2019年5月30日外交部发言人陆慷主持例行记者会
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lu Kang’s Regular Press Conference on May 30, 2019
问：据报道，美国国务卿蓬佩奥昨日称，美国企业与政府的合作遵循美法律，但中国的情况完全不同。华为是中国政府的工具，二者联系紧密。另外我们也注意到，美国务院发言人昨日对记者称，美出台“国防授权法案”禁止美行政机构使用华为设备，是基于一定证据的。中方对此有何评论？
Q: According to media reports, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said yesterday that American companies comply to US laws when they cooperate with the government, but that’s very different in China. He said that Huawei is an instrument of the Chinese government and they’re deeply connected. As we note, the spokesperson of the US Department of State said yesterday during a press briefing that the “US National Defense Authorization Act”, passed to ban public procurement of Huawei technologies, was based on quite a bit of evidence. I wonder if you have any comment on that?
答：我们注意到了美方表态，美方终于提到了“证据”。一段时间以来，美方为打压华为，绞尽脑汁编造各种话题，试图要引导美国和国际社会的公众相信华为有安全问题。美方此前拿意识形态问题说事儿，现在又拿华为与中国政府的关系说事儿，估计美方还会继续编造一些其他话题。但是绕来绕去，美方一直都回避了一个大家都真正关心的问题，就是美国到底拿得出拿不出证据。
A: We note the remarks from the US side. It is the first time it mentioned “evidence”. For quite a while, in order to oppress Huawei, the US has been wracking its brains to make up stories in an attempt to convince people from the US and other countries that Huawei poses a security risk. First it was ideology, and now Huawei’s relationship with the Chinese government. I guess there will be more to come. However, it has been shying away from the one thing everyone truly cares about: evidence.
与此形成鲜明对比的是“棱镜门”事件，美国政府究竟在其中发挥了什么作用、美国政府是否因为有意识形态的差异而在实施网络侵害时有所取舍，事实都摆在那儿，十分清楚。国际社会都不需要找什么依据，来给这种行径定性。
A vivid contrast to it is the “PRISM” incident. The facts are more than clear as to what role the US government played and whether it differentiated its targets based on ideology. There is no shortage of evidence for the international community to define the behavior of the US.
问：据报道，美国警告香港方面，与载有伊朗石油的船只交易将受到美方惩罚。中方对此有何评论？
Q: According to reports, the US has warned Hong Kong that it could face penalties if it does business with ships carrying Iranian oil. What’s China's comment?
答：我们多次回答过类似问题。中方一贯反对任何国家、在这儿主要是美国，依据自己的国内法实施所谓“长臂管辖”和单边制裁。中国同伊朗保持着正常的合作关系和经贸往来，合理、合法，应当得到尊重，不应当受到干扰。
A: We have answered many similar questions here. China is consistently against the so-called “long-arm jurisdiction” and unilateral sanctions based on domestic laws, which the US, in particular, frequently resorts to. China maintains normal relations and economic and trade exchange with Iran, which is legal and legitimate and should be respected and not disrupted.
问：我们看到，中国欧盟商会近日发布了《商业信心调查2019》报告，报告显示欧洲在华企业对中国市场仍有信心，同时很多企业也表示，希望中方扩大开放的举措能化为切实机遇。这似乎与美方关于很多外国企业正考虑离开中国的说法不同。中方对此有何评论？
Q: The European Union Chamber of Commerce in China recently released its Business Confidence Survey 2019, saying that European companies in China are still confident in China’s market, and many hope China’s further opening-up will translate into real opportunities. This seems contradictory to the view of the US side that many foreign companies are considering leaving China. Do you have any comment on that?
答：我们也看到了你所说的报告，注意到报告中提到，62%的受访企业将中国视作当前和未来排名前三的投资目的地，56%的受访企业考虑今年扩大在华业务。这再次证明，即便是在美国对中国产品加征关税的情况下，外商来华投资兴业的热情依然不减。我们之前就介绍过，中国工信部、贸促会负责人也介绍过有关情况，列举了详细的数据和事例，其中还包括了特斯拉等一些美国大企业一年来加大对华投资的情况，你都可以查阅。
A: We have read the report and note the part that 62 percent of the surveyed companies see China as a current and future top three investment destination, and that 56 percent are considering business expansion in China this year. This again proves that despite additional US tariffs, foreign investors and business owners are still enthusiastic about the Chinese market. We have shared information in this regard and so have the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade. You may refer to the detailed data and specific cases, including the growing investment by Tesla and other major US companies in the past year.
企业选择在哪个国家投资营商，选择谁作为合作伙伴，总是要根据自身利益和市场原则作出决定，不是任何其他国家、什么人一两句话就能左右的。我愿再次强调，中国对外开放的大门一直是打开的，会越开越大。我们始终欢迎外国企业来华投资兴业，开展互利合作。同时，我们也致力于为外国投资者提供更加公平、透明、稳定、可预期的投资市场环境。
When choosing investment destinations and business partners, companies make decisions based on their own interests and market principles rather than empty words from certain persons in other countries. I’d like to stress again that China’s door to the world is open and will only open wider. Foreign companies are welcome to invest and operate in China for mutual benefits. In the meantime, we remain committed to providing a fair, transparent, stable and non-discriminatory market environment for foreign investors.
问：据报道，美国国防情报局局长罗伯特·阿什利昨天称，2018年中国弹道导弹试射次数超过其他国家总和，未来10年中国的核武库将翻倍。中方对此有何评论？
Q: United States Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency General Robert Ashley yesterday said that China has conducted more ballistic missile tests than the rest of the world combined in 2018. He also said that it is on pace to double its nuclear arsenal over the coming decade. I wonder if China has any comment?
答：不知道为什么，近期美方在考虑战略平衡问题，以及全球都关心的美国核力量削减问题时，总是把中国捎上。我们在这儿说过，美方这么想拉上中国，究竟是想把中国谈到和美国一样的核力量水平，还是把美国谈到和中国一样的核力量水平？
A: We wonder why the US has been trying to drag China in when it comes to the issue of strategic equilibrium and reduction of its nuclear capabilities, which is a global concern. As I said here earlier, we wonder whether the US is trying to have China’s nuclear arsenal increased to its level or reduce its own nuclear arms to China's.
国际社会绝大多数成员在联大和裁谈会多次重申，美国和俄罗斯作为拥有世界上最大核武库的国家，在削减战略力量问题上负有特殊、首要、不可推卸的责任和义务。在此背景下，我们认为美方应该首先履行自己的核裁军义务，而不要总是扯上一些其他不相干的情况。
The vast majority of the international community has reiterated in the UN and at the Conference on Disarmament that the US and Russia, as countries with the biggest nuclear arsenals, shoulder special, primary and obligatory responsibilities to reducing strategic capabilities. Against this backdrop, we believe the US should first fulfill its own nuclear disarmament obligations instead of trying to draw unrelated matters into this issue.
问：今天上午，张汉晖副部长在外交部举行的中外媒体吹风会上指责美国是“经济恐怖主义”。请问中方具体指什么？
Q: Earlier today at the MFA briefing Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Hanhui accused the US of “economic terrorism”. I was wondering what China means by that?
答：张汉晖副部长讲得很对啊，没有什么不好理解的。
A: I could not agree more with Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Hanhui and don’t see anything hard to comprehend.
美方现在在国际上、包括在同其他国家经贸关系上采取的单边主义和霸凌主义行径充分表明，是美国破坏了现行国际规则和以世界贸易组织规则为基础的、国际公认的多边贸易体系。这确实对其他国家、对美国自身都带来了严重损害。
The US unilateralism and bullying practices in the international arena, including in economic and trade relations with other countries, show clearly that it is undermining the existing international rules and the multilateral trading regime that is based on WTO rules and recognized by the international community. It has indeed inflicted serious harm on other countries as well as the US itself.
问：据报道，马来西亚总理马哈蒂尔在出席第25届“亚洲的未来”国际交流会议期间表示，马方将尽可能多地使用华为技术。美西方必须接受亚洲国家现在也能生产有竞争力的产品，不应威胁商业对手。中方对此有何评论？
Q: In his speech at the 25th International Conference on the “Future of Asia”, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said that his country will use Huawei technology as much as possible, and that instead of threatening business rivals, the US and other Western countries need to accept the fact that Asian countries are capable of making competitive products. Do you have any response to that?
答：马哈蒂尔总理这个表态，说的是一句大实话，也是一句公道话。包括中国、马来西亚在内的广大发展中国家当然都有自身发展能力提高、科技水平进步的权利。在经济全球化的今天，通过互利合作实现共同发展、共同进步，实际上是拓展了各国的发展空间、做大了共同利益蛋糕，符合所有国家的利益。希望个别国家能够认真听一听马哈蒂尔总理的上述忠告，对发展中国家发展进步摆正心态，更多看到机遇。
A: Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad’s statement is both candid and unbiased. Developing countries including China and Malaysia are entitled to the right of enhancing developing capabilities and science and technology. In an era of economic globalization, countries, by pursuing shared development through win-win cooperation, are in fact creating broader development space and making the pie of common interests bigger for all to share. We hope certain country will heed the advice from Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, adopt a fair attitude towards the progress of developing countries and see more opportunities in their development.
问：请问习近平主席是在莫斯科还是在圣彼得堡与普京总统举行会谈？
Q: Where will President Xi Jinping and President Putin hold talks, in Moscow or St. Petersburg?
答：今天上午外交部举行的中外媒体吹风会对此作了比较详细的介绍。习近平主席首先是到莫斯科对俄罗斯进行国事访问，同普京总统的大、小范围会谈和重要的国事活动当然是在莫斯科举行。之后，习近平主席将赴圣彼得堡出席第23届圣彼得堡国际经济论坛。因为普京总统也会出席论坛，两国元首在此期间还会有一些互动。
A: Detailed information was provided at our press briefing this morning. President Xi will first travel to Moscow for the state visit to Russia. Large-scale and small-scale talks with President Putin as well as important state events will be held in Moscow, as can be assumed. Afterwards he will travel to St. Petersburg for the 23rd St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. As President Putin will also be attending the forum, the two heads of state will have more interactions there.
问：习主席访问俄罗斯和参加圣彼得堡国际经济论坛期间，是否将会见其他国家领导人或官员？
Q: I’m wondering if during the trip to St. Petersburg, President Xi will meet with leaders or officials from other countries who are going to be there?
答：习主席此次在莫斯科对俄罗斯进行的国事访问是中俄双边活动，我不知道你问这个问题是不是因为你知道，届时在莫斯科还有其他来宾？目前我没有听说这样的情况。
A: President Xi’s state visit is a bilateral event. I am not sure if you have information on other guests to Moscow on overlapping dates. I myself have no information on that.
圣彼得堡国际经济论坛是俄罗斯主办的最重要的多边论坛。多年来，很多国家都对此非常重视，很多重要领导人也将出席。目前我还不掌握在此期间其他双边会晤的具体情况。有消息我们会及时发布。
The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum is Russia’s most important multilateral forum. High importance has been attached to it by many countries over the past years. This year, it will also be attended by many leaders. Regarding possible bilateral meetings on the sidelines of it, I have no information to offer at the moment and will update you on further news.
问：今天上午中美两位主播的辩论，你看了吗？对此有何评价？
Q: Did you follow the Chinese and American TV anchors’ debate this morning? Would you like to comment on that?
答：我跟大家一样很关心，也关注了。这应该不是一场辩论，就是两位主持人的一个对话吧。
A: Like you all, I am very interested and I did watch it. I think it is more of a dialogue than a debate.
我前两天说过，真理越辩越明。在当前中美关系形势下，我们乐见中美两国各界人士进行开诚布公的、诚实的、理性的思考和对话。
Just like I said the other day, truth will emerge clearer from debates. Against the backdrop of the current China-US relations, we are glad to see candid, honest and rational thinking and discussion between people in various sectors in our two countries.