在购买“尖阁列岛”前美敦促日本与中国协商 [日本媒体]

-------------译者：yearning-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------



WASHINGTON —The United States urged Japan to consult with China prior to Tokyo’s 2012 purchase of the disputed Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea from a private owner, a declassified email forwarded to then U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton showed Saturday.

华盛顿报道：星期六一份发送给美国国务卿希拉里的解密邮件显示，2012年，美国敦促日本在执行从一个私人所有者的手中购买下东中国海的尖阁列岛的行动前应先与中国协商。

In the email dated Sept 3, 2012, about a week before Japan’s purchase of the Senkakus claimed by China and Taiwan, then U.S. Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell said he had urged Japan’s then Vice Foreign Minister Kenichiro Sasae and the Japanese government to “consult and advise Beijing on their plans.”

在这份2012年9月3日，也就是日本买下中国和台湾同时声索主权的尖阁列岛前一周的邮件中，美国负责亚太事务的助理国务卿科特·坎贝尔说他已经敦促日本副外相佐佐江贤一郎以及日本政府“就他们的计划征求北京的意见”。

Campbell said he had requested Japan’s prior consultation with China when he met with Sasae on Aug 7, 2012, in Tokyo. At that time, the Japanese government “has just concluded a round of deliberations and apparently their PRC (People’s Republic of China) counterparts were irate,” according to the email.

坎贝尔说他在2012年8月7日于东京和佐佐江贤一郎会面时要求日本应先和中国协商。根据邮件内容显示，当时日本政府“结束了一系列的讨论之后，中方明显非常震怒”。


-------------译者：起风了-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

skotmanforyouJAN. 31, 2016 - 04:14PM JST
Do the US of A consult with any country prior to what they believe is just or necessary?

在美国认为自己所做的事情是正义和必要时，它会事先同任何其他国家协商吗？

sfjp330JAN. 31, 2016 - 04:29PM JST
The Japanese statement that Daioyu/Senkaku was "terra nullius" is significant because it serves as an acknowledgement that Japan had no meaningful claim to Diaoyu/Senkaku based on historical activities prior to 1895. Japan’s argument largely ignored the historical position put forward in Chinese accounts. Claiming that the uninhabited islands were not occupied by any power, or terra nullius, Japan annexed the islands in 1895 shortly after its victory in the Sino-Japanese War. At the time, Japanese interior ministry noted that it was still unclear as to whether the islands belonged to Japan, especially as there was detailed knowledge of the islands in Chinese writings, making Koga’s claims of ‘discovery’ difficult to substantiate.

日本称钓鱼岛（尖阁列岛）是“无主之地”，这一点非常重要，因为这等于是日本政府承认了在1895年前日本无法根据历史活动来对该岛屿进行有意义的主权声明。日本方面的说法很大程度上忽视了中国声明中所提出的历史地位。日本称这个岛屿不被任何国家占领或者说是“无主之地”，所以在甲午战争胜利后不久的1895年日本吞并了该岛屿。当时，日本内务府称仍然不清楚这些岛屿是否属于日本，特别是考虑到中国方面对该岛屿有着详细的描述。所以很难证实古贺“发现了”该岛屿。

-------------译者：黑色艺术-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

nandakandamandaJAN. 31, 2016 - 05:31PM JST
Chinese ships used them as a kind of milepost or signpost on the way to trade with Ryukyu/Okinawa, apparently, but does that signify ownership?
 
过去中国船队在与琉球/冲绳进行贸易活动时曾把钓鱼岛作为航程信标，但这表明中国对其拥有主权吗？

sfjp330JAN. 31, 2016 - 05:51PM JST
After the ratification of the Treaty, Deng visited Japan in 1978 agreed that the issue should be left to future generations to solve. In Diet discussions, it was also made clear by LDP Secretary General Ohira and FM Sonoda that it was in Japans national interest to go along with Deng Xiaopings proposal to leave things for the next 20 or 30 years. Sonoda wrote, while it is true that China is claiming these islands as their territory, the islands are currently in Japan’s hands, and have not become an actual issue among Japan and China. One cannot conclude from these accounts that both sides agreed to shelve the territorial issue while in no way abandoning their claims to the islands, otherwise there would not have been a normalization of diplomatic relations in 1972 or a Treaty of Peace and Friendship in 1978.

在正式确定了条约之后，邓小平在1978年访问日本时表示这个问题应当交由下一代来解决。在日本国会的讨论中，时任日本自民党干事长的大平正芳与外相园田直也都明确表示，日本为了其国家利益愿意接受邓小平的提议：把钓鱼岛问题搁置二三十年。园田直写道：“尽管被中国声称了主权，但现在日本还是把这些岛屿掌控在手里，也没有成为两国间的一个实际问题。从中可以看出，双方同意搁置领土问题，同时放弃对岛屿的主权声明，否则中日在1972年不可能实现邦交正常化以及在1978年签订和平条约。

 -------------译者：黑色艺术-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Friendship in 1978.
itsonlyrocknrollJAN. 31, 2016 - 07:29PM JST
Let the compulsory Jurisdiction of the ICJ settle this once and for all.....
Japan Chair Platform: The Senkaku Islands and International Law....
If China genuinely wishes to solve the issue by ICJ, China should accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court which Japan did as early as 1958. Seeking a legal solution is much more preferable for China as a responsible superpower to exacerbating the tension by sending government vessels to the area and repeatedly intruding into Japan’s territorial waters.
http://csis.org/publication/japan-chair-platform-senkaku-islands-and-international-law
 
让海牙国际法庭强制管辖来把这件事一了百了了吧……
Japan Chair Platform（一个讨论日本的政治挑战与国际关系的论坛）:尖阁列岛与国际法……
如果中国真正想通过海牙国际法庭来解决此事的话，那么应该像日本在1958年做的那样接受法庭的强制管辖。中国想成为一个负责任的超级力量的话，寻求一个合法的解决方案显然比派遣船只进入争议区域、频繁侵入日本领海要更好。

lostrune2JAN. 31, 2016 - 07:35PM JST
That was actually a reasonable suggestion from the US

来自美国的这个建议居然挺有道理。

-------------译者：光脚上街-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Kazuaki ShimazakiJAN. 31, 2016 - 08:23PM JST
@lostrune2JAN. 31, 2016 - 07:35PM JST
That was actually a reasonable suggestion from the US

 实际上，美国给了日本一个不错的建议

No, it is a stupid, self-serving suggestion. For a country claiming sovereignty AND already in administration (as acknowledged by the United States) to "consult" with another country before doing as it wishes with the islands is a significant weakening of its own claim.

 才不是呢，这是一个愚蠢且自私自利的建议。对于一个国家对正在进行管理的和正在声索主权的岛屿做它想做的事情之前，要与另外一个国家进行商讨，本身而言这是在削弱自己的立场。

issai0108JAN. 31, 2016 - 08:49PM JST
US urged Japan to consult with China... Apparently, this was ignored. Nonetheless, it was a prerogative of the recipients. But why make news of a suggestion made almost four years ago? Probably to point fingers. Now, will that help solve or even reduce Japan's headache on the problem? Just asking.

美国督促日本与中国协商。。。。 显然，日本没有照着做。尽管如此，这确实是接收者的一个特权。但是为什么现在要把四年前的一个建议披露出来？可能是为了推卸责任。现在，这有助于解决或者缓解日本在这个问题上的麻烦吗？随便问问。

-------------译者：kfab-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

NerakaiJAN. 31, 2016 - 10:10PM JST
as acknowledged by the United States

“日本对钓鱼岛的实际管理”得到了美国的承认”

Being acknowledged by US doesn't mean it can be agreed by all other parties interested. It's always Japan who is looking for the big brother for advice(or decision) whatever happens in the Far East though. Isn't it?

 经过美国同意并不代表所有相关方达成共识.不管远东发生点什么事,日本都要看美国的眼色行事.

Gilang PerdanaJAN. 31, 2016 - 10:19PM JST
The thing that i find funny is if china is so sure that senkaku islands belong to them then why are they decline the japanese offer to settle this at ICJ.

我觉的可笑的是如果中国是如此的确定尖阁列岛是他们的,为什么他们要拒绝日本人想在国际法庭上解决这一争端的提议.

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

zones2surfJAN. 31, 2016 - 11:30PM JST
Not to be rude, but Asia has sort of been of an afterthought for the U.S. for the last 40 years. And, as an afterthought, what they want is no problems. No headaches. No issues. Because they don't want to have to devote time to it.
Invest time in the Middle East?? Sure, no problem, oil involved. Invest time in Europe/Russia??! Hey, that is the only thing many of these types know.
Asia? Hey, its over there, somewhere. Let's just get them to talk to each other and make sure it doesn't blow up.
Right. So how has that worked out?!
The U.S. is disengaged and doesn't want to pick any fights. The Chinese know that. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the U.S. doesn't care about who claims what. They just want quiet and stability so they don't have to get involved. Particularly under the current administration.
Oh, that prior discussion before taking action thing?? I see the Chinese are real good about doing that in the South China Sea.....
Idiots. They are doing the John Kerry routine of James Taylor "You've Got a Friend" while the Chinese are doing Sun Tzu "The Art of War".
Any bets on who will win??

过去40年来亚洲一直不受美国重视，所以美国希望亚洲不要惹麻烦。因为美国不想把时间浪费在亚洲。
将精力放在中东，是的，其中牵涉到了石油。将精力放在欧洲/俄罗斯？？！嘿，他们也这么做了。
亚洲？美国希望亚洲各国好好谈谈，不要发生什么大冲突。
那么这种方法奏效了吗？
美国已经脱节了，不想再挑起任何战争。中国人知道这一点。美国不关心谁对这些岛屿声称主权。美国只希望亚洲和平稳定，这样美国就不用介入了，特别是对于美国现政府而言尤其如此。
哦，采取行动之前先和对方协商？额，中国人在南海确实是这么做的。。。。。
白痴。美国采取的是《我们是朋友》策略，而中国采取的则是孙子的《孙子兵法》策略。
猜猜谁会赢？

 -------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

wtfjapanFEB. 01, 2016 - 12:20AM JST
Do the US of A consult with any country prior to what they believe is just or necessary? All they did was urge Japan to consult China, now Japan has got themselves in this S storm, they continually urge the US to back them up. Another example of recalcitrant pride trumping common sense. Exact same thing happen with Abes visit to Yasukuni shrine, didnt take the US advice and they got themselves into another pile of S

美国敦促日本同中国协商，日本不听，现在陷入麻烦，然后他们继续要求美国武装自己。这是顽固到忘了常识的又一个例子。美国也要求安倍不要访问靖国神社，可是就是不听，所以又让自己陷入另一个麻烦。

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

FarmboyFEB. 01, 2016 - 12:53AM JST
All this time, this information was kept secret on the private servers, and now, all this worry about how insecure the servers are has caused the information to be released to the public. Fine work!

之前，这个信息一直秘密保存在私人服务器中，现在，由于人们担心私人服务器不安全，所以导致了这个信息被公之于众。真是弄巧成拙啊。

Gilang PerdanaFEB. 01, 2016 - 02:18AM JST
And again. If you remember the Philliphines case in 2013. The Philiphines government also try to bring the South China Sea case into the ICJ. And guess what China did?? They decline it (AGAIN)
My point is if China is so sure that the WHOLE South China Sea are belong to them then they must surely win the case in ICJ right?? Then why are they decline it..
Make me wonder if China claim is indeed valid seeing whenever someone is trying to bring the case into the ICJ, China always decline it all the time.

2013年菲律宾也试图将南海争议提交给国际法院，但是被中国拒绝了。
所以如果中国真的觉得自己是整个南海的主人，那么中国应该可以肯定自己会赢得国际法院的支持啊，不是吗？所以中国为什么要拒绝呢？