岁月静好的人们，还沉浸在dotcom书记的电视剧中

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/04/07/briefing-secretary-tillerson-secretary-mnuchin-and-secretary-ross

Briefing by Secretary Tillerson, Secretary Mnuchin, and Secretary Rosson President Trump’s Meetings with President Xi ofChina

Tideline Resortand Spa
Palm Beach, Florida

3:58 P.M. EDT

MR. SPICER: Hi, guys. So this is being streamed back to both the Tideline,as well as the White House.

Obviously,today the President was very pleased with the outcomes of today’s meeting. I wanted to give you guys a quick readout, so today I’ve brought three ofthe top participants in this: Secretary of State Tillerson, Secretary ofthe Treasury Steven Mnuchin, and Secretary Commerce Wilbur Ross.

They’ll go inthat order, and then we’ll take a few questions.

With that,Secretary of State Tillerson.

SECRETARYTILLERSON: Well, thank you, Sean.

I would open bysaying the President was very happy to host President Xi at Mar-a-Lago theselast two days. As those of you that have been here know, it was obviouslya perfect weather day today, and it was a great opportunity for both thePresidents and their wives to really get to know one another and enjoy, sharemeals together, and work on important issues.

Each side did bring along senior delegations ofofficials
-- so, of course, we’re represented here – who also were able to buildimportant relationships for a lot of work that’s still ahead of us.

I think what Iwould really want you to get a grasp of is that both the atmosphere, thechemistry between the two leaders was positive. The posture between thetwo really set the tone for our subsequent meetings between our high-leveldelegations. And I would tell you the exchanges were very frank. They were candid, they were open, and they were very positive. So Ithink all of us are feeling very good about the results of this summit in termsof what it did for setting a very constructive tone going forward.

The two leadershad positive, productive meetings. President Trump and President Xiagreed to work in concert to expand areas of cooperation while managingdifferences based on mutual respect.

The twoPresidents reviewed the current state of the bilateral relationship and notedthe importance of working together to generate positive outcomes that wouldbenefit the citizens of both of our countries. President Trump noted thechallenges caused by Chinese government intervention in its economy and raisedserious concerns about the impact ofChina’sindustrial, agricultural, technology, and cyber policies onU.S.jobs andexports. The President underscored the need forChinato takeconcrete steps to level the playing field for American workers, stressingrepeatedly the need for reciprocal market access.

The two sidesnoted the urgency of the threat ofNorth Korea’sweapons program, reaffirmed their commitment to a denuclearized Korean Peninsula,and committed to fully implement U.N. Security Council resolutions. Theyagreed to increase cooperation and work with the international community toconvince the DPRK to peacefully resolve the issue and abandon its illicitweapons programs.

SECRETARYMNUCHIN: Thank you. I would just like to reiterate that we had avery productive two days with our counterparts. And specifically we had ameeting this morning that was a breakout of the first comprehensive economicdialogue. We had very direct and frank conversations about how we wouldwork together. Secretary Ross and I will be leading that jointly, and wewill be focused on trade, investment, and other economic opportunities betweenboth companies – countries.

We focusedspecifically on a more balanced economic relationship, specifically on trade. And we focused on the desire to have very specific action items both inthe short term for the next time we get together, as well as what the goals areover the year. So I think we think the restructuring of the dialogue andhaving specifically a breakout that will address comprehensive economicopportunities across our different agencies both here and within China I thinkwe felt was very productive, very good start in how we’re going to structureit, and again, very specific things that we talked about to look forward onmaking progress in the short term on.

Secretary Ross?

SECRETARY ROSS: Thank you, Steven. I think in many ways, themost significant thing was a 100-day plan. Normally, trade discussions,especially betweenChinaand ourselves, are denominated in multiple years. This was denominated inthe first instance in 100 days with hopefully way stations of accomplishmentalong the way. Given the range of issues and the magnitude, that may beambitious, but it’s a very big sea change in the pace of discussions. AndI think that’s a very very important symbolization of the growing rapportbetween the two countries.

MR. SPICER: We’ll take a few questions. Steve.

Q Secretary of State Tillerson, can I ask you aboutNorth Korea? Did the President say that he might use trade againstChinaif they do not rein inNorth Korea? And did you get any specific commitments fromChinato do something about theNorth Koreaproblem?

SECRETARYTILLERSON: The Presidents’ discussions – President Trump and PresidentXi – onNorth Koreawere very wide-ranging, very comprehensive, and more focused entirely on bothcountries’ previous commitments to denuclearize the peninsula. There wasno kind of a package arrangement discussed to resolve this.

I thinkPresident Xi, from their part, shared the view that this has reached a veryserious stage in terms of the advancement ofNorth Korea’s nuclear capabilities. They discussed the challenges that introduces for both countries, butthere’s a real commitment that we work together to see if this cannot beresolved in a peaceful way. But in order for that to happen,North Korea’sposture has to change before there’s any basis for dialogue or discussions.

President Trumpindicated to President Xi that he welcomed any ideas that President Xi andChina might have as to other actions we could take and that we would be happyto work with them, but we understand it creates unique problems for them andchallenges and that we would, and are, prepared to chart our own course if thisis something China is just unable to coordinate with us.

Q Two quick questions for Secretary Tillerson, and one for Secretary Ross. Previous administrations have been very tough onNorth Korea– sorry – tough onChinain termsof human rights violations. And I was wondering if that came up and ifthis administration plans to pressure the Chinese on human rights violations. And the second question, if I may have the opportunity to ask sinceyou’re here onSyria– a lot of the American people are concerned that yesterday’s actions meanwe’re going to war. And I was hoping if you could just clarify – is thisjust a one-fit situation, or is this going to be part of a – campaign to tryto the Assad government?

SECRETARYTILLERSON: As to the discussions around human rights inChina, I thinkAmerica’s values are quite clearand they really occupied a core of all of our discussions. I don’t thinkyou have to have a separate conversation, somehow separate our core valuesaround human rights from our economic discussions, our military-to-militarydiscussions, or our foreign policy discussions. They’re really embeddedin every discussion, that that is really what guides much of our view aroundhow we’re going to work together.

As toSyria, I thinkas was indicated in our statements last night, this particular strike that wascarried out on the airbase from which the chemical weapons attack was launchedwas very deliberately considered by the President. It is a response thatwe believe is both proportional and appropriate. And as we said lastnight, we will monitorSyria’sresponse to that strike in terms of whether they attack our own forces orcoalition forces, or whether we detect that they are considering mobilizing totake additional chemical weapons attacks. And I’d say at this point thefuture will be guided by how we see their reaction.

Q Thank you. And for you, Secretary Roth, I was wondering if talkedto the Chinese about cracking down on any banks or companies that may beworking withNorth Korea.

SECRETARY ROSS: As you know, Commerce fined ZTE, the second largest telecom company formaking equipment inChina,$1.170 billion recently. So they recognize that that shows our cleardetermination to crack down on that sort of activity.

SECRETARYMNUCHIN: And I would just also emphasize Treasury obviously managesmultiple sanctions programs, some specifically towardsNorth Korea, and we have had directconversations with our counterparts inChinaabout working with us onthose.

Q Did the Chinese agree to do anything that will make iteasier for American companies to export toChina?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: I think there was definitely an acknowledgementby them on the trade issue that we do need to get to a more balanced tradeenvironment. We did begin those discussions today, but I would justemphasize there was a lot going on in two days. And although we had somespecific conversations, as Secretary Ross, mentioned, the plan is for us todevelop a 100-day plan, and we would expect to see some very specific items onthat.

Q Will you move forward with a plan to labelChinaa currency manipulator?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: I would just comment on, I think as you know,the currency report is going to come out in the near future, and we willaddress that when it comes out.

SECRETARY ROSS: As other trade issues, you would not have expectedus to reach agreement in a few hours of meetings. The issues are far morecomplex and far more deep rooted. But 100-days is a very, very short timefor trade.

Q Did you discuss the environment and environmental commitments? Andwhat was your response ifChinaasked for more commitments from theUnited Stateson that issue?

SECRETARY ROSS: That was not a major part of the discussion, nor do I recall the Chinesespecifically raising it.

Q There was anticipation that President Xi would come with some sort ofgift for President Trump – infrastructure investment, something that woulddemonstrate a Chinese commitment to having more jobs in theU.S. Wasthere anything like that?

SECRETARY ROSS: The best gift was his presence and the relationship what was built upbetween our President and President Xi.

Q Secretary Tillerson, Chinese media is reporting that President Trump wasinvited to visitChinain 2017. Can you clarify just if that was the year that you’ve agreed todo this?

SECRETARY TILLERSON: The President did accept the invitation of President Xi to visitChina. Now, the invitation was for a 2107 visit. The President said thathe would look at the dates, and we would work with them to see when that visitmight occur.

Q Secretary Ross, could you give a couple of examples of thekind of way stations that people might see in the 100-day time?

SECRETARY ROSS: The exact way stations are a matter of negotiationitself. But, directionally, the objective is to increase our exports toChinaand toreduce the trade deficit that we have with them.

Q When you say that there was a recognition by the Chinese andacknowledgement of the trade issue that it needs to be a more balancedenvironment, what did they say exactly? That seems like that’s sort ofoff message for them.

SECRETARYMNUCHIN: I don’t think it was off message at all. Again, I thinkthey look at – we have very similar economic interests, and I think there areareas that they clearly want to work with us. And as Secretary Ross saidthe objective is for us to increase our exports to them. It’s a very bigmarket, and there will be more opportunities for both exports as well asinvestments.

Q We were told – sorry, did you want to say something, Secretary Ross?

SECRETARY ROSS: What I was going to say was simply that it was avery wide range of products that we discussed, not a particularly limited one. And the most interesting thing to me was they expressed an interest inreducing their net trade balance because of the impact it’s having on moneysupply and inflation. That’s the first time I’ve heard them say that in abilateral context.

Q We were informed that President Xi was informed of theSyriastrikes during dinneryesterday, and so I was wondering if you could maybe explain what the reactionwas from the Chinese as to this. They’ve usually been very opposed – inthe U.N. at least – on acts againstSyria.

And so sincethe three of you are here, we saw that all three of you were in the photo inthe Situation Room, as this was playing out. So I’d be very interested tohear – especially it’s not common to see maybe the Treasury Secretary or theCommerce Secretary in those situations. So if you can say what role youwere playing and maybe what your thoughts were while this was unfolding.

SECRETARYTILLERSON: The President did directly inform President Xi near the end ofthe dinner yesterday evening as the missiles that are launched were impacting,which was about 8:40 p.m. last night. The President told President Xithat we had launched a strike againstSyriaas a result of Assad’sviolation – multiple violations of the use of chemical weapons against his owncitizens, including the killing of women, children, and babies. ThePresident provided President Xi the number of missiles that were launched andexplained the rationale behind it.

President Xi Ithink expressed an appreciation for the President letting him know andproviding the rationale and said, as it was told to me, indicated that heunderstood that such a response is necessary when people are killing children.

Now,Chinahasissued its own statements. I’m sure those are available to you. Ihave read them on them on the wire service, as well.

As to theSituation Room, before I turn it to the two Secretaries to give you kind oftheir color on what was going on, I think it is important for everyone torecognize a couple of things on the Syrian attack. First, it was anoverwhelming success. I think the performance our military and the expertiseand the power of what theU.S.military is able to execute on a fairly short planning window wasextraordinary. And I think all Americans, and, indeed, I think all ourallies in the free world should take great comfort in what occurred with thatstrike last night. And Americans should be very proud of their men andwomen in uniform.

SECRETARYMNUCHIN: I would just not only echo what Secretary Tillerson said, but Ithink, as you know, the Treasury Department has very important functions interms of sanctions and other intelligence – financial intelligence functionsthat I have been participating in. So on the National Security Council,the Treasury Department does participate in that.

We will beannouncing additional sanctions onSyriaas part of our ongoing effortto stop this type of activity and emphasize how significant we view this. And we expect that those will continue to have an important effect onpreventing people from doing business with them.

Q Can you elaborate on the sanctions a little bit?

SECRETARYMNUCHIN: Again, they will be coming out in the near future. But Iwould just say we view sanctions as being a very important tool, whether it’sNorth Koreaor whether it’sSyria. These sanctions are very important and we will use them to the maximumeffect.

SECRETARY ROSS: To me, the most dramatic thing about being in the Situation Room as hewas making the decision was the thoroughness of the support and informationthat went into it, the consultation he did with a wide range of military and diplomaticand economic advisors, and the utter seriousness and thoughtfulness with whichhe made this very grave decision.

In terms of thestrikes themselves, it’s my understanding that they took out something like 20percent of the entire Syrian air force. So it was huge not just in termsof number of planes but relative to the scale of their air force.

Q Secretary Tillerson, you talked about the great success. The AFP isreporting that the runway is still operational and is actually being used. Is that accurate? And can you comment on whether that was yourintent, and if that puts a damper on the success of the operation?

SECRETARYTILLERSON: The runways were not the target due to the nature of theconstruction of those runways. Our military estimate was that we couldnot do serious damage to the runways. They are very thick and they’reconstructed in a way that the ordnance that were used, while would have damagedthem – the damage would have been easily repaired in a matter of hours.

So the targetingwas selected very deliberately to render the airbase essentially inoperable asan operating base, and that means taking out all the infrastructure, thefueling capability, all the support infrastructure, hangars. And, indeed,there were a number of Syrian aircraft that were destroyed on the ground. Those were the targets that were selected for that very specific reason.

So the factthat planes may be landing in and out of there, they’re not refueling andthey’re not able to certainly initiate any activity from that airfield today.

Q Can I also ask you a follow-up on reports that theUnited Statesis investigatingRussia’s rolein the gas attacks themselves? How far are you in this investigation, andwhat’s your confidence level and the direction on that, please?

SECRETARYTILLERSON: I don’t have any particular information I think that it wouldbe appropriate to share with you at this point. Obviously we continue togather the information that we can through our intelligence sources, as well asshared sources from other countries as well. And so I don’t think itwould be appropriate for me to comment on that at this time.

Q Russiahas comeout very strongly against the attack, calling it an “act of aggression.” Do you have a message for the Russians or a response to that?

SECRETARYTILLERSON: I’m disappointed in that response from the Russians because itindicates their continued support for the Assad regime and, in particular,their continued support for a regime that carries out these type of horrendousattacks on their own people. So I find it very disappointing, but, sadly,I have to tell you, not all that surprising.

Q There were reports prior to today that President Trump was planning tosign an executive order that would target countries that dump steel into theUnited States. Was that correct, and is he still planning to do so, if so?

SECRETARY ROSS: The practice is to announce executive orders and executive memoranda whenthey’re issued, not in response to rumors.

Q Can you just if Westinghouse was talked about at all, and the scale ofthe bankruptcy of Westinghouse – was that even a topic?

SECRETARY ROSS: That was not a topic in today’s session, but we have been looking verycarefully at that and the alternatives, both from an economic, from an energygeneration and from a national security point of view.

SECRETARYMNUCHIN: And I would just comment that it – obviously, any suchtransaction that involved foreign investment would go through the normal CFIUSprocess.

Thank you.

MR. SPICER: Thank you guys very much. Have a great weekend.

END
4:22 P.M. EDT

技安2017-04-09 17:13:16

感觉挺和谐啊……

livia田田田田2017-04-14 23:22:56

危机？

JW2017-04-09 11:19:40

不开放市场会怎么样？战争吗

作者

不会，贸易平衡问题