Roundtable with Chinese Print Media

Remarks by Jon M. Huntsman, Jr.
U.S. Ambassador to China
Roundtable with Chinese print media

U.S. Embassy, Beijing, China
September 4, 2009

 

Ambassador Huntsman: I’m honored and delighted to be here, as (Public Affairs Officer) Tom (Skipper) mentioned.  Tom and I both have something in common.  We’re both recent arrivals.  Tom was absolutely right in saying that today marks our second week.  It’s been a very very busy couple of weeks.  We’ve been able to get around and meet some leaders and to escort important delegations from the United States here having important dialogues.  I’ve learned that this must be the most, at least among the busiest of embassies that the United States has anywhere in the world.

I’ll just offer you a couple of thoughts, and then we’ll turn it over to you for any questions you have.

I mentioned to President Hu during our meeting -- as I did with Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi -- that we have a very busy fall season ahead of us.  We’re just coming off the heels of the Strategic and Economic Dialogue.  We have mil-to-mil dialogues planned.  We have the JCCT, the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade.  We have a human rights dialogue later in the year.  Just to mention a few.  Then of course President Obama, fulfilling his commitment to President Hu that he would visit China, sometime later in the year.  So we have a lot to look forward to, and right around the corner, which is to say a couple of weeks from now, our two Presidents -- President Obama and President Hu -- will meet in New York, and later we will have the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh.

So there is much ahead between now and the end of the year.  As I mentioned to President Hu, I think by the end of the year we will be able to prove that the U.S.-China relationship is probably at its strongest point in the 30 years of our formal bilateral diplomatic relationship.  Which is saying a lot.  But I do believe by the end of the year as we conclude multiple dialogues and we assess the direction of the relationship, where we see the problems that we’ve been able to jointly tackle, we’re going to find that the U.S.-China relationship is on very sound footing and it is as healthy as it’s been in 30 years of a formal diplomatic relationship.

So we’ve got a lot of work ahead of us.  We’re very excited about where the relationship is and where it’s going and how the relationship increasingly is moving toward global issues that probably makes it unique.

As I’ve watched the relationship over the years -- and I’ve observed it now for 30 years -- the relationship has been generally marked by our bilateral dialogues.  We have issues that we handle bilaterally and country to country, and we’ll continue those dialogues, no question about that.  But we’re also beginning a very interesting and I think unprecedented period of the relationship that is taking us toward a higher level, tackling global issues that no two other countries in the world can resolve.  Issues like the new energy economy, like climate change, regional security, when you look at the troubled state of the world and our ability together to do so much to enhance the economic and trade prospects for the entire world -- if we handle our relationship right.

So this more than anything else marks I think the new phase of the relationship that we are entering.  We’re cruising at a very high altitude.  When you cruise at a high altitude, it means the weather is better.  There aren’t so many bumps.  If you have to drop down to a lower altitude, generally you encounter more turbulence.

So my commitment to President Hu, as to Foreign Minister Yang, was we will do everything we can to maintain a high altitude in the relationship.

Now, we’re not going to agree on everything.  There will be issues that divide us.  Our interests will not always converge perfectly.  But that doesn’t mean that we can’t take a step back, put the issues in proper context and perspective, and rise above them to keep focused on the issues that really matter in the world.

So that’s where we are, and I think by the end of the year we’re going to know just how well we’re doing in terms of managing what I consider to be the most important relationship in the world.

With that, I’m happy to turn it over to you for any comments, questions, criticism, whatever you have.

Question:  I come from International Herald Leader from the Xinhua News Agency.

My first question is when will President Obama come to China and will you make some preparations for him?

My second question is, what matters do you review in order to make some breakthroughs in your term?  Because there is a time [in Chinese]. I think you know what that means.  And compared to your former Ambassador Randt, what’s your strengths and weaknesses compared to him?  [Laughter].

Ambassador Huntsman:  Well, that’s a lot to process in one question.

First of all, let me start in reverse order and tell you that each Ambassador brings something new to the job.  As I look back on the eight who preceded me since we formally established diplomatic ties in 1979, they all have brought something special to the relationship and they all have been appropriate for their time in history.  I don’t think that we have ever had an ineffective representative in Beijing.  They’ve all genuinely left a mark and left the relationship better.

So my goal, obviously, is to do what my predecessors have done, and that’s to leave the relationship better than I found it.  Now the relationship is in pretty good shape.  So that means when I talk about the cruising altitude, I want to cruise a little higher.  I want to make sure we take the relationship to an even higher altitude where the weather is even clearer.  That is done through understanding our interests, clearly.

We always understand the issues that divide us.  That’s always in the newspapers, and it’s always what people want to discuss.  I think we need to do a better job understanding our shared interests, because I would argue that the United States and China have many shared interests.  We don’t talk about them enough.  I want to make sure that the relationship going forward is built around our shared interests, because increasingly, as China takes its prominent place on the world stage as a responsible stakeholder -- as my good friend Bob Zoellich used to say -- we will find more than ever before that we have shared interests.  More so today than at any other time in history.  That means we have to work together on problem solving and tackling some of these issues.

So I hope that my time here is marked by clearly defining what our shared interests are between the United States and China, and making sure that we have programs underway, dialogues, that allow us to move forward in dealing with our shared interests and in problem solving.  Because in the end, you want more than talk.  You need to have results as well.  The world will watch the U.S.-China relationship for results to see where we take this relationship.

I suspect as it relates to your first point about the President’s visit, this will be a very unique opportunity for the President to help define in ways that only he can -- he’s a very, very brilliant and effective communicator.  And I’ve come to find that he has a keen interest in the relationship.  He wants it to succeed.  He wants it to be positive.  He wants it to be collaborative.  He wants it to be comprehensive.  When he gets here, whenever that time is, and you’ll hear more from the White House, I think the visit will go a long way in helping the Chinese people understand what our many shared interests are and why we should get along country to country like never before.  Why we should be enhancing our exchanges, people to people exchanges, like never before.  This will be a very unique opportunity, and I’m looking forward to it.

Question:  Xia Lei from the Beijing News.  Mr. Ambassador, in 2006 I remember you led a delegation to Beijing and you said at that time that it was the best time to do business with China.  So now as the new Ambassador to China, what kind of trade relationship do you expect the two countries to develop?  For example, especially with regard to the trade disputes, like the recent tire dispute in China.

Ambassador Huntsman:  Let me tell you that in a certain sense, trade friction is a sign of a larger trading relationship.  You can’t trade in a high volume like we’re seeing without having some friction from time to time.

Now we have a rules-based system called the WTO.  I was involved earlier in my career in helping to get China into the WTO in November of 2001.  That means you sign onto a rules-based system, and you make certain commitments towards reform and liberalization.  So now we find ourselves with unprecedented trade flows.  Pretty soon China will be America’s number one trading partner.  And it’s come from when President Nixon visited here in February of 1972, with no trade at all.

I would argue that trade ultimately leads to greater peace and greater prosperity because it means that we have much in the way of economic and commercial interaction.  With that, you're going to have trade disputes.  And my hope is that increasingly we will recognize that the relationship on the trade side is based upon rule of law and a rules-based system that should allow us to adjudicate some of our differences without hostility.  And increasingly we need to look to that rules-based system as we increase our trading relationship.

The marketplace in China is unlike any market in the world.  The marketplace in America is unlike any market in the world.  I can’t think of two other more unique markets anywhere in the international community.  It means we’ll have more in the way of trade interaction.  It means we’ll have more in the way of joint venture opportunities on both sides.  And it means that we’ll likely see more in the way of joint development of new technologies and products.

Where in the early days we traded simple commodities, today we’re trading at a relatively sophisticated level with some of our finest companies in America interacting with some of your companies here.  Entrepreneurs doing business with entrepreneurs.

So I think this is a very good sign, and we will do all that we can to encourage more trade, fair trade, and trade that is consistent with a rules-based approach.

Question:  I’m from Southern Weekly.  My question is about the Taiwan issue.  Is it still the biggest concern in the China-U.S. relationship?  People all know you have some experience in Taiwan, so how will your personal experience influence your work?  How will you handle the Taiwan issue?

Ambassador Huntsman:  I would guess that having some experience living in Taiwan, you're more acutely aware of the sensitivities involved.  But the relationship with Taiwan from the very beginning has always been built around the Taiwan Relations Act, the One China Policy, and the Three Communiqués.  If you look at each of the three communiqués, they’re each very very important.  If you take the time to read them and understand why they occurred at that particular point in history, they all lead up to very important results that have maintained a sense of stability in the region, which is extremely important.  That has remained consistent.  I think it’s in everyone’s interest for that to remain consistent going forward.

I think it’s very encouraging that there is greater dialogue and a greater focus, perhaps an unprecedented focus, on dialogue and stability across the Straits.  That’s a very encouraging sign.  I think all observers in the region and throughout the world applaud the work that is being done and where ultimately that might lead -- more in the way of trade flows, more in the way of people exchanges.  You look at the san tong, the three links, that are becoming a reality.  This was just talk a few years ago.  I don’t think many thought that it would ultimately become a reality, and now we see that evolving.

So as one observer, I think we’re seeing some very encouraging things occurring cross strait, and we applaud that.

Question:  Caijing Magazine.  My question is about with the countdown to Copenhagen, and all sides trying to clinch a deal in Copenhagen.  So for example, by the end of this month the United Nations will host a high profile meeting in New York to invite several heads of government and leaders together in New York to try to prompt a new deal, try to get consent in Copenhagen.

So I wonder what’s your vision about how to clinch a deal in Copenhagen this December?  And what does the United States expect from China?

Ambassador Huntsman:  We have a very good expert by the name of Todd Stern, who is our Special Envoy on climate change, who is deep in dialogue with respect to the negotiating positions here.  But let me just step back and tell you why I think this is important.

We’ve gone through many many decades of industrialization.  In the West, it has allowed our economies to move forward very quickly.  Now we have our citizens who are concerned like never before about quality of life, about health, about clean air.  And I would tell you that from a U.S. perspective, much of the focus industrially over the years to come will be looking at ways to clean up the decades of industrialization.  The new products and technologies, the innovations in clean energy, new modes of transportation, different types of fuels that will allow us to get around.

And I suspect that if we were to sit around here 25 or 50 years from now, we will find that like the communications revolution over the last couple of decades -- computers, ways of communicating, the internet -- it’s transformed our lives.  Everyone here, your lives have been totally transformed by communication technology.  I suspect that our lives will be similarly transformed over the next generation or two by the ways in which we power our economies, deliver transportation options, clean up our manufacturing capability.  And it’s going to be a competitive race, which means that America will innovate some new industries in terms of finding new and greener, cleaner approaches to manufacturing.  China will be doing the same thing.  It will be a competitive race, but it will be a very important one because it will generate new breakthroughs and it will employ a lot of people.  And more importantly, it will focus on emissions challenges by taking them down.

Now this is important to my mind because when you look at where America is across the Pacific Ocean, we are downstream from the industrializing East Asia region.  So if you follow the jet stream, and if you look at the pollution that sits off the coast of California, the scientists will tell you that there is a portion of that, a percentage of that, comes all the way from the other side of the world.  And as governor of a state that is the inland from California, I will tell you that there’s a certain portion of our bad air that comes from the other side of the world as well.  So this is a global issue.  This is a global challenge.  It isn’t one country getting out and doing it and others remaining invisible.  That won’t create results.  We have to be in this together, because everyone is downstream from one another as it relates to emissions challenges and the implications for health and quality of life.

So with the United States and China being the greatest emitters in the world -- between the two of us, almost 50 percent of global emissions - if we can’t work together to help resolve the problem, no one else is going to do it for us.  Therefore we have to be wise enough to say there’s a problem.  And the only two countries that can begin to resolve this challenge, really, are the two of us.  That will then lead to some creative thinking about emissions reductions and certain goals that we can set for ourselves:  energy efficiency programs, renewable portfolio standards.

I took the plane last week, a plane ride to Chengdu, Sichuan, and I looked down on the flight outside of Beijing and I saw rows and rows of new renewable energy -- wind energy -- that was being developed.  China’s taking it very seriously.  You’re investing significant amounts of money in your tomorrow in renewable energy.  America is doing the same thing.  I think that by what we’re doing, we’re going to create the industries of tomorrow that will employ a number of people, a good many people, and at the same time we’re going to clean up the air and improve quality of life and health.  Not just here, not just in the United States, but throughout the world.

So this is more than just saying what is your negotiating position for Copenhagen.  Copenhagen will be a very important end point that we all need to take very seriously and move toward.  I think we need to sometimes take a step back and remind our people and our countries why we’re doing this.  It isn’t just about numbers, it isn’t just about setting goals, it isn’t just about a political dialogue.  This has real implications for the average citizen in the United States and in China.  So it’s therefore a hugely consequential issue that will play into Copenhagen and well beyond as well.

Question:  Ivy Hua from the 21^st Century Business Herald.

My question is on the trade aspect.  I know that you attended the S&ED this July and we know that one of the most important productions in the S&ED is whether the U.S. is going to admit China’s market economy status in an appropriate way.  So I wonder, what is the appropriate way?

And on the trade aspect, another important thing is U.S. export controls, especially in the high tech industry.  So how will you solve this problem in the future, to enhance the U.S.-China trade relationship?  Thank you.

Ambassador Huntsman:  Let me just say generally that I think I’ve been involved in our trading relationship for a lot of years, and I have seen it evolve very quickly into a mature state.  We still have challenges, and we’ll have challenges probably for a good long time because we have such large volumes that cross the Pacific back and forth.  But I do believe that through the Strategic and Economic Dialogue and through our JCCT and our many working groups that are part of that, that we will be able to address the concerns that are on display on both sides.  There will be national security concerns on our side, there will be certain domestic concerns on your side.  Those will be addressed as our trading relationship continues to be enhanced.  I think like never before, I have great confidence in where our trading relationship is going because we’re talking to one another.  We have a dialogue ongoing.  And the dialogue is unprecedented in the sense that it’s at the highest levels between my government and yours.

So we can point out individual challenges today, but I suspect like the challenges 30 years ago, which were many, they’re overcome year by year through dialogue and through working out our differences.

Question:  Thank you, from China Daily.

Mr. Ambassador, the Democratic Party of Japan has won the elections in Japan.  It seems it’s not that dependent on the U.S. as the previous ruling party so that may observers expect some adjustment in Japan’s foreign policy.  So what’s your view about the future trilateral relationship between the three nations (the U.S., Japan and China)?

Ambassador Huntsman:  I think the trilateral relationship will always be strong and always be based on stability and peace in the region.  There’s no other way to manage Northeast Asia.  It is increasingly becoming a significant part of the world’s GDP, probably 20 to 25 percent of the world’s GDP just in Northeast Asia over the next two decades.  So it’s in everyone’s interest to maintain peace, stability and prosperity in the region.  And although there has been an historic change in Japan, I have no doubt about Japan’s continued focus on maintaining peace and prosperity in the region.

Question:  From China Newsweek.

I saw in the American news media that you were considered for the Ambassador position eight years ago.  It is true?

Ambassador Huntsman:  No.

Question:  No?

Ambassador Huntsman:  I was asked, but there wasn’t much of a competition.

Question:  I also heard --

Ambassador Huntsman:  I was also asked to be Trade Ambassador, along with Ambassador to one other country.  We didn’t know what our family wanted to do and ultimately ended up working on the trade side.

Question:  The U.S. media also said you could be a strong competitor of Obama in the 2012 presidential election.  What do you think?

Ambassador Huntsman:  Well, I don’t think too much about that.  I now work for President Obama and represent my country here.  If we do our job well, we might even be here right up to 2012.  I don’t know, and I don’t want to forecast the future. But as far as I’m concerned, there aren’t too many other jobs that are as rewarding or as important as representing the United States here in Beijing in what clearly is emerging as our most important relationship in the world.  Beyond that, I’m not a very good politician.

Question:  I’m from Global Times and also attended Johns Hopkins.

Ambassador Huntsman:  Way to go.  Great school.

Question:  My question is for the U.S., between Japan and China, which do you think will be the most important relationship?

Ambassador Huntsman:  Everyone defines relations slightly differently.  By saying that the U.S.-China relationship is -- I guess you could say is “among” our most important relationships, because you have a couple of relationships in Europe that would consider themselves important, longstanding allies.  And certainly the U.S.-Japan relationship has been a significant and important relationship and will continue to be.

I try to look into the future and to forecast where trade and security and the flow of people will take us.  I think by forecasting the future, you’ll get different answers based on who you talk to, but personally, I am hard pressed to identify any other relationship that over time will emerge with the level of significance that the U.S.-China relationship will.

Question:  Do you think the stability situation in Xinjiang will impact the bilateral relationship?

Ambassador Huntsman:  I think it’s important, with trials around the corner, for transparency to rule the day, because as you are transparent, the more the world is able to see the kinds of things, the way in which a government responds to a challenge.  So there is no way of settling down the concerns or fears of outside observers other than good old-fashioned transparency.

Then beyond that, having a discussion about the root causes of an uprising.  What is driving it?  What is fueling it?  And are there ways that you can lessen tension by dealing with some of the issues that are pervasive on the ground?  I suspect this will be an issue that many observers will have -- not just the United States, but everyone looking at the situation.

People are critical of the United States, as they should be.  We take criticism, and I think we take it pretty well.  When you have an international incident, when you have issues that crop up domestically within the United States, it’s important to critically evaluate what happened, what went wrong.

We’ve had some significant natural disasters, for example, in the United States.  People critically look at them, and they evaluate why it happened, what the results were as compared to what they could have been, and then you do it better next time.  And in the case of Xinjiang, I suspect there will be a lot of people looking on.  The more transparency there is, I think the more confidence there will be in the pathway forward.

Thank you all very much, and I hope that we can have a roundtable maybe once every quarter or a couple of times a year if you would be interested in doing that, where you can come in and we can just compare and exchange notes like this.  That would be good.

Thank you.

 

# # # #