白宮稱世衛新報告沒有讓我們更了解病毒來源

俄羅斯莫斯科喀秋莎農場 仰望之星

編輯上傳 水星

昨天白宮例行新聞發布會,世衛組織有關中共病毒報告、以及中共問題成了焦點,現將有關內容摘譯如下,供戰友參考。 【1】

2021年3月30日,新聞秘書詹·普薩基(Jen Psaki)的新聞簡報
新聞發布會
新聞簡報室

……
問:還有一個話題,23個國家已經簽署了世衛組織一項條約的構想,該條約將在未來的疫情期間改善信息共享,為什麼美國還沒有簽署?

普薩基:我們認為,與國際夥伴和其他國家合作至關重要,當然,加強和改革我們在應對流行病和未來流行病方面的國際努力也至關重要。

我們確實對目前談判一項新條約的時機和啟動感到關切,我們認為,這可能會使人們的注意力從有關應對、準備應對未來大流行病威脅的實質性問題上轉移,我們相信,這應該是我們目前的重點,但我們當然願意並期待與國際社會繼續合作。

繼續提問……

問:拜登是否相信,數百萬因中共病毒失去親人的美國人,應該得到比他們從世衛組織那裡得到的更好的回應?

普薩基:在調查-

問:有關中共病毒的起源。

普薩基:我認為,他相信,美國人民、國際社會、醫學專家、醫生——所有為拯救生命而努力的人-失去親人的家庭-都應該獲得更大的透明度,他們應該得到更準確的信息,它們應該得到國際社會為提供這些(本應)採取的步驟。

因此,包括美國在內的許多國家都發表了廣泛的聲明,但讓我強調一下——我們仍在審查這份報告,但讓我強調一些最新的關切。

該報告缺乏關鍵的數據、信息和訪問權限,它展示了一幅局部的、不完整的圖畫,正如我所指出的,發表了一項聯合聲明,我們還歡迎歐盟和歐盟成員國發表類似聲明,發出了一個明確的信息,即國際社會也有這些關切。

我們認為應該從這裡採取一些步驟,我們認為,這一進程的第二個階段應該由國際和獨立專家領導,他們應該可以不受限制地訪問數據,他們應該能夠在這個時間點向在當地的人提問,這是世衛組織可以採取的步驟。

問:該聲明說,美國與這些國家一道表達了共同的關切,但坦率地說,這份聲明相當官僚主義,就死亡人數而言,或許不符合這個國家危機的嚴重性。那麼,白宮對世衛組織這份報告的實際反應是什麼?這僅僅是不充分的嗎?

普薩基:嗯,我們的專家組還在審查這份報告;17位專家正在審查。

問:但你知道它的標題,這是不夠的,你說過,所以呢-

普薩基:我們同意,我們早就說過,正如我剛才說的,它缺乏關鍵的數據和信息,它缺乏訪問權限,它缺乏透明度。當然——我們不認為,在我們迄今的審查中,它符合當前的情況,它符合這一流行病對全球社會的影響,這就是為什麼我們還呼籲採取進一步的前瞻性措施。

我要告訴你們的是,在20個左右的國家之間進行談判以獲得一份聲明,有時看起來是官僚主義的,但卻是善意的。

問:拜登什麼時候就此發表講話?

普薩基:關於世衛組織的報告?我想我們會讓我們的審查結束,然後我們會尋找機會讓他發言,但我可以肯定地告訴你,他也有同樣的擔憂,他們直接來自他,也直接來自我們的國家安全團隊,我們的國家安全團隊研究了迄今為止的報告,他們仍在審查和分享聲明中明確表達的擔憂。

繼續提問……

問:我也只想從中汲取教訓,世界衛生組織譚德塞的一個主要擔憂是,如果你願意的話,這份報告可能掩蓋了病毒從實驗室逃逸的可能性,這也是白宮關注的焦點嗎?然後,當你談到合作時,在白宮看來,中共國是否還不夠合作?

普薩基:嗯,他們一直不透明,他們沒有提供基礎數據,這當然不算合作,你知道,到目前為止我們的專家所做的分析-你知道,或者說他們擔心的是,一個假設沒有額外的支持,它並沒有使我們比六到九個月前更接近於對起源的理解或更深入的了解,它也沒有為我們提供指導方針或步驟-我們應該如何防止這種情況發生在未來的建議步驟,這些都是必須的。

問:所以這集中在實驗室的假設上?

普薩基:再說一次,它不會-它不會導致-它不會-它不會讓我們更好地了解病毒的起源。

……

問:是的,世衛組織還有一個後續行動,總統對世衛組織感到失望嗎?他相信他們不能勝任這項任務嗎?

普薩基:我認為聲明表明的是,我們仍然對世衛組織的作用充滿信心,我們期待著成為世衛組織的一個有貢獻的成員,我們有一些關切,正如我迄今為止對報告所作的分析所表示的那樣,我們認為可以在審查的第二階段採取步驟,改進其中一些關切。

……
問:關於世衛組織,川普總統指責世衛組織是“中共國的傀儡”,這份報告證實了這一說法嗎?

普薩基:好吧,我認為我們已經表達了對這一角色的關切-缺乏透明度,缺乏廣泛提供給全球社會的數據,我們認為,可以採取一些步驟,確保獨立調查-全球專家參與這一進程的下一階段,但我們也認為,世界衛生組織是一個美國應該參與的機構-為了實現變革,我們需要在談判桌上佔有一席之地,這就是為什麼我們重新加入世界衛生組織。

……

問:我有一個關於亞洲的問題和一個關於亞裔美國人的問題,我們知道日本首相即將到訪,而且據說國家安全委員會和國務院都將主辦這次會議-他們的日本和韓國同行。作為一個外國新聞集團的代表,我從NHK得到了一個問題。

日本媒體問,貴國政府集中精力與日本、韓國等東亞盟國密切合作,對抗中共國,但這些國家與中共國的關係不同於美國與中共國的關係,那麼,當你和你的亞洲盟友的利益與美國不同時,他們將如何與你合作呢。 ?

普薩基:我不確定我是否完全理解你的問題,你是在問,當總統和其他政府官員會見日本領導人時,我們將如何討論中共國以及我們與中共國的關係?

問:不,我(是說)-東亞國家與美國在中共國的利益不同。

普薩基:當然。

問:如果你們有不同的利益,你們將如何讓你們的亞洲盟友與你們合作?

普薩基:嗯,我認為,就像美國與任何國家的關係一樣,都有共同利益的領域,無論是經濟合作還是地區安全,我們都可以在一些領域進行溝通、合作,甚至有時會有分歧,當然,我們會-我希望這些對話應該涵蓋一系列的話題。 (摘譯完)

幾個關鍵點:

1、三次提到了“缺乏關鍵的數據、信息和訪問權限”,以及透明度;

2、這一段應該怎樣理解? “……或者說他們擔心的是,一個假設沒有額外的支持,它並沒有使我們比六到九個月前更接近於對起源的理解或更深入的了解,它也沒有為我們提供指導方針或步驟-我們應該如何防止這種情況發生在未來的建議步驟,這些都是必須的。

問:所以這集中在實驗室的假設上?

普薩基:再說一次,它不會-它不會導致-它不會-它不會讓我們更好地了解病毒的起源。 ”白宮懷疑病毒來源於武漢實驗室?

3、“全球專家參與這一進程的下一階段”,在國務院的有關聲明中似乎也有“下一個階段”的說法。

大勢所趨之下,全世界都在看著你白宮!

蓬佩奧國務卿已經定性,“世界衛生組織與中共同謀!”【2】

靜觀白宮進一步的舉動。

參考鏈接:

【1】https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2021/03/30/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-jen-psaki-march-30-2021/

【2】https://gnews.org/zh-hans/1039400/

新聞稿原文部分:

……

Q    And one other topic.  Twenty-three countries have signed on to the idea of this WHO treaty that would improve information sharing during future pandemics.  Why hasn’t the U.S. signed on to that?

MS. PSAKI:  Well, we believe it’s vital in working with international partners and other countries and, of course, strengthening and reforming our international efforts as it relates to addressing pandemics and future pandemics.

We do have some concerns primarily about the timing and launching into negotiations for a new treaty right now, and we believe that could divert attention away from substantive issues regarding the response, preparedness for future pandemic threats.  And we believe that should be our focus currently, but we’re certainly open to and looking for continued collaboration with the global community.

Go ahead.

Q    Does President Biden believe that the millions of Americans who lost loved ones to COVID-19 deserve a better response than the one that they’ve gotten from the WHO?

MS. PSAKI:  In terms of looking into —

Q    In terms of the origins for COVID-19.

MS. PSAKI:  Well, I think he believes that the American people, the global community, the medical experts, the doctors — all of the people who have been working to save lives — the families who have lost loved ones — all deserve greater transparency.  They deserve better information.  They deserve steps that are taken by the global community to provide that.

So there was an extensive statement put out by a number of countries, including the U.S.  But let me highlight — and we’re still reviewing the report, but let me highlight some of the concerns that have come up to date.

The report lacks crucial data, information, and access.  It represents a partial and incomplete picture.  There was a joint statement, as I noted, that was put out.  We also welcome a similar statement from the EU and EU members, sending a clear message that the global community shares these concerns.

There are steps from here that we believe should be taken.  There’s a second stage in this process that we believe should be led by international and independent experts.  They should have unfettered access to data.  They should be able to ask questions of people who are on the ground at this point in time, and that’s a step the WHO could take.

Q    And that statement says that the U.S. joins these countries in expressing shared concerns.  But the statement, quite frankly, is pretty bureaucratic and perhaps does not meet the moment of the seriousness of the crisis here in this country in terms of the death toll.  So what is the White House’s actual reaction to this report from the WHO?  Was it simply inadequate?

MS. PSAKI:  Well, the report is still being reviewed by our team of experts; 17 experts are reviewing it.

Q    But you know the headline of it, and it’s not sufficient, you’ve said.  So —

MS. PSAKI:  We agree.  And we have long said, as I just stated, it lacks crucial data, information.  It lacks access.  It lacks transparency.  It certainly — we don’t believe that, in our review to date, that it meets the moment, it meets the impact that this pandemic has had on the global community.  And that’s why we also have called for additional forward-looking steps.

And I will tell you that negotiating between 20 countries or so to get a statement out, sometimes it appears bureaucratic, but well-intentioned.

Q    When will the President speak on this?

MS. PSAKI:  On the WHO report?  I expect we’ll let our review conclude, and then we’ll look for an opportunity for him to speak to it.  But I can certainly confirm for you that he shares these concerns.  They are coming directly from him and directly from our national security team, who has looked at what the report has presented to date.  They’re still reviewing and share the concerns issued in that statement that made those concerns clear.

Go ahead.

Q    Thanks, Jen.  I just want to piggyback off of that as well.  World Health Organization Director General Tedros — one of his primary concerns was that the report may have glossed over, if you will, the possibility that the — that the virus escaped from a lab.  Is that a central concern of the White House as well?  And then, when you talk about cooperation, has China not cooperated enough, in the White House’s opinion?

MS. PSAKI:  Well, they have not been transparent.  They have not provided underlying data.  That certainly doesn’t qualify as cooperation.  You know, the analysis performed to date from our experts — you know, or their concern is that there isn’t additional support for one hypothesis.  It doesn’t lead us to any closer of an understanding or greater knowledge than we had six to nine months ago about the origin.  It also doesn’t provide us guidelines or steps — recommended steps on how we should prevent this from happening in the future.  And those are imperative.

Q    And so that centers on the hypothesis that would involve the lab?

MS. PSAKI:  Again, it doesn’t — it doesn’t lead to — it doesn’t — it doesn’t provide us greater understanding of the origin of the virus.

……

Q    Yes, one more follow-up on the WHO.  Is the President disappointed with the WHO?  Does he believe they’re not up to the task?

MS. PSAKI:  I think what the statement makes clear is that we remain — that — that was issued by the State Department today — is that we remain confident in the role of the WHO.  We look to be a contributing member of the WHO.  We have some concerns as we — as I’ve expressed about the analysis that’s been done so far about the report, and we think that steps can be taken moving forward in the second stage of the review to ameliorate some of those.

Go ahead.

……

Q    Descheduling them — federally descheduling and an end the federal prohibition?

MS. PSAKI:   That’s been his position.  Nothing has changed.

Q    And regarding the WHO, former President Trump has accused the WHO of being, quote, “a puppet of China.”  Does this report confirm that claim?

MS. PSAKI:  Well, I think we’ve expressed our concerns about the role — the lack of transparency, the lack of data that has been provided broadly to the global community.  We believe there are steps that can be taken moving forward to ensure that an independent investigation — that global experts are involved in the next stage of this process.  But we also believe that the WHO is a body that the United States should be a part of — that in order to make changes happen, we need to have a seat at the table, and that’s why we rejoined the WHO.

Go ahead, in the back.

……

Q    Thank you very much, Jen.  I have one question on Asia and one question on Asian Americans.  We know the Japanese Prime Minister is coming to visit, and also both NSC and State Department are said to host the — their Japanese and South Korean counterparts.  As the representative of a foreign press group, I got a question from NHK.

The Japanese media asks: Your administration has focused on working closely with East Asian allies, like Japan and South Korea, to counter to China.  But these countries have a different relationship with China than the U.S. has with China.  So how will you and your Asian allies cooperate with you when they sit on different interests than the U.S.?

MS. PSAKI:  I’m not sure I completely understand your question.  Are you asking if we — how will we discuss China and our relationship with China when the President and others in the administration see leaders from Japan?

Q    No.  I — the East Asian countries have different interests than the U.S. has with China.

MS. PSAKI:  Sure.

Q    So how will — how will you have your Asian allies cooperate with you if you have different interests?

MS. PSAKI:  Well, I think, just like the U.S. relationships with any country, there are areas of mutual interests.  There are areas where we can communicate, work together on, even sometimes have disagreements, whether it is economic cooperation or security in the region.  And certainly we’ll — I expect that those conversations should cover a range of topics.

0
0 則留言
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments