中國“不承認、不執行”仲裁庭即將作出的裁決?儘管《公約》288(4)條款規定，仲裁庭有權決定自身管轄權，但是該條款的適用不是無條件的。國際法中不存在所謂“絕對權力”，仲裁庭作爲《公約》制度下的一個國際爭端解決機制，其權威和權力是所有締約國讓渡的。如果仲裁庭濫用權力，包括中國乃至國際社會有權拒絕接受裁決。我們不難看到，仲裁庭在該案的審理過程中過度任性，明顯違反國際法治基本準則，動搖中國和其他國家對《公約》的信心。
We don’t yet know the outcome, but we do know that the tribunal failed to fully understand and investigate the real dispute between China and the Philippines. It disregarded the essence and purpose of the Filipino claims in filing the case, deliberately regarding it as a mere issue of the interpretation and application of UNCLOS – but in fact, the submissions handled are far beyond this scope. There is deep concern in China that the tribunal is failing to consider the specific geographical framework and situation in the South China Sea where the maritime claims of the two countries potentially overlap.
雖然我們還不知道最終結果，但可以確信，仲裁庭在管轄權裁決中沒有了解和確認中菲間存在的爭議是什麼，忽視菲律賓提起該案的目的和訴求的實質，刻意將其視爲純粹的《公約》解釋和適用問題，而實際處置的內容又遠遠超出這個範疇。另外，中方高度關切，仲裁庭未考慮南海的特定地理框架和海洋劃界態勢，也就是中菲兩國在相關海域的海洋權益主張上是有重疊的。
I hope it is not hard to understand why China has decided not to recognize and implement the tribunal’s ruling. More than 60 countries have voiced their support for China’s position on resolving the South China Sea issue through negotiations and consultations. China, as a state party to UNCLOS, supports and respects the treaty’s principles and spirit. What China opposes is not UNCLOS and compulsory arbitration, but the tribunal’s abuse of power in handling the case.
鑑於上述，中方做出 “不承認、不執行”的決定應是不難理解的。目前，已有60多個國家公開支持中國關於通過協商談判解決南海爭議的立場，不少專家開始質疑仲裁庭的程序問題。中國作爲《公約》的締約方，支持和尊重其原則和精神，我們反對的不是《公約》和強制仲裁機制本身，而是仲裁庭在審理此案中的濫權行爲。
Today, most disputes are resolved through negotiations between the countries directly involved. The prerequisite for such negotiations, whether bilateral or multilateral, is the agreement or consent of those countries. China’s claim and position in the arbitration case are consistent with the basic spirit of international law, as well as state practice in international relations.
當今世界上絕大部分爭端都是由直接當事國之間通過談判協商解決的.。無論是雙邊、多邊談判，還是通過國際機制解決，其前提都是要直接當事國達成協議或者形成共識。中國對此案的主張和立場符合國際法的基本精神和國際關係實踐。
This arbitration cannot resolve the disputes between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea. Instead, it will only increase tensions and undermine peace and stability in the region. If the coastal countries in the South China Sea region do not intend to aggravate tensions, they have to return to the path of seeking resolution through negotiation. China and the countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have agreed to handle the issue through a dual-track approach – in other words, to resolve disputes through peaceful negotiations. Consultations on the code of conduct in the South China Sea region are making progress. The momentum should not be interrupted.
仲裁解決不了中菲在南海的爭議，只會刺激對立情緒，損害地區和平與穩定。南海沿岸存在爭議的國家如不打算激化矛盾，總還需要回到雙邊談判解決爭議的軌道上來。中國和東盟國家現在都支持通過“雙軌思路”處理南海問題，即直接當事國通過友好協商談判尋求和平解決爭議，中國與東盟國家共同維護南海和平穩定。商談“南海各方行爲準則” 的努力也已取得先期成果。這個勢頭不應被中斷。
As President Xi Jinping said, China is committed to upholding international justice and is opposed to forcing one’s will upon other people. The handling of the South China Sea issue has a bearing on justice as well as peace and stability. Countries in this region need to work together to build rules-based cooperation. The international community should support the efforts made by China and other littoral states to manage and resolve disputes in a peaceful manner, respect China’s choice of using negotiations as the means to settle disputes, and protect the legitimacy and fairness of international mechanisms – especially UNCLOS.
主席指出，中國堅持維護國際公平正義，反對把自己的意志強加於人。南海問題的處理事關和平穩定，也事關公平正義。本地區的國家需要共同努力，建立基於規則的合作機制。國際社會應支持中國和其他南海沿岸國以和平方式管控和解決爭議所做的努力，尊重中國以談判解決分歧的選擇，維護國際機制特別是《公約》的合法性和公正性。
