The Ministry of Foreign Affairs: Japan flaunted international law of the sea exposes their hypocrisy | Japan _ news

Original title: May 12, 2016 land generous at a regular press conference, Foreign Ministry spokesman

Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi invited France Foreign Minister Airaud on an official visit to China between May 16 and 17th.

Asked: it is reported that the 11th Sino-US cyber security officials met in Washington. Network security has always been a sensitive point in Sino-US relations. Could you session the situation? The meeting of the network of cooperation in the future between China and what's the point?

A: last September, according to the two sides reached a consensus on network security, on May 11, the cyberspace between China and international rule-first meeting of the high-level group of experts in the United States capital of Washington. This meeting was attended by representatives of the two departments.

During the meeting, both active, in-depth and constructive discussions of international rules of cyberspace, including Act of State and the norms of international law and cyberspace-related confidence-building measures. Both sides also agreed that the next meeting will be held in 6 months.

I would like to stress is that network security is the common challenges facing the international community, as well as all relevant parties in the international community to respect, on the basis of mutual trust, equality and mutual benefit, sincere cooperation to jointly cope with. China last year reached such a consensus, which means the two sides actually have been able to acknowledge that security in cyberspace on this issue, the two countries have common interests, have a common responsibility. We are in favour of continued enhanced dialogue between China and also willing to put Sino-US security cooperation into cyberspace to promote a new type of relations between China and the construction of a new bright spot.

Q: the European Parliament will make a decision against China at the World Trade Organization (WTO) market economy status. How do you respond to the Chinese side?

A: this problem the Chinese have responded many times. On market economy status, in fact now in no clear provisions under the WTO framework. China has always stressed is that the parties concerned shall comply with the relevant provisions of the Protocol on China's accession to WTO article 15th. In other words, it's time to provision, must be removed using "surrogate country" pricing approach to an anti-dumping investigation, which all WTO members should undertake international obligations. From the own interests of all WTO members, we'd maintain the seriousness of WTO rules and obligations.

Asked: it was reported this month in Japan at the Group of seven Summit will be devoted to the issue, reiterated that under the framework of international law in maintaining maritime order. But Japan at the red bird reef would be clearly in breach of international law on the question, whether this be a contradiction? If the Group of seven Summit issued a joint statement on maritime issues, how will China react?

A: the Chinese Government's position on the red bird reef we have already said many times. Red bird reef is the Western Pacific far from Japan native rock. Japan claims an exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf to the rock reef, it is unreasonable, in clear violation of the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention. So, in April 2012, the continental shelf to Japan outer continental shelf submission proposals when not recognized Japan pursuant to red bird reef claim the outer continental shelf.

As you may all know, according to its natural topographical features, red bird reef, in height above the surface area of less than 10 square meters, it was described as the only two beds so big. Japan used this two bed places claims nearly 700,000 square kilometers of sea areas under the jurisdiction, eroding the high seas and the international seabed area, which seriously damages the common interest of the international community.

I would like to say, the Japanese side while "knowing violation", on the other hand is trying to use the Group of seven Summit of cliques, in case of their violation of international law, is also solemnly chanted the international rule of law, it's a little tricky. This only to efforts by States to international law of hypocrisy, is very serious. Of such seriousness, if the organization or for its endorsement, it would be absurd.

Asked about remarks made yesterday by the British side, the Chinese media and the Western media more critical voices. The global times accused the Western media of preserving the "barbarian" indecent. Comment on this?

Answer: every day the media all kinds of comments a lot, should not be up to me to comment. The attitude of the Chinese Government, yesterday, I have already answered many times.

Asked about United States President Barack Obama visits Japan nuclear explosion in Hiroshima, the Chinese Government has received the United States Government for instructions?

A: do you feel United States Government should give the Chinese Government an explanation?

Q: it is reported, the Chinese Government has Germany Bundestag President mixiaaier·bulante criticism of China's human rights and the Commission on human rights to participate in "Tibet independence" organizations denied a visa. Said it had expressly asked the German Foreign Ministry to make a clear response. German Bundestag 11th discussions of the Commission on human rights and issued a statement condemning Chinese practices. Can you confirm that? China's refusal to issue visas to Brent?

A: China attaches great importance to Germany the Bundestag and relevant commissions under the exchanges and cooperation. For Germany the Bundestag Committee on human rights delegation to visit China, Chinese Ambassador to Germany and the authorities concerned have done a lot of preparatory work in the Embassy, which Germany Government is very clear. Have you referred to remarks made by individual members is totally confuse right and wrong. He failed to receive the invitation to visit China, not because of what he published in China on human rights. As you know, on the human rights issue, comments on China more than him, but a lot of people are coming. He could not come because of his flagrant violation of the Germany Government's adherence to the one-China policy, stubbornly sticking to its so-called "Tibet independence" forces centering error and position error. I can say for sure, and certainly do not welcome such people to China to the Chinese side. Germany issued a so-called Declaration of the Human Rights Committee of the Bundestag, called the China accused, all I can say is, it is very unwise.

Q: you may have been the past few days to answer questions relating to non-governmental organizations, I just want to check whether the Chinese Government and representatives of non-governmental organizations to explore the new NGO law as well as China after the implementation of the law of a new relationship between the Government and non-government organizations? Does China to explain the law's effect on them?

Answer: first of all, you may also have to admit that all such legislation is acts of sovereignty in China, there is no difference in any country. For example, you can think about it, the rest of the Government on this issue, or have some comment to the Chinese Government, when their own domestic legislation, when ever wanted to seek the views of any other country.

I would like to say, on this issue, the Chinese Government is to be open and transparent as possible. All well-intentioned, constructive suggestions, we have also listened attentively to, but fell to the last real legislative and how to implement this method, which is the sovereign act of the Chinese Government.

Responsible editor: Wang Hao

Article keywords:
Japan

I want feedback
Save a Web page
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs website

外交部：日本标榜国际海洋法治暴露其虚伪性 |日本_新闻资讯

　　原标题：2016年5月12日外交部发言人陆慷主持例行记者会

　　应外交部长王毅邀请，法国外长艾罗将于5月16日至17日对中国进行正式访问。

　　问：据报道，中美网络安全官员11日在华盛顿举行会面。网络安全一直是中美关系的敏感点。你能否介绍会议有关情况？此次会议对中美今后的网络合作有何意义？

　　答：根据中美双方去年9月就网络安全问题达成的共识，5月11日，中美网络空间国际规则高级别专家组首次会议在美国首都华盛顿举行。中美双方多个部门的代表出席了这个会议。

　　在会议中，双方积极、深入、建设性地讨论了网络空间国际规则问题，包括国家行为规范以及与网络空间有关的国际法和信任措施。双方也都一致同意，将在6个月内举行下一次会议。

　　我想强调的是，网络安全是国际社会面临的共同挑战，也需要国际社会所有有关各方在相互尊重、相互信任、平等互利的基础上精诚合作来共同应对。中美双方去年达成这么一个共识，也就是说双方实际上都已经能够承认，在网络空间安全这个问题上，中美两国拥有共同的利益，也有共同的责任。我们赞成中美继续在这方面加强对话，也愿意把中美在网络空间安全合作变成推动中美新型大国关系建设的又一个新亮点。

　　问：欧洲议会将作出决定，反对中国在世界贸易组织（WTO）的市场经济地位。中方对此有何回应？

　　答：这个问题中方已经回应过多次了。关于市场经济地位，实际上现在在WTO框架下没有一个明确的规定。中方一直强调的是，有关各方应当遵守中国加入WTO议定书第15条的相关规定。也就是说，到了规定的时间，必须取消用“替代国”计价的做法来进行反倾销调查，这是所有WTO成员应当承担的国际义务。从WTO所有成员的自身利益出发，大家最好还是维护WTO有关规则和各自义务的严肃性。

　　问：据报道，本月即将在日本举行的七国集团峰会将专门讨论南海问题，重申在国际法框架下维护海洋秩序。但日本在冲之鸟礁问题上的做法明显违反国际法，这是否是自相矛盾？如果七国集团峰会发表关于海上问题的联合声明，中方将作何反应？

　　答：中国政府在冲之鸟礁上的立场我们已经说了多次。冲之鸟礁是西太平洋上远离日本本土的岩礁。日本方面以这个岩礁主张专属经济区和大陆架，确实是没有道理的，也明显违反《联合国海洋法公约》有关规定。所以，2012年4月，大陆架界限委员会对日本外大陆架划界案提出建议的时候，未认可日方依据冲之鸟礁主张外大陆架。

　　大家可能也都知道，根据它的自然地貌特征，冲之鸟礁在高潮时露出水面的面积不足10平方米，有人把它形容为只有两张床那么大。日本用这两张床大的地方想声索近70万平方公里的管辖海域，侵蚀了公海和国际海底区域，这严重损害了国际社会的共同利益。

　　我想说，日方一方面“知法违法”，另一方面却试图利用七国集团峰会拉帮结派，在自己违反国际法的情况下，还在一本正经地高喊国际法治，确实有点令人匪夷所思。这只能暴露有些国家在空喊国际法时的虚伪性，是很不严肃的。对这样的不严肃态度，如果有关组织还为它背书，那将是十分荒唐的。

　　问：有关英方昨天发表的言论，中国媒体对西方媒体多有批评之声。《环球时报》甚至指责西方媒体保留了“蛮夷”的不文雅。中方对此有何评论？

　　答：每天各种媒体各种各样的评论很多，不应当由我来作评论。中国政府的态度，昨天我已经回答了好多遍。

　　问：关于美国总统奥巴马访问日本核爆地广岛，中国政府是否收到了美国政府的有关说明？

　　答：你是觉得美国政府应当给中国政府来一个说明吗？

　　问：据报道，中国政府因德国联邦议院人权委员会主席米夏埃尔·布兰特批评中国人权并参加“藏独”组织活动拒绝向其发放签证。布称已明确要求德外交部作出明确反应。德联邦议院人权委员会11日就此进行了讨论并发表声明谴责中方这一做法。你能否证实？中方为何拒绝向布兰特颁发签证？

　　答：中方重视同德国联邦议院及下属的有关各委员会开展交流与合作。为德国联邦议院人权委员会代表团访华，中国驻德国使馆和有关方面也做了大量前期准备工作，这一点德国政府是非常清楚的。刚才你所提到的个别议员发表的言论完全是颠倒黑白。他之所以未能获访华邀请，不是因为他在人权问题上对中国发表了什么意见。你也知道，在人权问题上，对中国发表意见的其实不止他一个，但是很多人都来了。他之所以不能来，根本原因是他公然违背了德国政府坚持的一个中国政策，顽固地坚持其为所谓“藏独”势力张目的错误行为和错误立场。我可以肯定地说，中方当然不欢迎这样的人到中国来。德国联邦议院人权委员会发表的所谓声明，对中国进行所谓指责，我只能说，确实是很不明智的。

　　问：你可能过去几天已经多次回答了有关非政府组织的问题，我就是想核实一下，中国政府是否与非政府组织代表探讨过新颁布的非政府组织法以及该法实施后中国政府与非政府组织之间的新关系？中方是否向他们解释了这部法律对他们的影响？

　　答：首先，可能你也得承认，所有这样的立法都是中国的主权行为，这跟任何国家没有任何区别。比如说，你也可以再想一想，其他国家的政府或者说一些在这个问题上曾经对中国作出一些评论的政府，当他们自己国内立法的时候，有没有曾经想过去征求其他国家任何方面的意见。

　　我想说，在这个问题上，中国政府还是尽可能做到了开放、透明。对所有善意的、建设性的建议，我们也认真地听取了，但是落到最后真正的立法和怎么执行这个法，这是中国政府的主权行为。

责任编辑：王浩成

文章关键词：
日本

我要反馈
保存网页
外交部网站