Subsequent to Presidents Barack Obama and Hu Jintao’s meeting, Administration officials met with the press to answer questions regarding what was discussed between the two. Below is a transcript of that Q&A session. Stayed tuned to China Law & Policy as we delve deeper into some of the issues raised during the two Presidents’ meeting.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release September 22, 2009
BACKGROUND BRIEFING BY
A SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL
ON THE PRESIDENT’S MEETING WITH PRESIDENT HU OF CHINAPress Filing Center
Waldorf Astoria
New York, New York
6:00 P.M. EDT
MR. HAMMER: Good late afternoon. We’re going to do one more readout for today, and I know there’s a conference call beginning in about 15 minutes. So that’s the window that we have. We have a senior administration official who will brief on the President’s just concluded meeting with the Chinese President Hu.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Good afternoon. The President had an hour-and-a-half meeting with President Hu. It had been scheduled for an hour. The meeting I would describe as friendly, warm. It’s the second time the two have met. They’ve spoken often on the phone. It reflects the fact they’ve had many conversations and they’ve now become easy and comfortable with each other. It was a conversation; it was not simply a presentation of talking points on the two sides.
The emphasis was upon common interests, how far we’ve come in building the relationship, opportunities that we have to build the relationship further, discussion about how the President’s trip to China later this year could fit in with that objective, candid discussion of differences.
The principal topics that were discussed were North Korea, Iran, climate change, and global economic recovery and bilateral — the bilateral economic and trade relationship. I think I’ll leave it there and open it up to questions.
Today, after the U.N. General Assembly meeting, Presidents Barack Obama and Hu Jintao met for a one-on-one meeting to discuss issues pertaining to the U.S.-China relationship. Although the meeting was off the record, below is the official transcript of their remarks prior to their private discussion.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: We welcome your delegation to New York. I’m sorry that I didn’t have a chance to see you in L’Aquila, but your Councilor Dai did an excellent job representing your country.
I also have to say that I enjoyed seeing Vice Premier Wang as well as Councilor Dai at the SED meeting. And Vice President Biden and I both had excellent meetings with Chairman Wu two weeks ago in the White House. I should also mention that Vice Premier Wang showed me his jump shot, which is excellent. (Laughter.) How do you say “basketball shot” in Chinese? (Laughter.)
On Friday, the day before breaking for a month-long recess, the Senate finally confirmed Gov. Jon Huntsman as U.S.
Our New Ambassador to China!
Ambassador to China. In the coming weeks, Ambassador Huntsman, his wife and two youngest daughters will move to Beijing. In addition to managing the U.S.-China relationship and working with Chinese officials on North Korea, climate change and other difficult issues, Ambassador Huntsman will also be helping to arrange President Obama’s first trip to China, scheduled for this fall.
For more information from the Salt Lake Tribune, click here.
For an analysis on the Huntsman confirmation from the China Daily’s English edition, click here.
In a recent interview with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), CFR Senior Fellow and China environmental expert
Dr. Elizabeth C. Economy
Elizabeth C. Economy analyzes the recent Strategic & Economic Dialogue with China and the U.S.’ changing relation with the emerging global power. While noting that serious differences remain, Dr. Economy stresses the importance of the U.S. and China to work together on a myriad of global issues.
She also pontificates on the changing dynamic in our relationship with China due to the weakened economic might of the U.S. vis-à-vis China and the increase of differing opinions on issues from the Chinese leadership.
But for us at China Law & Policy, where our focus is on the interplay of legal development in China and U.S. policy toward the country, most exciting part of the interview was Dr. Economy’s powerful insistence that the U.S. make rule of law development a priority in its policy toward China.
CFR: What issues should the United States prioritize in its talks with China? Economy: Off the top of my head, I would say climate change because it is potentially game changing for the entire world in an overwhelmingly negative way. However, my second thought would be the rule of law. The rule of law underpins virtually every other issue. Whether we’re talking about food and product safety, or environmental implementation of anything China might agree to when it comes to global climate change, or trade and investment barriers and intellectual property rights protection, all of them hinge on China having an effective rule of law. Without that, the relationship will continue to founder, because even though we have high-level agreement that we want to work on these issues, if China can’t ensure that it will live up to its obligations, then we’re going to continue to have serious conflict. From my perspective, the most important thing we can do is help them develop the rule of law; it is at the root of most of our conflicts. (emphasis added)
In Friday’s Huffington Post, Sen. John Kerry published a timely op-ed piece, “Who Lost the Earth?” on the need for the U.S. and China to reach some kind of an agreement on climate change. “Who Lost the Earth?” comes at a point when it appears that any agreements reached during December’s U.N. Conference on Climate Change will likely not include the two biggest emitters of greenhouse gases: the U.S. and China.
In his op-ed, Sen. Kerry correctly commends China for its efforts in already implementing measures to curb greenhouse gases. It is in fact impressive that China is already experimenting further than the U.S. with some energy efficient technologies. Furthermore, Sen. Kerry is right to criticize those in the U.S. who say that China “won’t lift a finger.” While nervous that it could forestall economic development, China still has a sincere interest in solving its impending environmental crisis. Every year, over 60,000 “mass incidents” (protests often involving thousands of people) in China are spurred by environmental damage. The Chinese government views these mass incidents as a very real threat to its rule.
But even in light of these factors which propel China forward on the issue of climate change, Sen. Kerry and his Democratic colleagues still need to be realistic about China’s capacity. Sen. Kerry notes that there needs to be legal commitments on the international stage and that China needs to be held accountable. All of this is true. But at the same time, China’s circumstances must be understood. While moving forward in some areas, China still lacks the technical capacity to implement many energy-saving measures. Simple things like an energy audit of a building often elude local officials. Many industries, such as waste-heat recovery, have yet to be developed.
Another impediment is the difficulty for the central government to implement environmental laws on a local level. Because China is an authoritarian regime, many believe that whatever the Chinese central government wants to achieve, it can easily impose. But with this authoritarian government comes a layer of inflexibility. Rule is from the center out; from top down; for the central government to guarantee that laws are implemented on the local level, it must amass all of its power, and oversee the locality, a very time-consuming and exhausting activity.
Unlike the U.S., China does not have a flexible regulatory state where government authority has been delegated to specific agencies that have almost exclusive jurisdiction over a field. Nor do laws allow for individuals to enforce the law through lawsuits on behalf of the government (i.e. private right of action). Instead, the Chinese central government must do all in a country as large as the U.S. Not surprisingly, its ability to control the local level and guarantee that laws are implemented is not as prevalent.
In moving forward, U.S. policy makers must take China’s circumstances into account. While they need to push China forward to meet greenhouse gas emission targets, these targets must reflect China’s current capabilities. If Sen. Kerry and the Democrats do not devise a realistic strategy to help China in terms of technology assistance and implementation skills prior to Copenhagen in December 2009, opponents in Congress will use China’s capacity issues as an excuse to reject any agreement arising out of Copenhagen. This would not just be a defeat for Sen. Kerry and like-minded Democrats; this would be a defeat for the future of this world.
This past Monday and Tuesday marked the sixth Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) between the U.S. and China. Formerly just the “Strategic Economic Dialogue” and before under the sole supervision of the U.S. Treasury
Secretary Hillary Clinton & State Councilor Dai Bingguo with the Strategic Track delegation, July 28, 2009 (White House Photo/Public Domain)
Department, the inclusion of the conjunction “and” to the title brings non-economic issues to the table as well as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
On day one of the two-day conference, President Obama spoke to the delegation, stressing the need for the U.S. and China to continue cooperation to guarantee a lasting economic recovery, to lessen the impact of climate change and promote “a clean, secure and prosperous energy future,” and to stop the spread of nuclear weapons in places like North Korea and Iran (these three issues were also the main thrust of an op-ed written by Secretary Clinton and Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner in Monday’s Wall Street Journal) .
Was the S&ED successful? Did it produce more than just mere rhetoric? At first glance, no. But in the relationship between the U.S. and China, sometimes even rhetoric is a step forward. See below for a review of the issues in greater detail.
(1) Climate Change
There was definitely paper success here. The U.S. and China signed a Memorandum of Understanding to Enhance Cooperation on Climate Change, Energy and the Environment (MOU), but the MOU just puts on paper existing relationships and does little to further climate change cooperation. Both governments promise to continue with the Ten Year Cooperation Framework on Energy and Environment signed just last year and both promise to promote cooperation on a variety of vague steps, including capacity building and cooperation “between cities, universities, provinces and states of the two countries.” Perhaps this shows a greater understanding on the part of U.S. policy makers that “capacity” is something that China sincerely needs assistance with (see The U.S. in Copenhagen: Preventing Another Toothless Tiger). Also, in a nod to the Chinese delegation’s claim of differing responsibilities between developed and developing countries, the MOU states “Consistent with equity and their common but differentiated responsibilities, and respective capabilities, the United States and China recognize they have a very important role in combating climate change” (emphasis added) Only time will tell if any of this rhetoric becomes a reality and whether the U.S. and China can reach an agreement in time for Copenhagen, an increasingly less likely proposition.
(2) Economic Recovery
Discussion regarding economic recovery was perhaps the most public, and most interesting, of all the talks. Showing the changing dynamic of the U.S.-China relations, Xie Xuren, the Chinese finance minister, called the U.S. to task and requested that it reduce its budget deficit. Holding an estimated $1.5 trillion in U.S. Treasuries, the Chinese government is concerned that an increased deficit could weaken the dollar, lowering the value of their Treasuries. At the same time, for the U.S. to decrease deficit it would need to buy less goods, further decreasing demand on China’s manufacturing sector (an unfortunate Catch-22 here for China). While Secretary Geithner promised the Chinese delegation that the U.S. would lower its deficit once recovery has begun, he also called upon the Chinese to increase
Who's got the ball? Vice Premier Wang Qishan with Pres. Obama at the Oval Office, July 28, 2009 (White House Photo/Public Domain)
domestic demand and lower the astronomically high savings rate of its people (estimated at 50%) in an attempt to rebalance the U.S.’ trade deficit with China.
(3) Currency
Always a thorny issue, the U.S.’ repeated request that China allow its currency to strengthen was most likely discussed during the S&ED. However, nothing about currency was mentioned publically.
(4) North Korea
China has taken a much more foreceful approach to North Korea. In May, when North Korea first began its saber-rattling, China spoke a hard-line against its neighbor, agreeing to abide by U.N. Security Council sanctions. Less clear is what actions China actually undertook to promote these sanctions. And although North Korea was a main point in President Obama’s speech before the S&ED, publically, neither the U.S. nor China made any statements on how they will cooperate to contain the country. Such silence is par for the course since North Korea is a very sensitive issue for China but at the same time, their assistance in dealing with the North Koreans is essential.
On Tuesday, the Senate delayed voting on the confirmation of Jon Huntsman as the next Ambassador to China. Reason for the delay is unclear although the Senate has said that it still needs to compile paperwork.
While some in the press seem to speculate that the hold up could be due to issues related to Gov. Huntsman’s large financial holdings, it could also simply be the Senate overworked with the Sotomayor confirmation, health care reform and other issues.
Voting on Gov. Huntsman’s confirmation has been postponed to next Tuesday or Wednesday (August 4 or 5). Congress’ last day before its month-long summer recess is Friday, August 7. It appears that Gov. Huntsman’s confirmation is coming down to the wire.
Thursday’s Senate confirmation hearing for the next ambassador to China was a virtual love-fest from both sides of the aisle. Democratic senators gushed about Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman’s China background and Mandarin language skills and Republican senators John McCain, Orin Hatch and Bob Bennett attended the hearing to show their ardent support for the nominee. There is little doubt that Gov. Huntsman – a Republican governor, nominated as Ambassador to China by a Democrat president – will be confirmed on Tuesday when the full Senate meets to vote on his nomination. But his confirmation hearing still proved a telling sign of the Administration’s priorities in its relationship with China (nominees are always prepped for weeks prior to their hearing by Administration officials).
In his opening statement Gov. Huntsman stressed the importance of working with China on two high-priority fronts: first, repairing the international economy and second, maintaining peace and stability in Northeast Asia. In what was likely a nod to the Chinese government and an acknowledgement of the increasing tension with North Korea as illustrated by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent trip to Asia, Gov. Huntsman highlighted China’s leadership in organizing the six-party talks and commended China on working closely, and successfully, with the U.S. and the U.N. Security Council in dealing with North Korea. Gov. Huntsman also mentioned other areas where the U.S. and China must continue to work together: advancing global counter-terrorism efforts, stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction, combating extremism and promoting stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and promoting better governance and development in places like Sudan, Burma and Zimbabwe.
Most people believe that President Obama nominated Gov. Huntsman solely for strategic reasons – to eliminate a strong Republican presidential candidate in 2012. But that could easily be only partially true. Another reason is that Gov. Huntsman is actually a very good pick to represent the U.S. in a relationship that has become much more delicate as it becomes more important. Gov. Huntsman has a strong China background, experiencing first-hand Chinese societies in Taiwan (during his time as a Mormon missionary) and Singapore (as Ambassador). Additionally, during the hearing, Gov. Huntsman supported continued human rights discussions with the Chinese, criticizing our current approach as too “on-again-off-again.” Instead he advocated for a regularized and systematic forum where issues such as freedom of religion, freedom of speech, rule of law, and access to information can continuously be discussed. While some might argue that this was mere political posturing to secure votes from Congress, Gov. Huntsman’s statement is a noted departure from Secretary Clinton’s recent announcement that human rights cannot interfere with our handling of other crises. Such a departure provides credibility that Gov. Huntsman sincerely wants to make human rights issues a regular part of his dialogue with the Chinese. Also, his experience in Taiwan and Singapore provide him with the alternative perspective that economic development in a culturally-Chinese society does not necessarily require the authoritarian regime that currently exists on the mainland.
Although Gov. Huntsman’s approach to human rights is slightly different from the Administration’s, he whole-heartedly supports the Administration’s focus on climate change in U.S.-China relations, deviating from many of his Republican colleagues. In discussing caps on greenhouse gases, Gov. Huntsman maintained that the U.S. should support an agreement on climate change with China, viewing any agreement as an economic, exporting opportunity. The U.S. will become a leader in clean air and energy efficiency industries, industries that he argued would likely dominate the global economy for the next 20 to 40 years. Unfortunately, Gov. Huntsman did not address the intellectual property concerns of exporting U.S. clean energy technology to China, a thorny issue that will certainly prove tricky in any discussions on climate change.
The nomination of Gov. Huntsman is a telling signal that the Obama Administration perhaps grasps the realities of the new China. The China today is not the China that existed 30 years ago when the U.S. first normalized relations. In only the past few years, China has quickly emerged as a global leader with a strong economy, large militarily and significant influence on other countries. Today, the U.S. negotiates with a power that in many ways is its equal; one that can easily walk away from the negotiating table. For the next few years, the U.S. and China will have to be able to cooperate on a myriad of tough issues that could impact the future of our world order – climate change, trade, humanitarian crises, currency, terrorism, just to name a few. It is important to have a representative in Beijing who understands how to effectively negotiate with the Chinese and find common ground between our two nations, but at the same time is willing to stand his ground when our interests diverge, which, at times, will be unavoidable. Gov. Huntsman, with his knowledge of Chinese culture, language skills, and his courage to buck his own party and accept the nomination, could likely be the best person for the job.
Gov. Huntsman, his wife and the author (on the right) after the confirmation hearing
Comments (4) 
appears that any agreements reached during December’s U.N. Conference on Climate Change will likely not include the two biggest emitters of greenhouse gases: the U.S. and China.
