[link to news.cgtn.com (secure)]

[link to news.cgtn.com (secure)]


Hi, Trish Regan. Hi, Liu Xin. It was wonderful to see you at such a nice debate, having two people actually talk to one another for a change, rather than making just broad generalizations. I just wanted to point out a few things, just so no one missed anything.
Trish. One of the things your great research team should have figured out is that Liu Xin is not a party member of the CPC (Communist Party of China). So as a result, you weren't talking to a monolithic body. You were actually talking to a very nice lady who was going to explain very reasonably what China is about, and how she viewed all of these events. 
Trish, there's one thing we need to get straight. And that is, let's put some context to this. In an earlier show, you said that China is responsible for 600 billion U.S. dollars of IP theft per year. And you called Chinese people and companies thieves. 
Liu Xin responded by saying, no, you shouldn't make general blanket statements about countries or people. And she questioned the 600-billion-dollar number.
Today, we got the answer. There's no 600-billion-dollar number because that number is an estimate, the highest estimate of world losses to IP, not China's responsibility.
And I think you would admit that it is not right to make blanket statements about people because you don't want them making blanket statements about you. Stereotypes are never nice.
Trish. After the show, you played what you thought was a "gotcha" moment. You said Liu Xin admitted, and you repeated it two or three times, that China steals IP. I'm going to give you a chance to not only see, but to replay exactly what Liu Xin said, which will show you that she was talking not about China, but about all human beings.
Now, when one company wants to work with another company in a new market, they get together, and they produce products and services. And as part of that process, there is technology that is transferred to the joint enterprise. This is called (an) international business. It happens all the time in the U.S., in Europe, in China, in Japan, everywhere.
So, when you start talking about forced transfer, I don't know if you mean that Chinese people are holding a gun to the head of people coming to China in order to make them sign agreements where they will, in essence, give their technology over. That doesn't make sense 
Trish, let's talk tariffs. You suggested that, wouldn't it be great if everything went to zero in terms of tariffs? I think you're right. And I would agree with that. But there are political realities. So let's talk about them. 
One of the reasons that the U.S. did not join (the) TPP, which was something that they were pushing for, was because it would have brought tariffs down too low.
Now, ironically, Donald Trump was just in Japan, asking for the same benefits that those in the TPP exchange with each other for the U.S. 
Now, the reality is that in most cases, countries have certain industries that they need to protect for political or for development reasons. That's why something called RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) (exists), which China and many other countries are pushing, which allows most countries to have a discretionary about five-percent tariff ability. 
This is to protect them, to allow them to politically govern. But over time, those can be reduced to zero. So, when you say it's something that we should all hope for, I would agree. And I think most people in China would also as well.