【正文】 合管理，不斷完善海洋法律制度，積極發(fā)展海洋科技教育。維護(hù)《聯(lián)合國(guó)海洋法公約》確定的海洋法律的原則，維護(hù)海洋健康，確保海洋資源的可持續(xù)利用和海上安全，已經(jīng)成為人類共同遵守和共同負(fù)擔(dān)的使命。人類社會(huì)的發(fā)展必然會(huì)越來(lái)越多地依靠海洋。這條通道源于長(zhǎng)安城（即今天的西安），一路穿越陜西省、甘肅省境內(nèi)的河西走廊，新疆的塔里木盆地，帕米爾山區(qū)，阿富汗、伊朗、伊拉克及敘利亞，最后抵達(dá)地中海的東岸，全程7千公里，其中有4千多公里的路程在中國(guó)境內(nèi)。為期兩周的游覽將成為你一生中最為難忘的經(jīng)歷之一。中國(guó)人民之所以要進(jìn)行百年不屈不撓的斗爭(zhēng)，所以要實(shí)行一次又一次的偉大變革、實(shí)現(xiàn)國(guó)家的繁榮富強(qiáng)，所以要加強(qiáng)民族團(tuán)結(jié)、完成祖國(guó)統(tǒng)一大業(yè)，所以要促進(jìn)世界和平與發(fā)展的崇高事業(yè)，歸根到底就是一個(gè)目標(biāo)：實(shí)現(xiàn)中華民族的偉大復(fù)興，爭(zhēng)取對(duì)人類做出新的更大的貢獻(xiàn)?？傮w來(lái)說(shuō)，就是要把中國(guó)建設(shè)成為富強(qiáng)民主文明的現(xiàn)代化的國(guó)家?，F(xiàn)在，我們正在滿懷信心地全面推進(jìn)改革開放。近二十年的實(shí)踐已經(jīng)充分證明，我們進(jìn)行改革的方向是正確的，信念是堅(jiān)定的，步伐是穩(wěn)妥的，方式是漸進(jìn)的，取得的成就是巨大的。江澤民主席在美國(guó)哈佛大學(xué)的演講改革開放，是中華民族自強(qiáng)不息和變革創(chuàng)新精神在當(dāng)代的集中體現(xiàn)和創(chuàng)新性發(fā)展。19世紀(jì)后半頁(yè)的中國(guó)歷史就充滿了這樣的屈辱。因此，戰(zhàn)后，英國(guó)包括其他西方國(guó)家，包括法國(guó)、德國(guó)、俄國(guó)和美國(guó)，還有東方的日本，或是單獨(dú)或是聯(lián)合對(duì)中國(guó)發(fā)動(dòng)侵略戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，以不同的方式欺凌中國(guó)，以獲取優(yōu)惠、特權(quán)、賠償、租借，甚至領(lǐng)土。yours a developing country and mine a developed onecan two nations surmount and indeed draw upon these differences to build an unprecedented and distinctive relationship in world affair? If we are successful, in one great step our two nations will have been able to ease one of the greatest sources of tension in international affairs: that between the developed and developing still have a long way to go, and it is still too early to conclude that our experiment will culminate in success, but certainly the results of the first ten years are ties have bee extensive, affecting all aspects of our national lives: merce, culture, education, scientific exchange, and our separate national security DividePresident Bush is making a noble effort to pull together the fraying alliance but the fact is Europeans and Americans no longer share a mon view of the the allimportant question of powerthe utility of power, the morality of powerthey have parted believe that they are moving beyond power into a selfcontained world of laws and rules and transnational negotiation and itself has entered a posthistorical paradise, the realization of Immanuel Kant’s “Perpetual Peace”.The United States, meanwhile, remains mired in history, exercising power in the anarchic Hobbesian World where the international rules are unreliable and where security and the promotion of a liberal order still depend on the possession and use of military is why on major strategic and international questions today, Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus: They agreed on little and understand one another less and the divergent perspectives? They are not deeply rooted in national centuries ago American statesmen appealed to international law and disdained “power politics”, while European statesmen spoke of raison d’ marched off to World War Ⅰ believing in power and martial glory, while Americans talked of arbitration the roles have of the reason is the enormous shift in the balance of gap between the United States and Europe opened wide as a result of World War Ⅱ and has grown wider in the past ’s unparalleled military strength has predictable given it a great propensity to use force and a more confident in the moral legitimacy of ’s relative weakness has produced an aversion to force as a tool of international ’s today, like Americans 200 years ago, seek a world where strength does not matter so much, where unilateral action by nations is forbidden, where all nations regardless of their strength are protected by monly agreed ruled of many Europeans, progress toward such a world is more important that eliminating the threat posed by Saddam Americans, the Hobbesian world is not so is naturally more attractive to those with the capacity to act international law constrains strong nations more than it does the of the disparity of power, Americans and Europeans even view threats person armed only with a knife may decide that a bear prowling the forest is a tolerable dangertrying to kill the bear is riskier than laying low and hoping the bear never a person with rifle will be likely to make a different calculation: Why should he risk being mauled to death if he does not need to? American could imagine successfully invading Iraq and toppling Saddam and therefore 70 percent of Americans favored that , not surprisingly, found it unimaginable and it is not just the power gap that divided Americans and Europeans ’s relatively pacific strategic culture is also the product of its war – like European Union is a monument to Europe’s rejection of the old power knows the dangers of Machtpolitik better than a French and German citizen？As the British diplomat Robert Copper recently noted, Europe today lives in a “postmodern system” that does not rest on a balance of power but on “the rejection of force” and on “selfenforced rules of behavior”.American realists may scoff, but within the confines of Europe the brutal laws of power politics really have been the World War Ⅱ European society has shaped not by the traditional exercise of power but by the unfolding of a geopolitical miracle: the German lion has lain down with the French new Europe has succeeded not by balancing power but by transcending now the Europeans have bee evangelists for their “postmodern” gospel of international application of the European miracle to the rest world has bee Europe’s new has put Europeans and Americans on a collision have not lived the European ，暴露了它在軍事上的軟弱和政治上的落后。第一篇：應(yīng)試翻譯技巧Speech by Former Carter at Weling Banquet 29 June 1987Permit me first to thank our Chinese hosts for your extraordinary arrangements and wife and I, as well as our entire party, are deeply the short period of six days, we have gone a longer distance than the Long have acquired a keen sense of the diversity, dynamism, and progress of China under your policies of your reform and opening to the outside than eight years have passed since Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping and I joined hands to establish full diplomatic relations between these two great hope and vision was to forge a SinoAmerican relationship which would contribute to world peace and the welfare of our two personally looked upon the forging of firm SinoAmerican ties as a historically significant faced the question in 1978, as to some extend we still do to