在7月29日外交部例行记者会上，有记者提问：据报道，近期美国等个别国家声称，中方拒绝世卫组织第二阶段溯源计划。请问中方对此有何评论？

　　赵立坚：首先我想强调，这份第二阶段溯源计划是世卫组织秘书处单方面提出的，未经得世卫成员国一致同意。世卫组织由成员国主导，秘书处提出的第二阶段工作计划草案是供成员国讨论用的，成员国有权作出修改。秘书处的职责是为成员国充分协商并达成一致提供便利，无权自行作出决定。

　　新冠疫情发生以来，中国始终高度重视病毒溯源问题，秉持科学精神，以开放态度积极参与全球溯源合作。中国两次邀请世卫组织专家来华开展溯源联合研究，付出了巨大努力，取得了重要成果，得出了权威结论。

　　近日，包括中国在内的许多国家都对世卫组织秘书处起草的第二阶段溯源工作计划表达了关切和反对，认为工作计划不符合第73届世卫大会决议要求，不符合中国－世卫组织联合研究报告结论和建议，未全面反映全球溯源研究最新成果，无法作为第二阶段溯源合作的基础。同时，60个国家也致函世卫组织总干事，欢迎中国－世卫组织联合研究报告，反对溯源问题政治化。这是国际社会的合理诉求和正义之声。

　　据了解，为支持和配合世卫组织开展第二阶段全球溯源工作，中方专家基于中国－世卫组织开展的第一阶段溯源工作及联合研究报告，在世卫组织秘书处提出第二阶段溯源计划前就主动向世卫组织提交了下阶段溯源工作的中国方案。这是一份科学、专业、经过实践检验的方案。我可以给大家介绍一下要点：

　　第一，第二阶段溯源工作应以世卫大会决议为指引，以科学家为主体，以证据为基础开展科学溯源。中国－世卫组织联合研究报告得出了国际社会和科学界公认的结论和建议，应作为第二阶段溯源工作的基础。

　　第二，第一阶段溯源研究已经开展过的，尤其是已经有了明确结论的，第二阶段不应再重复开展，特别是中国－世卫组织溯源联合研究报告已经明确病毒由实验室泄漏“极不可能”。第二阶段研究重点应放在动物中间宿主引入、冷链传播等联合研究报告明确的“非常可能”和“可能”等潜在传播路径，推动在全球多国多地范围开展溯源研究。

　　第三，充分借鉴第一阶段病毒溯源工作实践、机制和方法，推动溯源工作有序、顺利开展。对现有研究成果和新证据要进行评估分析，基于公开研究证据，经过综合评估确定第二阶段溯源工作的地区和工作方案。继续开展流行病学、动物产品和环境、分子流行病学等方面研究，加强而不是重复正在进行或已有工作。

　　第四，专家组应在第一阶段溯源研究专家基础上组建，充分尊重专家组成员的专业水平、国际声誉和实践经验。确有需要补充其他领域专家，可以在原有专家组成基础上适当增加。这既有利于溯源研究工作的连续性，也保证下阶段溯源工作的权威性和公正性。

　　同时，中方将继续落实中国－世卫组织联合研究报告的相关工作建议，积极推动开展报告中涉及中国的后续补充性研究。

　　我想再次强调，溯源是严肃的科学问题，应当让科学家们把新冠病毒来源研究清楚，从而更好防范未来风险。我们坚决拒绝政治溯源，对于真正的科学溯源已经并将继续积极参与。

　　CCTV: According to reports, a few countries including the US have been claiming recently that China refuses the WHO plan for the second phase of studies into the origins of COVID-19. Does China have any comment?

　　Zhao Lijian: First I want to stress that this plan was put forward unilaterally by the WHO Secretariat without getting the approval of all member states. The WHO is led by member states. The draft plan was put forward by the Secretariat for discussion by member states, who have the right to make adjustments. The mandate of the Secretariat is to provide convenience for member states to have full consultation and reach consensus. It is not entitled to decision-making on its own.

　　Since the outbreak of COVID-19, China has all along attached high importance to studies into the origins of the virus. We've actively participated in global cooperation in this area with an open and science-based attitude. We've twice invited WHO experts to China for joint research in origin-tracing. We've invested tremendous efforts, achieved important outcomes and reached authoritative conclusions.

　　Lately many countries, China included, have raised concerns over and voiced objection to the next steps to study the origins proposed by the WHO Secretariat. It is a shared belief that the plan is inconsistent with the resolution of the 73rd WHA and the conclusions and recommendations of the joint WHO-China study report. It failed to reflect the latest outcomes of global research in origin-tracing and cannot serve as the basis for the second phase of joint origin studies. At the same time, 60 countries have written to the WHO Director General saying that they welcome the joint WHO-China study report and reject politicizing origin studies. This is the legitimate appeal and voice of justice from the international community.

　　To my knowledge, before the WHO Secretariat circulated its plan, Chinese experts, with a view to support and coordinate with WHO efforts to conduct the next phase of origin studies, had submitted to WHO a Chinese proposal based on the previous phase of studies jointly conducted by Chinese and WHO experts and the joint report. The Chinese plan is a science-based and professional solution that has been tested in practice. The main points are as follows:

　　First, the second phase should be guided by the WHA resolution, rely mainly on scientists, and conduct evidence-based scientific research. The joint WHO-China study report's conclusions and recommendations have been widely recognized by the international community and the science community. This should serve as the basis for the second phase of studies.

　　Second, the second phase should not repeat what has already been conducted during the first phase, especially where conclusive findings were already reached. In particular, the joint WHO-China study report already stated clearly that "a laboratory origin of the pandemic was considered to be extremely unlikely". The key focus of the second phase should be on possible pathways identified as "very likely" and "likely" by the joint report including introduction through an intermediate host or cold chain products. Efforts should be made to advance origins study in various countries and regions across the world.

　　Third, the practice, mechanisms and approaches used in the first phase should be drawn on to conduct further studies in an orderly and smooth manner. There should be assessment and analysis of existing research outcomes and new evidence. The regions to be covered by the second phase and the work plan should be determined after comprehensive assessment based on open research evidence. Research in epidemiology, animal products, environmental and molecular epidemiology should be continued to reinforce rather than repeat existing work or tasks that have already been covered.

　　Fourth, the team of experts should be put together on the basis of the makeup of the first phase team with full respect for their expertise, international reputation and practical experience. Additional experts from other areas can be added to the original team in an appropriate manner if there is indeed such a need. This will not only help maintain continuity of the research but also ensure the authority and impartiality of the next phase of studies.

　　In the meantime, China will continue to act on relevant work recommendations in the joint WHO-China study report and actively conduct further follow-up research concerning China recommended in the report.

　　I'd like to stress once again that the study of origins is a serious matter of science. We should let scientists get to the bottom of this virus so as to get better prepared for future risks. We firmly reject origin-tracing based on politics. As to truly science-based studies of origins, we have taken an active part in them and will continue to do so.