翻译资格CATTI一级口译练习:公道自在人心

>>翻译资格考试：翻译资格CATTI一级口译练习:公道自在人心

>>翻译资格英语口译精品课程

黄惠康    Huang Huikang

7月12日，南海仲裁案最终裁决结果出笼。这出由美国幕后操纵，日本协力搭台，菲律宾前任政府独角主演，草台班子沽名钓誉，披着法律外衣的反华政治闹剧，荒腔走板，终以“烂戏”收场，国际哗然,恶评如潮。有识之士直呼“跌破眼镜”。太平岛“由岛变礁”，更是匪夷所思。专家普遍认为，此案系“毒树之果”，“有百害而无一益”。美国原本期望借仲裁案抹黑、“孤立”中国，然而始料未及，应者寥寥。即使在菲律宾，也有越来越多的人认识到，南海仲裁案是“美国利用菲律宾达成自己目的的阴谋”。这再次印证“得道多助，失道寡助”，公道自在人心。

On July 12, the award on the SouthChina Sea arbitration came out. This political anti-China farce in the disguiseof law, manipulated by the US, and acted by the former Philippine Government,eventually comes to an awful end. This award caused a storm of questions andnegative comments in the international community. A lot of professionals areshocked, not to speak of how ridiculous it is to define Taiping Island as a “reef”.As Professor Tom Zwart from the Netherlands said, “In the region (East Asia)the award will be widely regarded as the fruit of a poisonous tree, and it willfail, therefore, to garner the necessary support.” Abraham Sofaer, former legaladvisor to the US State Department, also pointed out that the arbitration hadbrought a lot of difficulties and anxiety, which were not good for any parties.

The US attempted to smear and “isolate”China with the arbitration, but unexpectedly received little response. China’sposition of non-acceptance of and non-participation in the arbitration has wonmore and more support. Even the Philippine people realized that the arbitrationis a total conspiracy of the US for its own agenda. This proves again the oldsaying, “a just cause enjoys abundant support while an unjust cause findslittle support.”

何为道?公理、潮流、法则也。

Dao, a combined concept offairness, justice, rule, trend and direction derived from ancient Chinesephilosophy, inhabits people’s hearts.

当今世界之道，在于和平、发展、合作、共赢。国际争端解决之道，在于公正合法、和平解决。在和平解决的大原则下，国际法赋予各国自主选择争端解决方式方法的权利。各国应本着合作精神，在国家同意的基础上，善意使用，不得滥用。中国坚定不移奉行独立自主和平外交政策，倡导人类命运共同体意识，反对冷战思维和零和博弈，反对以强凌弱，不称霸、不搞扩张，不觊觎他国权益，不嫉妒他国发展，不信邪也不怕邪，不惹事也不怕事。在领土问题和海洋划界争议上，中国主张由直接当事国通过双边友好协商谈判解决，从不接受任何第三方争端解决方式，不接受任何强加于中国的争端解决方案。

The Dao of the present world lies in peace, development and win-wincooperation, and the Dao of solvinginternational disputes lies in fair, lawful and peaceful solution. On thepremise of peaceful settlement, international law provides the right of everystate to choose the means of dispute settlement, which should be based onconsent, used in good faith and in the spirit of cooperation. China persistsunswervingly in pursuing an independent foreign policy of peace, advocates theawareness about human common destiny, opposes to Cold War mindset and zero-sumgames, and opposes to bullying of the weak by the strong. China will never seekhegemony or engage in expansion. With regard to territorial issues and maritimedelimitation disputes, China adheres to settlement through amicable consultationand negotiation by directly concerned countries, and does not accept any meansof third party dispute settlement or any solution imposed on it.

美国之失道，在于贪图霸权和危险的“帝国思维”。二次大战后，美国的全球目标一直是谋求“领导世界”。2009年始，奥巴马政府推出“亚太再平衡”战略，南海问题迅速成为美国维护地区霸权地位，对中国进行战略牵制的重要抓手。在菲律宾单方面提起和推进南海仲裁案的前前后后，美国的“深度参与”几乎无处不在。美国表面上佯称“中立不介入”，骨子里却唯恐南海不乱，明里暗地为阿基诺三世政府出谋划策，出钱出力，并在国际上“拉帮结伙”，大肆炒作，为仲裁案造势张目。美国总是以“世界法官”自居，但历史和现实一再表明，美国对待国际法，总是对人不对己，合则用，不合则弃。美国口口声声维护“海洋法治”，却为一己私利迄未批准加入《联合国海洋法公约》(以下简称《公约》);口口声声要求中国接受仲裁裁决，却忘了自己在与尼加拉瓜的国际法院诉讼中，不仅中途撤出庭审，拒绝执行判决，而且撤回了接受国际法院强制管辖的声明;口口声声反对南海军事化，自己却频繁地派遣军机、军舰到本地区挑衅滋事，甚至大费周章地将航母战斗群开进南海，炫耀武力。越多越多国家已经看清，谁是当今世界zui大的“麻烦制造者”。美国的插手往往会让事情变得更糟。今天的阿富汗、伊拉克、利比亚，无一例外地落入美国的干预陷阱，留下了一个又一个贻害地区的烂摊子。难怪菲律宾新任总统杜特尔特上任伊始即坦言，“伊拉克及其他西亚北非国家流血冲突的祸根就是美国的干涉政策。”就在仲裁裁决出笼前夕，美国最亲盟友英国公布伊拉克战争独立调查委员会报告，指称美英发动伊战的决策是基于“有瑕疵”的情报和评估。如此失道，岂能指望“一呼百应”。

The violation of Dao by the US lies in its “imperialistmindset” and pursuit of hegemony. After World War II, the US global strategyhas always been seeking the “leadership of the world”. In 2009, the Obamaadministration launched the Asia PacificRebalance Strategy, and took the South China Sea issue as the pivot tomaintain its regional hegemony and achieve strategic containment of China. Itis obvious that during the whole process of the arbitration unilaterallyinitiated and pushed by the Aquino III administration, the US has deeplyinvolved in every step. Although alleging “neutrality and non-involvement”, theUS manipulated behind the scene, and tried to forge a “coalition” to hype upthe issue, resulting in rise of tension in the South China Sea.

The US always regards itself as “judgeof the world”, but history and reality have repeatedly shown that the US hasalways adopted double-standards. In the eyes of the US, international law isonly applicable to other countries rather than itself. It only applies the lawwhen it is consistent with its own interest and resolutely abandons itotherwise. For instance, while advocating “the rule of law on the sea”, it hasnot acceded to the United NationsConvention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). While insisting that China mustaccept the arbitration award, it chooses to forget the Nicaragua case in whichit not only withdrew from the proceedings, refused to implement the ruling, butalso revoked the declaration of accepting the compulsory jurisdiction by theInternational Court of Justice. While opposing militarization in the SouthChina Sea, it has been provocatively dispatching military aircraft and warshipsinto the area, and even deploying aircraft carrier fleets to this region.

More and more countries have foundout who is the biggest “trouble-maker” in the world. It is the US interventionthat makes the world worse. Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya have all fallen intoits trap and are left with mess in the region. As the new Philippine PresidentRodrigo Duterte frankly said, the root of the bloodshed in Iraq and otherMiddle Eastern countries lies in the intervention of the US. Furthermore, justprior to the arbitration award, the UK Iraq Inquiry published its report,stating that the decision of the US and UK to start the Iraq War was based on “flawed”intelligence. Under such circumstance, who will to follow such a “leader of theworld”?

菲律宾前任政府之失道，在于背信弃义、仗势生非。菲中本是友好邻邦，然而近年来却因南海问题特别是仲裁案饱受困扰。在某些域外势力的策划操纵下，阿基诺三世政府甘愿充当美国“亚太再平衡”战略的马前卒，在南海问题上倒行逆施、背信弃义，公然走上了与中国对抗的歧途。先是蓄意挑起“黄岩岛事件”，继而变本加厉，单方面提起所谓强制仲裁并强行推进，还图谋绑架东盟，疯狂炒作，妄图抹黑中国，“以小欺大”，并指望通过“一纸裁决”获取非法利益。其目的是恶意的,行为是违法的。一是在明知领土问题不属于《公约》调整范围，海洋划界争议已被中国有关声明排除的情况下，刻意将有关争议包装成单纯的《公约》解释或适用问题。二是侵犯了中国作为《公约》缔约国享有的自主选择争端解决程序和方式的权利。中国早在2006年即根据《公约》第298条发表声明，将涉及海洋划界、历史性海湾或所有权、军事和执法活动等方面的争端排除出《公约》强制争端解决程序。做出同样声明的还有30多个国家。三是违反中菲两国达成并多年来一再确认的通过谈判解决南海有关争议的双边协议。四是违反与中国及其他东盟国家在《宣言》中共同作出的由直接有关当事国通过谈判解决有关争议的承诺。阿基诺三世政府自以为聪明，但岂能蒙蔽得了世人的眼睛。柬埔寨首相洪森指出，南海仲裁案是“国际政治框架内最糟糕的政治勾结”。这些域外国家纠集力量反对中国，“将给东盟和地区和平带来负面影响”。菲律宾《旗帜报》专栏作家罗德·卡普南指出，阿基诺三世执政六年，积极追随美国“重返亚太”政策，肆意误导菲民众，煽动对邻国的敌意。在南海问题上，“菲律宾人是在替美国火中取栗”。南海局势出现紧张，对于地区乃至全球安全都是巨大隐患。菲方应迷途知返，与中方相向而行，及时回到和平谈判的正确轨道上来。

The violation of Dao by the former government of thePhilippines lies in breaching previous commitment and causing a lot of troublein the shelter of a super power. The Philippines and China had been friendlyneighbors in a long history. However, in recent years, the bilateral ties weredamaged by the Philippine policy of confrontation, especially the unilateralarbitration claim. The government of Aquino III willingly acted as the pawn ofthe US Rebalance Strategy and tookthe road to confront China. It deliberately provoked the Huangyan Island(Scarborough Shoal) incident, unilaterally initiated and pushed thearbitration, and tried to hijack other ASEAN countries to smear China andbenefit from the unlawful arbitration award. Its intention is vicious, and itsaction illegal.

First, although fully aware thatterritorial issues are not subject to UNCLOSand maritime delimitation disputes have been excluded from the UNCLOS compulsory dispute settlementprocedures by China, the Philippines deliberately packaged the disputes as mereissues concerning the interpretation or application of UNCLOS.

Second, the arbitration infringesupon China’s right to choose the procedures and means for dispute settlement.In 2006, pursuant to Article 298 of UNCLOS, China declared to exclude fromthe compulsory procedures disputes concerning maritime delimitation, historicbays or titles, military and law enforcement activities. There are over 30countries that have made similar declaration.

Third, the unilateral arbitrationbroke the bilateral agreements reached between China and the Philippines overthe years to resolve relevant disputes in the South China Sea throughnegotiation.

Fourth, the arbitration violatedthe commitment jointly made by China and ASEAN countries, including thePhilippines, in the Declaration on theConduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) to resolve the relevantdisputes through negotiations by states directly concerned.

The Aquino III administrationthought itself clever, but how can it deceive the whole world? As CambodianPrime Minister Hun Sen said, the arbitration is “the worst political collusionin the framework of international politics”, and “would bring negative impactsto ASEAN and peace in the region”. Rod P. Kapunan, Philippine columnist of the Standard, pointed out that “after sixyears of hypocrisy and deceit, this shameless stooge (here refers to AquinoIII) has brought us right into the doorstep of possible armed conflict withChina all because it has chosen to pursue the US-designed policy of incitinghostility with our neighbor.” Regarding the South China Sea situation, he wrotethat “the lives of the Filipinos would be sacrificed to enforce a decision thatif examined closely is a US proxy war which the Philippines would serve ascannon fodder in securing its interest in this part of the globe.”

The escalation in the South ChinaSea will bring enormous risks to the regional even global security. ThePhilippines should recognize its mistakes and return to bilateral negotiationwith China.

仲裁庭之失道，在于政治操纵、违法不公。南海仲裁案从头到尾就是一场披着法律外衣的政治闹剧。仲裁庭的成立缺乏合法性，组成缺乏公正性，对案件的审理缺乏管辖权，明显扩权、越权、滥权，所谓的“裁决”更是荒诞离奇、谬误百出。有专家指出，由提起仲裁的菲律宾一方支付仲裁庭的全部费用，包括仲裁员的巨额酬劳，这本身就会引发众多担心和问题。难怪社会上不乏菲律宾花大钱雇“裁判”为其张目的质疑。

The violation of Dao by the arbitral tribunal lies inpolitical manipulation, unfairness and unlawfulness. The arbitration iscompletely a political farce under legal pretext. The establishment of thistribunal is lack of legitimacy; the arbitrators it chose are lack of fairness;the tribunal is lack of jurisdiction, which evidently expanded, exceeded andabused its power. The so-called “award” is even ridiculous. Experts pointed outthat, all the fees of the tribunal, including the huge reimbursement to thearbitrators, are borne by the Philippines. This has raised a lot of concernsand problems. People are asking if the Philippines “hired the judges”.

仲裁庭之失道首先在于仲裁庭组成是纯粹政治操作的结果。日本在其中扮演了“操盘手”的角色。仲裁的灵魂是自愿和公正。为此，仲裁庭的组建应基于当事双方的合议。但在美日和国际海洋法法庭时任日籍庭长柳井的操弄下，仲裁庭组成可谓“奇葩”。5名仲裁员中4名来自欧洲，1位长期居住在欧洲，对亚洲文化、南海问题经纬缺乏最基础的了解。一个鲜人为知的内幕更能揭示仲裁庭组成的“暗箱操作”。2013年4月组建仲裁庭时，柳井最初任命斯里兰卡籍资深外交官平托出任庭长。平托因夫人系菲律宾籍而特地征询争端双方的意见，并得到菲方的首肯。但稍后当平托在履职时流露出仲裁庭对本案无管辖权的裁决倾向后，引起美日菲的严重担忧，菲律宾遂貌似公正地要求柳井撤换平托。5月，平托被迫辞职。

The composition of the tribunal isa result of political manipulation. Japan and Yanai Shunji, then president ofthe International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, acted as the broker. Thecomposition of the tribunal is quite weird: four of the five arbitrators arefrom Europe, the fifth one is a permanent resident in Europe, and all of themare lack of basic understanding of Asian culture and the South China Sea issue.

One fact could better show the playunder the table. When the tribunal was established in April 2013, the firstpresident appointed by Mr. Yanai was Mr. Chris Pinto, a senior Sri Lankandiplomat. Since Pinto’s wife is Philippine, he especially asked advice fromboth parties to the dispute and was recognized by the Philippines. However,when Mr. Pinto later hinted that the tribunal might not have jurisdiction overthe case, it raised deep concern of the US, Japan and the Philippines. Thelatter asked Yanai to find somebody to replace Mr. Pinto for a so-called “justcause”. In May 2013, Mr. Pinto was forced to resign.

仲裁庭之失道更体现在仲裁庭为一己私利而滥权。国际法专家普遍认为，仲裁庭对领土主权和海洋划界问题没有管辖权。正如前美国国务院法律顾问索费尔指出的那样，“南海仲裁案事关主权争端，这个案件从一开始就不应该立案，更何况审理和裁决。”根据《公约》第298条规定，仲裁庭无权调解或仲裁领土主权和海洋划界纠纷，特别是在争端一方以书面声明的形式拒绝接受此类强制程序之后。索费尔也认为，“仲裁庭无视中方的合法要求，片面接受菲律宾的强制仲裁要求，这不是遵守国际法，而是践踏国际法。”然而，仲裁庭无视菲律宾提起仲裁事项的实质是领土主权和海洋划界问题，错误解读中菲对争端解决方式的共同选择，错误解读《宣言》中有关承诺的法律效力，恶意规避中国根据《公约》第298条作出的排除性声明，有选择性地把有关岛礁从南海诸岛的宏观地理背景中剥离出来并主观想象地解释和适用《公约》。其行为和裁决严重背离国际仲裁一般实践，完全背离《公约》促进和平解决争端的目的及宗旨，严重损害《公约》的完整性和权wei性，严重侵犯中国作为主权国家和《公约》缔约国的合法权利，是显失公允和不合法的，在国际法上开创了一个恶劣先例。

The tribunal abused the power forits own interest. Many experts of international law believe that the tribunalhas no jurisdiction over territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation.Just as Mr. Sofaer said, this arbitration is related to sovereignty disputes.It shouldn’t have been started, especially when a state party has declared inwriting that it does not accept compulsory procedures over such disputes asmaritime delimitation according to Article298 of UNCLOS. The tribunal’sruling “will broadly undermine the potential utility of internationaladjudication.”

The tribunal disregards the factthat the essence of the subject-matter of the arbitration is the issue ofterritorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation. It erroneously interpretsthe common choice of means of dispute settlement already made jointly by Chinaand the Philippines, erroneously construes the legal effect of the relevantcommitment in the DOC, deliberatelycircumvents the optional exceptions declaration made by China, selectivelytakes relevant islands and reefs out of the macro-geographical framework of theSouth China Sea Islands, and subjectively and speculatively interprets andapplies UNCLOS. The conduct of thetribunal and its award seriously contravene the general practice ofinternational arbitration, completely deviate from the object and purpose of UNCLOS to promote peaceful settlement ofdisputes, substantially impair the integrity and authority of UNCLOS, gravely infringe upon China’slegitimate rights as a sovereign state and state party to UNCLOS, and are unjust and unlawful. It has set an extremelydangerous precedent in the history of international law.

仲裁庭之失道还在于仲裁员广受诟病的职业操守。在这场自导自演的闹剧中，仲裁员和专家证人的“变脸”表演实在让人咂舌。他们对本案有关问题的意见与他们以专家身份曾经发表过的观点和意见自相矛盾，庭内庭外，判若两人。就以仲裁员阿尔弗雷德·松斯为例。这位荷兰知名海洋法教授公开发表的学术意见认为，在两国存在重叠海域主张的情况下，相关岛礁的法律地位和海洋权利问题不能脱离海洋划界争端而独立出现，它们构成海洋划界不可分割的组成部分。然而，在南海仲裁案关于管辖权的裁决中，包括松斯在内的5名仲裁员不顾中菲南海争端的根源和实质是岛礁主权及海洋划界之争的基本事实，强行以全体一致的方式裁定仲裁庭对菲律宾关于黄岩岛、美济礁等南沙争议岛礁的法律地位问题的诉求享有管辖权。这显然与松斯本人一贯的学术观点相悖。再以专家证人克里夫·斯库菲尔德为例。其证词与其学术观点截然不同。就同一个问题，斯库菲尔德用同样的资料、理由进行论证，但在仲裁庭内外的结论却完全相反。难道有偿服务就可以放弃职业操守吗?

The professional ethics of thearbitrators are widely criticized. All the Western arbitrators and expertwitnesses played a shameful role as though they were chameleons. They reversedtheir previous position as stated in published papers and even backtracked fromtheir long-held views to make the case for the Philippines. Arbitrator AlfredSoons had published his opinion that the status of islands was closelyassociated with demarcation and sovereignty issues. However, when the tribunalruled on jurisdiction and admissibility, he said that the tribunal has theright to decide on the Philippines’ submissions concerning legal status andmaritime entitlement of certain islands including Huangyan Island (ScarboroughShoal) and Meiji Reef (Mischief Reef), which was entirely contradictory to hisprevious viewpoint. Expert witness Clive Schofield also changed his views atthe proceedings. On the same subject, using the same materials, he drew totallydifferent conclusions in and out of the tribunal. People must be wondering: howcould they discard professional ethics to serve the interests of those who paythem?

事实胜于雄辩。菲律宾阿基诺三世政府单方面提起仲裁违背国际法，仲裁庭对此案没有管辖权，仲裁庭自行扩权、越权、滥权做出的裁决违法无效，中国不接受、不参与仲裁，不承认、不执行仲裁裁决，理所当然，合理合法。

Facts speak louder than words. Theunilateral arbitration initiated by Aquino III administration violatesinternational law. The tribunal has no jurisdiction over this case. The awardof the tribunal is null and void. China’s position is justified and lawful.

世界潮流浩浩荡荡，顺之者昌，逆之者亡。结盟、对抗的冷战思维早已过时，和平、合作与发展是当今世界不可阻挡的潮流。公道自在人心，菲律宾南海仲裁闹剧可以休矣。解决国与国之间的纠纷，友好协商才是正道。中国致力于与东盟国家在全面有效落实《南海各方行为宣言》框架下，加快推进“南海行为准则”磋商进程，妥善管控好有关争议，探讨开展海上合作，努力让南海成为和平之海、友谊之海、合作之海。

以上是翻译资格一级口译练习内容，希望可以为各位考生带来帮助。如果你想要了解更多有关考试的相关内容，请继续锁定坦途网翻译资格考试频道，精彩内容正在更新，期待您的发现！