当前位置: Language Tips> 翻译经验

《钓鱼岛是中国的固有领土》白皮书(英汉对照)

中国日报网 2012-09-26 10:06

分享到

 

 

四、日本主张钓鱼岛主权毫无依据

IV.Japan's Claim of Sovereignty over Diaoyu Dao Is Totally Unfounded

1972年3月8日,日本外务省发表《关于尖阁列岛所有权问题的基本见解》,阐述日本政府对于钓鱼岛主权归属问题的主张:一是钓鱼岛为“无主地”,不包含在《马关条约》规定的由清政府割让给日本的澎湖列岛和台湾及其附属岛屿的范围之内。二是钓鱼岛不包含在“旧金山和约”第二条规定的日本所放弃的领土之内,而是包含在该条约第三条规定的作为西南诸岛的一部分被置于美国施政之下,并根据“归还冲绳协定”将施政权“归还”日本的区域内。三是中国没有将钓鱼岛视为台湾的一部分,对“旧金山和约”第三条规定将钓鱼岛置于美国施政区域内从未提出过任何异议。

On March 8, 1972, Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued the Basic View on the Sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands in an attempt to explain the Japanese government's claims of sovereignty over Diaoyu Dao. First, Japan claims that Diaoyu Dao was "terra nullius" and not part of Pescadores, Formosa [Taiwan] or their affiliated islands which were ceded to Japan by the Qing government in accordance with the Treaty of Shimonoseki. Second, Japan claims that Diaoyu Dao was not included in the territory which Japan renounced under Article 2 of the Treaty of San Francisco, but was placed under the administration of the United States as part of the Nansei Islands in accordance with Article 3 of the said treaty, and was included in the area for which the administrative rights were reverted to Japan in accordance with the Okinawa Reversion Agreement. Third, Japan claims that China didn't regard Diaoyu Dao as part of Taiwan and had never challenged the inclusion of the islands in the area over which the United States exercised administrative rights in accordance with Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco.

日本的上述主张严重违背事实,是完全站不住脚的。

Such claims by Japan fly in the face of facts and are totally unfounded.

钓鱼岛属于中国,根本不是“无主地”。在日本人“发现”钓鱼岛之前,中国已经对钓鱼岛实施了长达数百年有效管辖,是钓鱼岛无可争辩的主人。如前所述,日本大量官方文件证明,日本完全清楚钓鱼岛早已归属中国,绝非国际法上的无主地。日本所谓依据“先占”原则将钓鱼岛作为“无主地”“编入”其版图,是侵占中国领土的非法行为,不具有国际法效力。

Diaoyu Dao belongs to China. It is by no means "terra nullius". China is the indisputable owner of Diaoyu Dao as it had exercised valid jurisdiction over the island for several hundred years long before the Japanese people "discovered" it. As stated above, voluminous Japanese official documents prove that Japan was fully aware that according to international law, Diaoyu Dao has long been part of China and was not "terra nullius". Japan's act to include Diaoyu Dao as "terra nullius" into its territory based on the "occupation" principle is in fact an illegal act of occupying Chinese territory and has no legal effect according to international law.

无论从地理上还是从中国历史管辖实践看,钓鱼岛一直是中国台湾岛的附属岛屿。日本通过不平等的《马关条约》迫使清朝割让包括钓鱼岛在内的“台湾全岛及所有附属各岛屿”。《开罗宣言》、《波茨坦公告》等国际法律文件规定,日本必须无条件归还其窃取的中国领土。上述文件还对日本领土范围作了明确界定,其中根本不包括钓鱼岛。日本试图侵占钓鱼岛,实质是对《开罗宣言》和《波茨坦公告》等法律文件所确立的战后国际秩序的挑战,严重违背了日本应承担的国际法义务。

Diaoyu Dao has always been affiliated to China's Taiwan Island both in geographical terms and in accordance with China's historical jurisdiction practice. Through the unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki, Japan forced the Qing court to cede to it "the island of Taiwan, together with all islands appertaining or belonging to it", including Diaoyu Dao. International legal documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation provide that Japan must unconditionally return the territories it has stolen from China. These documents also clearly define Japan's territory, which by no means includes Diaoyu Dao. Japan's attempted occupation of Diaoyu Dao, in essence, constitutes a challenge to the post-war international order established by such legal documents as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation and seriously violates the obligations Japan should undertake according to international law.

美国等国家与日本签订的片面媾和条约“旧金山和约”所规定的托管范围不涵盖钓鱼岛。美国擅自扩大托管范围,非法将中国领土钓鱼岛纳入其中,后将钓鱼岛“施政权”“归还”日本,都没有任何法律依据,在国际法上没有任何效力。对于美日上述非法行径,中国政府和人民历来是明确反对的。

Diaoyu Dao was not placed under the trusteeship established by the Treaty of San Francisco, which was signed between the United States and other countries with Japan and is partial in nature. The United States arbitrarily expanded the scope of trusteeship to include Diaoyu Dao, which is China's territory, and later "returned" the "power of administration" over Diaoyu Dao to Japan. This has no legal basis and is totally invalid according to international law. The government and people of China have always explicitly opposed such illegal acts of the United States and Japan.

 

分享到

中国日报网英语点津版权说明:凡注明来源为“中国日报网英语点津:XXX(署名)”的原创作品,除与中国日报网签署英语点津内容授权协议的网站外,其他任何网站或单位未经允许不得非法盗链、转载和使用,违者必究。如需使用,请与010-84883561联系;凡本网注明“来源:XXX(非英语点津)”的作品,均转载自其它媒体,目的在于传播更多信息,其他媒体如需转载,请与稿件来源方联系,如产生任何问题与本网无关;本网所发布的歌曲、电影片段,版权归原作者所有,仅供学习与研究,如果侵权,请提供版权证明,以便尽快删除。

中国日报网双语新闻

扫描左侧二维码

添加Chinadaily_Mobile
你想看的我们这儿都有!

中国日报双语手机报

点击左侧图标查看订阅方式

中国首份双语手机报
学英语看资讯一个都不能少!

关注和订阅

本文相关阅读
人气排行
热搜词
 
 
精华栏目
 

阅读

词汇

视听

翻译

口语

合作

 

关于我们 | 联系方式 | 招聘信息

Copyright by chinadaily.com.cn. All rights reserved. None of this material may be used for any commercial or public use. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. 版权声明:本网站所刊登的中国日报网英语点津内容,版权属中国日报网所有,未经协议授权,禁止下载使用。 欢迎愿意与本网站合作的单位或个人与我们联系。

电话:8610-84883645

传真:8610-84883500

Email: languagetips@chinadaily.com.cn