Home > Press Room > 

SCIO briefing on Sino-US trade

Economy
A press conference was held on Wednesday afternoon to introduce issues related to Sino-U.S. trade.

China.org.cnUpdated: April 6, 2018

CNN:

While publishing the list, the U.S. said it would minimize its influence on domestic enterprises and citizens. What are China's considerations on its list? As you said, among the more than 100 products of 14 categories, the first two are soybeans from the United States. These agricultural products are very important to the big agricultural states in the Midwest. These states are core supporters of Donald Trump in his presidential election. So my question is whether China intended to shake President Trump's political base and initiate a precise strike to force him not to start a "trade war," or to come back to the negotiation table?

Zhu Guangyao:

The CNN reporter analyses challenges in the Sino-U.S. economic relations from the angle of politics. I think business is business, and we should analyze the challenges and how to respond to them from the economic perspective. Because, as China has reiterated, the essence of Sino-U.S. ties is mutual benefit and win-win results. And Sino-U.S. economic ties are the ballast and propeller for Sino-U.S. relations. President Xi Jinping has devoted tremendous energy to maintain the healthy and stable development of China-U.S. economic relations. It is under this precondition that we have lodged serious representations to the United States, reminding it that if it uses the so-called Section 301 and national interests as an excuse to solve economic issues, it will harm its national interests, China's interests, as well as the whole world's interests. Under these circumstances, we are compelled to take the countermeasures, publishing the product list, and its content and order are all well grounded. 

Frankly speaking, China accounts for 62 percent of U.S. soybean exports. We all know that the U.S. soybean farmers hope China and the United States have sound economic ties, because they can benefit from the healthy development of the relations. The United States exported 32.854 million tons of soybeans to China last year, 34.39 percent of China's soybean imports. This size of imports is too big. Some Chinese soybean farmers have appealed to the relevant associations, saying that the U.S. government's subsidies have affected their interests. The Chinese government respects the farmers' requirements, and the policy appeals of the Chinese Soybean Association. Thus, soybean has become part of our countermeasures. But this goods list has not yet taken effect. The two sides have laid the problems open on the table. It is time for negotiation and cooperation. The precondition for negotiation and cooperation is mutual respect. No one side should enforce conditions on the other side at its will. 

We don't think that reckless and wild actions can resolve problems, and divergences can only be resolved through constructive talks and pragmatic negotiations. The preconditions for negotiation are mutual understanding and mutual accommodation, not pricing oneself out of the market. China has long-term friendly exchanges with the United States in this regard. Frankly speaking, I have engaged in works related to the United States for many years. I have had many quarrels with my U.S. colleagues. But we all know the national interests of our respective countries, and we will finally come back to the negotiation table. In accordance with the consensus reached in the two leaders' meeting in Mar-a-Lago, Hamburg and Beijing, we should resolve the trade disputes through pragmatic and constructive attitudes, and consolidate the mutual beneficial and win-win economic ties between the two countries to benefit our two peoples, including the soybean farmers in both countries. I appreciate that the U.S. soybean farmers and the American Soybean Association, for I know that they are pressing President Trump and the U.S. government to maintain the hard-won economic ties with China through various means, including paying out of their own pockets to air their voices in the U.S. media. Of course, they have benefited tremendously from the sound Sino-U.S. economic ties. Thanks.

CCTV/CGTN:

My question is, as President Trump said he hopes that China will reduce its annual trade surplus with the United States by US$100 billion. What's China's attitude on this issue?

Wang Shouwen:

Thank you for your question. First of all, we must understand how the trade surplus was formed. Trade happens between companies and consumers from two countries on a voluntary basis. Sometimes, a country wants to buy, and another country wants to sell. It is not decided by the governments, but by the economic structure and industrial competitiveness of the two countries.

Why does trade between China and the United States appear to be imbalanced? In my opinion, first of all, it is a problem with the structure of the U.S. economy. The U.S. economy is driven by over-consumption and under-saving. Its savings are less than its investments. This determines that it must have a deficit in global trade. The United States has a trade deficit not only with China but also with many other countries. Secondly, in order to maintain the status of the U.S. dollar as an international payment currency, the United States must maintain a relatively large trade deficit.

Third, an important cause of the Sino-U.S. trade imbalance is that although the United States has many advantageous industries, the U.S. government imposes many restrictions on U.S. companies, forbidding them to sell products to China. Therefore, the U.S. exports to China were affected, and the trade deficit emerged. The U.S. high-tech industry is a typical example. And there are many other U.S. industries that are highly competitive, but are not allowed to export to China. When those that can sell goods in China are not permitted to do so, it's natural that U.S. exports to China are low, and that the United States is seeing a trade deficit.

We are delighted to see that after President Trump took office, the restrictions on energy products, crude oil, liquefied natural gas and some other goods were loosened. Previously, these products were totally forbidden to be sold to China. In response, we increased the import of U.S. oil and gas substantially. These are positive measures, and can help solve the problem.

Now, let's look at the specific figures. If we take a closer look at the surplus and deficit figures, we will find the gap is not very large in actuality. Taking into account statistical variations, and the impacts of entrepot trade and service trade, China's trade surplus is only one third of the trade deficit announced by Washington. In the United States, the current account deficit was 4.9 percent of GDP during the financial crisis in 2007. Now, the figure is 2.3 percent. This means the proportion is declining. In China, the current account surplus was 9.9 percent of GDP in 2007, and the figure dropped to less than 2 percent today. Therefore, China and the United States both achieved progress in maintaining trade balance. This is a result that we are all glad to see.

You mentioned that China should reduce the US$100 billion surplus, which is absolutely unacceptable. The first reason is that we are unable to do it. As I analyzed just now, the trade surplus and deficit is determined by market forces as well as the overall economic policies and structure of the U.S., so China cannot reduce the surplus on its own. 

Second, we cannot accept it, because it requires efforts of both sides to reduce the surplus, and no one can reduce the surplus on its own. China wants to buy U.S. products, but the U.S. does not sell and even continues to restrict its exports, then how can the surplus be reduced? Therefore, we hope that the U.S. can relax its export controls of high-tech products to China, increase its domestic saving rate, and actively respond to the measures taken by the Chinese government to expand our import. For example, China will hold the China International Import Expo in Shanghai from November 5 to 10 this year, and we hope that U.S. industries and businesses can take this opportunity to display their products and services to Chinese consumers and importers. We believe that only through the joint efforts of both sides can the trade surplus or deficit be eased gradually. It is not feasible in both theory and practice to set a number and work for it through government intervention. Thank you.

NPR:

In the investigation report of Section 301 made by the United States Trade Representative, the "Made in China 2025" program seemed to be riddled with criticism. It put forward the following concerns: First, how can China acquire advanced technologies? Is it through appropriate channels? Second, "Made in China 2025" clarified that Chinese enterprises will account for a certain market share. Will excludability exist? Finally, does the fact that domestic enterprises receive a lot of funding from the government conform to international economic rules? What are your comments on these points? Will "Made in China 2025" adjust itself to conform to international economic rules more strictly?

Wang Shouwen:

Thank you for your question. You speak better Mandarin than I do. As for "Made in China 2025," China proposed it on the basis of open development and win-win cooperation. You have a clear understanding of it, as the initiative itself is open and transparent. It aims to offer some strategic guidance and information for the upgrading of Chinese manufacturing sector. It is transparent, open and does not discriminate. Both Chinese and foreign enterprises, state-owned and private ones, can all take part in it. So we welcome U.S.-funded enterprises to join it, too. In its roll out process, we made stringent examinations to guarantee that it conforms to WTO rules. The Ministry of Commerce fulfilled the duty on the basis of our commitment to the WTO to ensure that we perform our duties as a WTO member. So we maintain that "Made in China 2025" meets the obligations of the WTO framework.

If you think that "Made in China 2025" is inconsistent with WTO obligations and goes against China's commitment in any respect, we can come together to negotiate with the WTO, or we can further bring a lawsuit. But we don't want anyone to artificially create excuses and then unilaterally take steps. Perhaps we have different opinions, but we hope to solve problems in the framework of WTO international rules.

"Made in China 2025" does have some targets, and these goals are predictive, directive and not mandatory. In fact, many countries have also made similar guidance targets and guidance plans. If you don't agree with me, I look forward to receiving your comments and criticism.

The Clinton administration developed a national infrastructure plan which took the information superhighway as an important approach to revitalizing the U.S. economy. We believe that our "Made in China 2025" is similar to that. The Obama administration also launched a national plan aimed at doubling the U.S. exports in five years. That was a guidance plan, too. The European Union also made its "industrial revival" program.

So, I suggest you read the "Made in China 2025" carefully again and don't take it as a terrible thing. I would like to emphasize that it is transparent, open and non-discriminatory. Some of the targets it sets are guiding and leading ones, which only provide some guidance information rather than mandatory tasks. And this practice has been adopted by many countries, including the United States.

Zhu Guangyao:

Shouwen's response to this journalist's question is put in a historical and global perspective and is very objective. The USTR criticised "Made in China 2025," accusing China of infringing on or stealing U.S. intellectual property rights, and saying that is why China boasts such rapid growth. 

Indeed, China's per capita GNP was US$220 in 1980, and the figure surpassed US$8,820 in 2017, according to the latest statistics. This is a tremendous change. How has the unprecedented rise in China's comprehensive strength come about? I think, the underlying reason lies in reform and opening-up under the leadership of the Communist Party of China. President Xi Jinping stressed that reform and opening-up plays the decisive role in determining the destiny of contemporary China.  

As for intellectual property rights, how has China realized such fast growth? We have our recipe for success. We prioritize development, regard talent as the top resource and  see innovation as the most powerful driving force. We adopt the new concept of innovative, coordinated, green and open development that is for everyone to realize sustained growth of the national economy and continuous improvement of people's lives. At the same time, we follow the principle of mutual respect, fairness and justice, cooperation and win-win results to positively handle international relations, in which the Sino-U.S. economic relationship comes to the fore. 

At this critical moment for China-U.S. economic ties, I think the two sides should calm down and engage in consultation based on facts and in the spirit of mutual understanding and mutual respect. The at-fault party should examine its mistakes. The two countries should not criticize each other. We should not consider that the other country is developing at the expense of our own development. In a pluralistic world, the cooperation between China and the United States is crucial to world peace and development as well as the interests of the two peoples. Therefore, it is the expectation of all people around the world, not just the people of our two countries, that we can properly manage the trade friction between us. A reporter asked a question about "trade friction" and "trade war" just now. I think the two countries are putting forward requirements for each other. Based on the requirements, we'll properly settle relevant disputes through consultation on an equal footing. We'll also pay attention to the protection of intellectual property rights, which is a top priority for making China a country of innovators. Thank you.

CCTV:

In the face of such an immense trade challenge from the United States, will China have the ability to deal with it? If this continues and evolves into a trade war, will China be able to afford it, and win it?

Zhu Guangyao:

Your questions are on how to face and deal with the challenges. Regarding relations between China and the world, especially economic relations, President Xi Jinping made a very clear statement in the report at the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC). President Xi emphasized that China will never pursue development at the expense of others' interests, but nor will China ever give up its legitimate rights and interests. No one should expect China to swallow anything that undermines its interests. President Xi's words are a guideline for us to handle China-U.S. trade disputes and even severe trade frictions. We deal with this relationship according to President Xi's instructions. We have repeatedly communicated with them, but the U.S. side is still obstinately walking on its own path alone and has introduced a high-tariff list of items worth US$50 billion. We must act in defense of China's own interests. 

Under the circumstance that both sides have laid out their conditions, we hope that both sides can treat each other candidly and with mutual respect and conduct consultations based on the principle of cooperation and win-win. As I just said, China has never given in to external pressure since the founding of the People's Republic of China. This is the history of the development of our country and the history of the Chinese people's struggle. China will not yield to any external pressure. On the contrary, under the guidance of the Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, through innovation and development, the Chinese economy will rise to a higher level, China's per capita GNP will continue increasing from the current US$8,820, and China's market will become broader and more attractive. We open up to the whole world and hope that every foreign investor can benefit from China. As we all know, State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi has already announced that President Xi Jinping will attend the Boao Forum for Asia and deliver an important speech on China's reform and opening up policy. Under President Xi's leadership, China will embark on a broader and more ambitious road that will not only benefit the Chinese people but also make our contribution to the peace and development of the world.

Phoenix TV:

Some media outlets have recently said that the current "trade war" between China and the U.S. was incited by China, because China undertook actions like forced technology transfer, which threatens the protection of intellectual property rights. How would you comment on this? 

Wang Shouwen:

Thank you for your question, Phoenix TV. I think it would be appropriate to respond to the media report you quoted with what President Trump gets used to say, that it's "fake news".

The U.S. investigated this so-called matter of "China's theft of intellectual property rights" and proposed a specific tax list yesterday based on its domestic law. First, the U.S. violates its own commitments. When the U.S. passed the WTO Agreement in 1994, the President submitted a Statement of Administrative Action to the Congress, and the U.S. promised not to decide whether other countries' practices are against the WTO rules or not unilaterally through the Section 301 Investigation. So the U.S. must handle disputes related to the WTO according to the WTO rules and the final decisions of dispute settlement bodies. Without the WTO's mandate, the U.S. government has no right to terminate its obligations under the WTO, nor can it conduct cross sector retaliation. The U.S. violated its own commitments first. Then, in 1998, the E.U. sued the U.S. for its Section 301 Investigation into the WTO. The case was called DS152. The U.S. made another international commitment to the process of the litigation, saying that it would handle relevant trade disputes in strict accordance with WTO dispute settlement procedures, rather than adopting the Section 301 Investigation and its conclusions unilaterally. Therefore, the U.S. has violated its commitments to its domestic law and international law, so who would you say has incited this "war"?

Second, the U.S. accused China of its "forced technology transfer" in the Section 301 Investigation, which was completely baseless because China has no law stating that foreign companies must transfer their technology to their Chinese partners. There is no law making such requirements either. There are certain industries in China where joint ventures are required for foreign investment, which is in line with WTO rules. As a developing country, China hopes that foreign investment and Chinese companies can make joint ventures, which is completely in line with WTO rules as well. So in this circumstance, it is baseless for the U.S. to say that the Chinese government has forced technology transfer. Technology transfer between companies is completely based on contracts. One company is willing to transfer, and another is willing to accept and pay an appropriate amount, which is a voluntary action that the government should not intervene in. In fact, some U.S. companies have realized huge gains in China by means of joint ventures. For example, a well-known American automobile company established a joint venture in China, and now the automobile production of the company in China is more than its automobile production in any other place in the world, including the U.S. The profits the joint venture obtained exceed those obtained in the U.S. or any other country in the world. These are the benefits of joint ventures, which benefit both China and the U.S. How could such practices be regarded as forced technology transfer?

Third, China is committed to the protection of intellectual property. General Secretary Xi put forward a new development philosophy in his report delivered at the 19th CPC National Congress. The first principle of which is development driven by innovation. Without the protection of intellectual property, there is no space for innovation-driven development. We have improved the IP protection system through legislation and established a series of mechanisms for administrative enforcement and judiciary. We have set up trans-provincial IP courts. An American transnational corporation told me that one of its companies in China won 28 out of 31 cases here. You can search for the judgments of IP disputes. More than 80 percent of lawsuits filed by American clients were ruled in their favor. This shows that China's court system and administrative enforcement provide strong protection for IP rights.

China is a developing country. We are not perfect regarding IP protection. But we must admit the progress has been made in this regard. When China entered the WTO in 2001, China forked out only US$1.9 billion to foreign IP owners, but the amount had risen to $28.6 billion by 2017. Certainly, we should intensify IP protection. President Xi said property protection, especially IP protection, is important in building a good business environment. We should introduce harsher punishments for IP infringements and make the violators pay a higher price. Despite the progress we have made, we will endeavor to improve our protection of intellectual property. China cannot accept the practices of some countries that adopt discriminatory measures against China that breach the WTO commitment and its own domestic laws, based on nothing more than groundless reports, accusations and complaints from corporations. It's self-evident who started the "trade war." Thank you.   

China Radio International:

My question is for Mr. Zhu. At the G20 Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors recently concluded in Argentina, the U.S. representative said that China's transition to a market economy is regressing. You were at the meeting. Could you tell us how the Chinese side responded to this view at the meeting? I also heard that the Under Secretary of the Treasury of the United States said the two countries won't have any more comprehensive economic dialogue. Do you accept this view? 

Zhu Guangyao:  

The G20 Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors was held in Buenos Aires on March 19 and 20. Before that, a meeting of their deputies was held. It's true that the U.S. representative mentioned a regression in China's reform. He made the remark when discussing the global economic crisis. As the deputy finance minister of China, I made a speech immediately after him.

In my speech, I first made clear China's perception of the world economy. China believes that after the outbreak of the global financial crisis, the year 2018 has seen the best performance of the world economy. Therefore, it's important for the G20 countries to remain united and to coordinate their policies with each other.  

Then, I mentioned the success China has made after it adopted the reform and opening up policy. When the policy was introduced, China's per capita GNP was US$220. Last year, this figure exceeded US$8,820. The change is remarkable. This is the result of the reform and opening up policy and of the hard work of the Chinese people. When improving their life, the Chinese people have also made great contributions to the world. In the past decades, China accounts for more than 70 percent of poverty reduction worldwide. For many years, China's economic growth accounted for more than 30 percent of the world's total economic growth. These are the achievements of China's reform and opening up policy and the contributions China has made to the world. 

China is going to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the introduction of the reform and opening up policy. New reform and opening up measures will be announced. China will surely become more and more open. We want to have more policy communication with other countries. We welcome more foreign investment in China. We will also increase investment overseas. Our aim is to further integrate the Chinese economy into the world economy. In this context, it's crucial for G20 to enhance policy coordination among member countries, including China and the United States. 

This is generally what I said at the meeting.

The second question pertains to the China-U.S. comprehensive economic dialogue mechanism, which was one of the four important China-U.S. dialogue mechanisms that Chinese President Xi Jinping and his counterpart Donald Trump initiated during their meeting at Mar-a-Lago on April 6, 2017. It is actually a continuation of the China-U.S. Strategic Economic Dialogue and the China-U.S. Strategic and Economic Dialogue, but bears the hallmark of the Trump administration. The dialogue mechanism has led to very productive cooperation, including the early-stage outcomes achieved under the China-U.S. 100-day economic cooperation plan. I remember, in May last year, in this room, I answered questions from the press, including a CNN journalist. In this situation, we should cherish the cooperative relationship already established between the two countries. Coincidently, on that very day, after the press conference, the U.S. Deputy Treasury Secretary said in an email to me that it was wrong to say that China-U.S. comprehensive economic dialogue was dead and that the U.S. cherished high-level dialogue with China, referring to a report. You can verify this. Since the two parties keep close policy communication, important information may need to be exchanged at any time. I can tell you that my reply to his email was, "I also value your message and will report this message to my superiors."

The divide on China-U.S. economic ties, in my opinion, is partly a reflection of the expectation for a more open market as well as a better business environment from each other, and partly a reflection of the aspiration for cooperation in the market. Otherwise, we can just go our own way and ignore the issues on the agenda. The challenges facing us are real, but I think the two countries have the wisdom and capabilities to solve these issues, because we have shared interests that derive from one another's interests. China and the U.S. have more shared than divergent interests, and that is the reason for this. The two countries have US$580 billion worth of trade volume and 230 billion worth of direct investment, in addition to the U.S bonds held by the Chinese government (valued at US$1.1-1.2 trillion according to the U.S. Treasury) as mentioned by the Wall Street Journal. Beyond that, the two countries enjoy the friendship between their people and build up mutual trust. China and the U.S. are two great countries and the people of the two countries are great people. Win-win cooperation is what we both desire. Thank you. 

China Business Network:

I have a question for Vice Minister Wang Shouwen. WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said recently that a trade war between China and the U.S. would have a grave impact on the global economy and that the WTO was facing a most difficult moment. Some other experts believe that third countries would suffer most from the trade war. Has China assessed the effects of the trade war on both itself and the world? Faced with the current external environment, will China push ahead with further opening up? Thank you.

Wang Shouwen: 

Thank you for your question. Indeed, Director-General Azevêdo's words are very reasonable. No one will emerge a winner from a trade war. This is why China, as a responsible country and WTO member, doesn't want a trade war. China is willing to discuss and settle all disputes with the U.S. based on equality, consultation and mutual respect in line with WTO rules, which are widely agreed on. However, if China's interests are hurt and its economic security is endangered, we will take all necessary measures to defend our legitimate interests in accordance with the spirit of international law and the stipulation of China's Foreign Trade Law. Of course, we hope all the so-called disputes can be settled within the WTO framework, so that we can minimize damage to the WTO system and to the interests of all parties. But if someone is determined to wage a trade war, China will not be afraid. As I mentioned just now, China will fight to the end if a trade war is initiated, while also keeping the door to dialogue and consultation open. China is willing to openly exchange views with the U.S. on handling differences within the WTO or bilateral framework for mutual benefit and win-win results. Thank you.

Reuters:

Are the U.S. trade measures beyond China's initial expectation? Will the RMB exchange rate be a topic during the negotiations between China and the U.S.? Thank you.

Zhu Guangyao:

China and the United States keep close communication; even facing severe differences, we still maintain policy communication. China has made its principle clear. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce, representing the position of the Chinese government, clearly stated that we will not negotiate under the Section 301 framework. This is a basic principle, because the U.S. action is a unilateral one. We hope that the two sides can clearly put forward their policy requirements  and seek new ways to solve the problem based on the principle of mutual respect. The most important thing is mutual respect, and then we can achieve win-win cooperation. 

Both of us have the responsibilities and obligations to manage our expectations, because China and the United States are the two largest economies in the world, and their policies not only have a major impact on their respective economies, but also have a major impact on the global economy. The global multilateral system must be maintained by all WTO members. In this process, both China and the United States have significant responsibilities. In this process, all countries must realize that hegemonism and unilateralism are unpopular. In safeguarding the multilateral system, we must work together because the United States has always played a leading role in the global economic system that has been established since World War II. China is an important participant, builder, and contributor to this system, and of course, it is also a beneficiary. We are willing to work with all of you to maintain this multilateral system through cooperation – constructive cooperation – so that our global economy can move forward and develop in a healthy and stable manner.

Regarding the exchange rate issue, the IMF recently made a very clear definition of the exchange rate, including the fundamentals of the economy, sound macroeconomic policies and sound mechanisms. Under this premise, the determination of exchange rates reflects the strength of the market. I think that China and the U.S., as important members of the International Monetary Fund and important participants and defenders of the international financial market, both shoulder common responsibilities. Cooperation in this area is conducive to the stability of the financial market, helps prevent possible systemic financial risks and contributes to the healthy and sustainable development of the world economy. Thank you.

CRNTT:

My question is for Mr. Zhu. Will this round of trade friction between China and the United States impact China's GDP growth target this year? If yes, how big will the influence be? 

Zhu Guangyao:

The Chinese economy has maintained stable growth in recent years. Both the 19th CPC National Congress and the government work report delivered by Premier Li Keqiang at this year's two sessions made clear that the Chinese economy has shifted from fast growth to high quality development. This is in accordance with the principle of pursuing progress while ensuring stability. It's very important for China to upgrade its economy, give priority to performance and therefore maintain sound and sustainable development. 

The Central Committee of the CPC and the State Council have made it clear that guided by this basic principle, we must unswervingly implement the supply-side structural reforms, focusing on the supply-side structural reform to push the three major tasks. 

The three major tasks, also tasks for the next three years, are preventing systemic financial risks, reducing poverty and controlling pollution. These three major tasks are related to the stability of our economic system and quality of our people's lives. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has made consecutive upward revisions of its forecast for China's economic growth. The fund expects China's economy to expand by 6.6 percent this year, higher than the 6.5 percent target announced by Premier Li Keqiang during his government work report presentation at the opening meeting of the first session of the 13th National People's Congress.

The IMF had an overall assessment. According to its 6.6 percent forecast, if China maintains a three-year average growth rate of 6.3 percent in 2018, 2019, and 2020, China will double its 2010 GDP by 2020. Therefore, we are fully confident that we will achieve our goal of doubling the size of China's economy by 2020. In 2017, China's per capita GNP reached US$ 8,820. The World Bank's middle-income standard is US$12,700. We can certainly cross the middle-income line if China develops at this speed.

Therefore, we do not want China and the United States to have a "trade war," yet now we are indeed threatened by serious trade frictions. Both sides should calm down and explore a new path through cooperation and mutual respect, and we must gradually come up with a way to mitigate the imbalance in Sino-U.S. trade during the process of cooperation. China has made clear that we do not pursue a trade surplus and we hope bilateral trade will gradually come to a balance in the process of cooperation. At the same time, in a win-win situation, China and the United States can realize the harmonious coexistence of their economies, work together to improve people's well being, and jointly promote the peaceful development of the world. Thank you.

Hu Kaihong:

This concludes today's briefing. Thank you, Mr. Zhu and Mr. Wang. Thank you, friends from the press.

<  1  2