小弟三月份投了一个一般的国际期刊，前两天写信询问审稿结果，主编回信只给出一个审稿人的意见，并说明另外一个审稿人还在审稿。下面是审稿人的意见：This article suffers from two fundamental flaws
1. It fails to explain (i) what the concept of 'xx' means in the context of the article, (ii) why it is needed or what the advantages over other concepts would be, and (iii) what it explains that could not be explained without the concept.
2. It also fails to explain why precisely microeconomics needs to be brought in. Reference to 'scarcity of xx' would itself require further explanation or argumentation. How does it relate, for instance, to xx economy (if we really need an economical paradigm)? Moreover, this supposed scarcity of xxs gets confused at a certain point .
In other words, this article would require complete rewriting in order to become persuasive.

请各位大家指导一下，这样的审稿意见是不是意味着退稿？如果能改，应该怎么改？