英语口译：南海问题应以诚实、理性和负责任方式解决

英语自学网

　　

2a40da587aab59d56366feccab1b7c70.jpg

        　　2016年7月8日，莱索托主流英文媒体《公众眼报》全文刊登了孙祥华大使署名文章，全文如下：
        　　On 8 July, 2016, the Public Eye of Lesotho published an article by
Ambassador Sun Xianghua: “The South China Sea Disputes Call for Honest, Sensible
and Responsible Way of Settlement”. The full text is as follows:
        　　南海问题应以诚实、理性和负责任方式解决
        　　The South China Sea Disputes Call for Honest, Sensible and Responsible Way
of Settlement
        　　6月初，我在莱索托权威报纸《公众眼报》发表了题为《南海问题：尊重法律和事实，反对阴谋与诡计》的文章，全面介绍南海争议经纬。然而，当我在该报7月1日版上读到《建立以规则为基础的南海机制》一文后，我决定再写一篇文章，揭穿“以规则为基础”一文的谬论与谎言，向莱索托人民讲清楚为什么我认为菲律宾政府没有采取诚实、理性和负责任的方式来解决南海争议。
        　　In early June, I published the article “South China Sea: respect law and
facts rather than tricks and plots” in the esteemed Basotho newspaper the Public
Eye, which presented a holistic and realistic picture of the South China Sea
disputes. However, after reading an article also about the South China Sea
titled “Towards a rules-based regime in the South China Sea” published in the
same newspaper on July 1, I decided I have to write another one, to expose and
rebuke all the fallacies and fabrications in the “rules-based” article, and
explain to the Basotho people why I think the government of the Philippines has
not been following an honest, sensible and responsible way to solve the South
China Sea disputes.
        　　首先，菲律宾政府在其领土边界问题上对国际社会不诚实。稍作研究即可发现，1898年《美西巴黎条约》、1900年《美西华盛顿条约》、1930年《英美条约》均对菲边界作出规定，这些条约明确规定东经118度经线是菲领土的西部界限，而中国南海岛礁均位于这条经线的西侧。事实真相是，自1970年代初起，菲律宾受攫取南海油气资源的贪心驱使，开始越过这条国际条约规定的界限侵占中国岛礁。南海争议的根本原因就是菲律宾的非法领土扩张。“以规则为基础”一文号称呼吁“法治”，却选择性地遗忘了菲律宾才是真正的违法者。
        　　Firstly, the Philippine government has not been honest to the world about
the boundary of its territory. If we do some research, we would find that the
Philippine territory is defined by the 1898 Treaty of Peace Between the United
States of America and the Kingdom of Spain, the 1900 Treaty Between the Kingdom
of Spain and the United States of America for Cession of Outlying Islands of the
Philippines, and the 1930 Convention Between the United States of America and
Great Britain Delimiting the Boundary Between the Philippine Archipelago and the
State of North Borneo. These treaties have manifestly stipulated that the 118
degrees east longitude is the western limit of the Philippine territory. China’s
islands and reefs in the South China Sea are all located west of this line. The
truth is, since the early 1970s, the Philippines started encroaching upon
China’s islands and reefs across the limit defined by the international
treaties, incented among others by its greed for the oil and gas resources in
the South China Sea. The Philippines’ illegal territorial expansion is the root
causes of the South China Sea disputes. When the “Rules-based” article called
for rule of law, it seems to selectively forget that the Philippines was the
real breaker of the rule of law.
        　　第二，菲律宾政府提请仲裁不是解决争端的理性之举。《联合国海洋法公约》(以下简称《海洋法》)第280条规定，“本公约的任何规定均不损害任何缔约国于任何时候协议用自行选择的任何和平方法解决它们之间有关本公约的解释或适用的争端的权利。”第281条规定，“作为有关本公约的解释或适用的争端各方的缔约各国,如已协议用自行选择的和平方法来谋求解决争端,则只有在诉诸这种方法而仍未得到解决以及争端各方间的协议并不排除任何其他程序的情形下,才适用本部分所规定的程序”。第283条规定，“如果缔约国之间对本公约的解释或适用发生争端,争端各方应迅速就以谈判或其他和平方法解决争端一事交换意见”。概括起来，上述条款充分说明争端直接相关方应穷尽所有通过和平谈判与协商的解决方式。
            
            

ensix

        　　Secondly, the Philippine government’s decision to seek an arbitration from
an Arbitration Tribunal was not a sensible way to solve the disputes. Article
280 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) says,
“Nothing in this part impairs the right of any States Parties to agree at any
time to settle a dispute between them concerning the interpretation or
application of this Convention by any peaceful means of their own choice.”
Article 281 says, “If the States Parties which are parties to a dispute
concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention have agreed to
seek settlement of the dispute by a peaceful means of their own choice, the
procedures provided for in this Part apply only where no settlement has been
reached by recourse to such means and the agreement between the parties does not
exclude any further procedure.” Article 283 says, “When a dispute arises between
States Parties concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention,
the parties to the dispute shall proceed expeditiously to an exchange of views
regarding its settlement by negotiation or other peaceful means.” In a nutshell,
the above-said articles strongly propose that the parties directly concerning
the disputes shall exhaust all the means of settlement through peaceful
consultations and negotiations.
        　　事实上，菲律宾曾在与中国的双边文件中同意通过双边谈判方式解决相关争议。此外，2002年中国与包括菲律宾在内的东盟成员国签署的《南海各方行为宣言》(DOC)第四条明确规定，“有关各方承诺，由直接相关的主权国家通过友好谈判协商，以和平方式解决领土与管辖权争议”。菲政府与中国也曾在2011年发表联合声明，重申以谈判协商方式解决争议。仅仅一年后，菲律宾在未事先告知中国、未取得中方同意的情况下，出人意料地单方面提起仲裁。菲律宾这种公然反悔、背信弃义的做法实在有违理性。
        　　As a matter of fact, the Philippines did reach agreement with China in
their bilateral documents that the two countries should resolve relevant
disputes through bilateral negotiations. In addition, Paragraph 4 of the
Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) signed by
China and ASEAN Member States, including the Philippines in 2002, also clearly
states that “the parties concerned undertake to resolve their territorial and
jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, through friendly consultations and
negotiations by sovereign states directly concerned.” As a matter of fact, the
Philippine government issued a statement jointly with China even in 2011,
undertaking to resolve disputes through negotiations and consultations. Just one
year later, however, the Philippines unexpectedly initiated arbitration
unilaterally, without informing China in advance or acquiring China’s consent.
This blatant action of dishonoring of and reneging on its own commitments can
hardly be described as a sensible one.
        　　同时，菲律宾单方提起仲裁的行为也侵犯了中国作为《海洋法》缔约国自主选择争端解决方式的权利。菲方提起的仲裁，实质上是关于领土主权与海洋划界问题，而领土问题一向属国际法而非《海洋法》管辖。关于海洋划界，中国也已根据《海洋法》第298条作出排除性声明，表明该问题不适用《海洋法》争端解决机制。很显然，菲律宾的指控没有任何法理依据。
        　　It must also be pointed out that, the unilateral initiation of arbitration
by the Philippines is a violation of the right to seeking dispute settlement of
its own choices that China enjoys as a State Party to UNCLOS. The Philippines’
requests of arbitration, in essence, are about territorial sovereignty and
maritime delimitation. As a common knowledge, territorial issues are subject to
general international law, not UNCLOS. On the other hand, on the maritime
delimitation, China has made a declaration of optional exceptions in accordance
with the Article 298 of UNCLOS, which explicitly excludes disputes concerning
maritime delimitation from the UNCLOS dispute settlement procedures. Now it’s
quite clear that the Philippines has no legal or sensible ground to stand on for
its allegations.
        　　综上所述，《海洋法》争端解决机制对中菲两国争议并不适用。国际仲裁庭对该问题没有管辖权，其执意插手实为滥用权力。因此中国不承认、不接受这一自始至终都是非法的仲裁。
        　　Based on all the reasons mentioned above, the settlement procedure provided
for in UNCLOS does not apply to the disputes between China and the Philippines.
The Arbitral Tribunal has no jurisdiction on this issue and its handling of the
case is willful expansion and abuse of power. Therefore, China does not accept
or recognize such arbitration which has been illegal from the very
beginning.
        　　第三，菲律宾政府的行为是极不负责任的。中国有句俗语：“人来人往，邻居不变。”这也是国家间关系的真实写照。自古以来，中国就奉行睦邻友好的外交政策，过去几十年已通过友好协商谈判与大多数邻国划定了陆地边界。中国与菲律宾是近邻，长期保持传统友谊。中方相信与菲律宾在南海问题上的争议应该而且只能通过双边谈判协商解决。唯有如此，解决方案才能持久并经受住历史的检验。中国虽然对南海岛礁拥有无可争议的主权，但考虑到中菲两国间确实存在争议，还是继续主张“搁置争议、共同开发”。菲方应感谢中方这一友好提议，而不是相反。
        　　Thirdly, the Philippine government’s action can hardly be seen as being a
responsible one. As we say in China, “people can come and go, but neighbors
stay.” This saying is especially true for a country. China has, since ancient
times, adopted a good neighborly foreign policy and has settled its land
boundaries with most of its neighbors in the past decades through friendly
consultation and negotiations. China and the Philippines are close neighbors and
have enjoyed long-time traditional friendship. China is confident that its
disputes with the Philippines in the South China Sea should and can only be
settled through bilateral consultation and negotiation. Only in this way, can
the settlement be lasting and stand the test of times. Even though China has
indisputable sovereignty over the islands and reefs in the South China Sea,
bearing in mind that the two countries do have disputes on the issue, it still
advocates to shelve the disputes for the time being and engage in joint
development. This act of good intentions should be appreciated by the
Philippines, not the contrary.
        　　对菲律宾来说，菲政府应当摒弃其单边仲裁要求，与中国进行和平真诚的谈判协商，以实现争端的持久与和谐解决。菲律宾政府应认识到，它在处理涉领土与海洋划界等敏感问题时，应对整个国家和人民以及子孙后代的利益负责，而不应仅考虑个人得失、选举需要、少数利益集团的利益，以及毫不相关的域外国家的利益。
        　　The Philippine government, on its part, should abandon its unilateral
initiation of arbitration and start to engage in peaceful and sincere
consultation and negotiation with China, with an aim of achieving a lasting and
harmonious settlement of the disputes. It should realize that when dealing with
such sensitive issues as territory and maritime delimitation, the Government
should bear in mind that its action should be responsible for its whole country,
whole people, and many generations of its people to come, not just for the sake
of personal gains or elections, or for the interests of small interest groups,
not to mention for the interest of some other countries which are not directly
concerned in the South China Sea.
        　　我相信，当菲律宾政府的决策者开始以诚实、理性和负责任的方式来处理南海争议时，中菲两国就该问题达成双方都接受的解决方案的日子就不会太远了。
        　　I believe, when honesty, sense and responsibility do become the guiding
principle of the relevant decision-makers in the Philippine government in
dealing with the South China Sea disputes, the day when a settlement agreed upon
and accepted by both sides will not be faraway.