WE DIG DEEPER NOW INTO BEIJING'S LATEST MOVES.

PROFESSOR JESSICA CHEN WEISS WAS A SENIOR ADVISER TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT UNTIL LAST YEAR, AND SHE'S JOINING WALTER ISAACSON TO TALK ABOUT THIS.

>> THANK YOU, CHRISTIANE.

AND JESSICA CHEN WEISS, WELCOME TO THE SHOW.

>> THANKS SO MUCH.

IT'S GREAT TO BE WITH YOU.

>> CHINA'S CHIEF FOREIGN POLICY MINISTER, WANG YI, MET WITH PUTIN THIS WEEK.

WANG YI HAD JUST COME FROM THE MUNICH SECURITY CONFERENCE, AND HE SAID HE WAS WORKING ON A PEACE PLAN FROM PRESIDENT XI OF CHINA.

WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THAT PEACE PLAN?

>> HE WE DON'T KNOW YET.

WE'LL HAVE TO SEE.

BUT I'M NOT REALLY EXPECTING ANYTHING DRAMATIC TO BREAK GROUND.

CHINA HAS I THINK CONSISTENTLY PLAYING A VERY DIFFICULT STRATEGIC GAME HERE, BALANCING ON THE ONE HAND WANTING TO HAVE A CLOSE PARTNERSHIP WITH RUSSIA, WHICH XI JINPING SEES AS CHINA'S MOST IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, PARTNER IN RESISTING PERCEIVED U.S. EFFORTS AT CONTAINMENT, AND ON THE OTHER HAND NOT WANTING RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES AND THE EUROPEANS TO GO TOO FAR SOUTH.

I THINK WE'LL SEE HERE IN THE COMING DAYS FURTHER ELABORATION OF THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT'S EFFORTS TO CONTINUE TO MANAGE THIS DIFFICULT STRADDLE, IF YOU WILL.

>> BUT ISN'T IT IN CHINA'S DEEP NATIONAL INTEREST TO HAVE THIS WAR IN UKRAINE SETTLED?

>> I THINK ON THE ONE HAND, YOU KNOW, THE CONTINUATION OF THE WAR PUTS CHINA IN A DIFFICULT POSITION.

BUT THEY ALSO DON'T SEE A WHOLE LOT OF, YOU KNOW, POLITICAL UPSIDE IN PUSHING PUTIN TO END THIS.

AND SO WITH THE TWO SIDES PRETTY DUG IN, PVTH PERHAPS GEARING UP FOR A FURTHER ESCALATION, CHINA WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS SIMMER DOWN BUT NOT NECESSARILY BE SOMETHING THEY FEEL LIKE THEY WANT TO BE ON THE FRONT LINES OF MANAGING.

BUT WE'LL SEE.

THIS IS A BIGGER STEP THAN THEY'VE TAKEN TO DATE AND REFLECTS THE INTEREST ON THE EUROPEAN SIDE TO HE SEE CHINA PLAY A MORE ACTIVE ROLE IN TRYING TO MEDIATE PERHAPS.

BUT THIS IS FROM THE LONGER PERSPECTIVE, I THINK CHINA'S TAKEN HERE REALLY WITH AN EYE TOWARD BALANCING AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.

CHINA DOESN'T WANT TO SEE RUSSIA DEFEATED.

BUT WHETHER OR NOT CHINA WITH SEE THE TWO SIDES DE-ESCALATE AND WHETHER THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, REALLY A LOT OF DIPLOMATIC CAPITAL INVESTED HERE WE'LL HAVE TO SEE.

>> SECRETARY OF STATE ANTONY BLINKEN SAID THAT HE WAS WORRIED AND WARNED WANG YI AGAINST CHINA SENDING LETHAL WEAPONS TO THE RUSSIANS TO HELP IN THE UKRAINE.

DO YOU THINK CHINA WILL DO THAT?

>> I THINK THIS IS ULTIMATELY GUIDED BY THE CHINESE RECOGNITION THAT TO DATE PUTIN PROBABLY IS A BIT DISSATISFIED WITH THE EXTENT OF CHINA'S SUPPORT, WHICH HAS LARGELY BEEN CONFINED TO THE DIPLOMATIC, AND AREAS WHICH HAVEN'T BEEN SUBJECTED TO INTERNATIONAL SANCTIONS.

BUT AS PUTIN NEEDS TO REPLENISH, YOU KNOW, WE'VE SEEN, AND THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION HAS INDICATED THAT THERE HAVE BEEN NON-LETHAL FORMS OF ASSISTANCE, DUAL USE TYPES OF GOODS THAT HAVE GONE FROM CHINESE ENTITIES TO RUSSIAN ENTITIES, AND I THINK THE QUESTION HERE, YOU KNOW, REALLY REMAINS WHAT IS IT THAT WE ULTIMATELY SEE AS DRIVING CHINA'S STRATEGIC CALCULUS HERE?

>> WHAT IS DRIVING ITS STRATEGIC CALCULUS?

>> WELL, ULTIMATELY I THINK CHINA'S GOING TO HAVE TO BALANCE ITS NEED TO RESIST THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ITS DESIRE FOR CONTINUED ACCESS TO INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, MARKETS AND CAPITAL.

THAT REFLECTS THAT CONTINUING DILEMMA.

AND SO FAR AT LEAST THERE'S A QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT SEES ANY STRATEGIC UPSIDE, AGAIN, TO LIFTING ITS LONG-TERM PARTNERSHIP WITH RUSSIA.

SO FAR AT LEAST THE GROWING TENSIONS IN U.S.-CHINA RELATIONS, THE GROWING CONCERN THAT THE UNITED STATES AND CHINA ARE HEADED FOR A SHOWDOWN OVER TAIWAN, NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE CHINA WANTS SUCH A CONFLICT BUT BECAUSE ACTIONS BY WHETHER IT'S IN TAIWAN OR BY THE UNITED STATES ARE PUSHING IN THAT DIRECTION.

I THINK ONLY CONSOLIDATES XI JINPING'S BELIEF THAT IT NEEDS A STALWART PARTNER IN RUSSIA TO RESIST THE STORMS TO COME.

SO UNTIL WE SEE I THINK NOT JUST THREATS BUT POTENTIAL ASSURANCES THAT IF CHINA DOESN'T GO FORWARD WITH THIS ASSISTANCE THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME BETTER TRAJECTORY AHEAD IN CHINA'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE WEST.

>> HOW DO WE OFFER THAT BETTER -- WE MEANING THE UNITED STATES.

OFFER THAT BETTER TRAJECTORY.

>> WELL, I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE IS OF COURSE THAT OF TAIWAN.

AND I THINK THAT HERE IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE DETER RATHER THAN PROVOKE BEIJING ON THAT ISSUE.

I THINK THE ADMINISTRATION IS QUITE CLEAR WE STAND BY OUR ONE CHINA POLICY BUT I CERTAINLY THINK THERE ARE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND OTHERS WHO MAY BE CAMPAIGNING FOR ELECTION WHO HAVE GONE MUCH FURTHER AND SAID THE ONE CHINA POLICY HAS OUTLIVED ITS UTILITY AND WE SHOULD RECOGNIZE TAIWAN AS A STATE.

THOSE DO DAMAGE TO THE LONG-TERM PROSPECTS OF PEACE AND STABILITY AND A NON-CONFRONTATIONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH CHINA.

SO IT'S THERE THAT IF WE DON'T MAKE THOSE ASSURANCES THAT WE AREN'T SUPPORTING TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE, IF WE CAN'T MAKE THOSE CLEAR AND CREDIBLE I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE HARD FOR US TO ASSURE REALLY THE WORLD, NOT JUST CHINA, THAT THE UNITED STATES WANTS A NON-CONFLICTUAL PRODUCTIVE RELATIONSHIP EVEN IF IT'S TESTY AT TIMES WITH BEIJING.

>> DO YOU THINK IT WAS A MISTAKE FOR THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, NANCY PELOSI, TO GO TO TAIWAN WHEN SHE DID?

>> YOU KNOW, I VISITED TAIWAN IN DECEMBER, AND I THINK THAT THEY RECOGNIZED THAT MAYBE THE COSTS THAT IT BROUGHT WERE GREATER THAN THE BENEFITS OF HER VISIT.

AND SO THESE KINDS OF SYMBOLIC SHOWS OF SUPPORT FOR TAIWAN, HOWEVER UNDERSTANDABLE, DON'T NECESSARILY LEAVE THE ISLAND AND ITS 23 MILLION RESIDENTS ANY BETTER OFF.

AND SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN OUR SUPPORT ARE MEANINGFUL WAYS, YOU KNOW, TO BUILD RESILIENCE, INCLUDING THROUGH STRONGER ECONOMIC TIES TO THE ISLAND, AND FIND WAYS TO DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE QUIETLY RATHER THAN WAVING THE RED FLAG.

>> LET ME READ YOU SOMETHING THAT WANG YI, THE CHINESE TOP FOREIGN AFFAIRS OFFICIAL, SAID AT THE MUNICH SECURITY CONFERENCE.

HE SAID, "U.S.

BIAS AND IGNORANCE AGAINST CHINA HAS REACHED RIDICULOUS LEVELS.

THE U.S. HAS TO STOP THIS KIND OF ABSURD NONSENSE THAT'S DONE OUT OF DOMESTIC POLITICAL NEEDS."

I FOUND THAT A VERY STRONG STATEMENT.

BUT THEN I ALSO FOUND MYSELF SAYING, WELL, THERE'S SOME TRUTH TO IT.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES THE CASES IN WHICH CHINESE RHETORIC OR PROPAGANDA KIND OF HURTS THE MOST IS WHEN IT SHINES A LIGHT ON THE THINGS THAT WE OURSELVES ARE, THINK, HAVING TROUBLE WITH, WHICH IS DEVELOPING, YOU KNOW, DESPITE THE ADMINISTRATION'S BEST EFFORTS A KIND OF STEADY AS SHE GHOEZ, YOU KNOW, HERE'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO GET OUR OWN HOUSE IN ORDER AND LEAD INTERNATIONALLY WHEN YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, A PUBLIC CONVERSATION WHICH IS ALL ABOUT GETTING AS TOUGH AS POSSIBLE AND OFTEN I THINK PLAYING ON SXAJTING THE THREAT THAT CHINA POSE.

NO QUESTION CHINA IS A CHALLENGE, IT'S AN AUTHORITARIAN SYSTEM VERY DIFFERENT FROM OURS, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY CHINA'S NOT REALLY GOING ANYWHERE.

THERE ARE A LOT OF WAYS IN WHICH WE CONTINUE TO -- NEED TO CO-EXIST ON SOME TERMS OR OTHER.

AND WHAT'S GOING TO BE HARD FOR US, TO MEET MANY OF OUR OWN OBJECTIVES, WHETHER THAT'S MEETING OUR CLIMATE OBJECTIVES WITHOUT CONTINUING TO DO BUSINESS WITH CHINESE ENTITIES, MANY OF WHOM ARE INNOVATING IN CLEAN TECH.

SO I THINK IT'S VERY UNFORTUNATE WHEN YOU HAVE PEOPLE LIKE VIRGINIA GOVERNOR YOUNGKIN, YOU KNOW, SUGGESTING THAT A FORD BATTERY PLANT THAT USES ORB LICENSES CHINESE TECHNOLOGIES WHERE THEY'RE AHEAD OF THE UNITED STATES IN THAT TECHNOLOGY, SAYING THAT WOULD BE LIKE LETTING THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY INSIDE OUR GATES.

THAT'S AN OWN GOAL.

THAT IS NOT HELPING US AMERICANS TO BE KIND OF THIS KNEE-JERK REACTIVENESS.

BUT IT'S REALLY, I THINK, PART OF THE BROADER POLITICAL DYNAMIC THAT WE FACE HERE IN THE UNITED STATES, YOU KNOW, TAKING SHOTS AT ONE ANOTHER AND KIND OF TARGETING THE CHINESE BOGEYMAN SEEMS POLITICALLY BENEFICIAL.

>> PART OF THIS TARGETING OF WHAT YOU CALL THE CHINESE BOGEYMAN, YOU SEE IT IN VARIOUS STATES.

YOU'VE MENTIONED GLENN YOUNGKIN.

BUT ALSO IN PLACES LIKE TEXAS WHERE THEY SAY THE RIGHT TO BUY LAND BY CHINESE NATIONALS.

EXPLAIN WHAT THEY'RE DOING THERE AND WHAT EFFECT YOU THINK THAT MIGHT HAVE.

>> SO IN MANY DIFFERENT STATE LEGISLATORS THERE ARE THESE CONSIDERATIONS OF BANS ON FOREIGN OWNERSHIP BY SORT OF ADVERSARY -- NATIONALS OF A FOREIGN ADVERSARY, OF LAND OR REAL ESTATE.

THE SECURITY THREAT HERE IS NOT PARTICULARLY CRYSTAL CLEAR.

YOU MIGHT SAY THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN PIECES OF LAND NEAR MILITARY SITES THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO BE PARTICULARLY WITH AND HAVE KIND OF A MECHANISM TO SCRUTINIZE THAT.

BUT A BLANKET BAN ON FOREIGN OWNERSHIP OF REAL ESTATE GOES AGAINST EVERYTHING WE STAND FOR.

THIS IS A LAND THAT WAS BUILT BY IMMIGRANTS.

AND FRANKLY, A LOT OF OUR COMPETITIVENESS IN HIGH-TECH AREAS REALLY DEPENDS UPON THE KIND OF IMMIGRATION AND ASSIMILATION OF FOREIGN TALENT INTO THE UNITED STATES.

EVEN IF THERE'S A CARVEOUT FOR PERMANENT RESIDENTS, PEOPLE ARE O'V WHO ARE ON THE PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP, THAT PATHWAY IS VERY LONG.

FIRST THEY COME OVER AS GRADUATE STUDENTS AND THEY STAY HERE AS POST-DOCS AND GO OFF INTO INDUSTRY.

AND THESE FOLKS WANT TO CONTRIBUTE TO AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL LEADERSHIP.

BUT SURVEYS SUGGEST THAT 60% OF ASIAN AMERICAN SCIENTISTS OF CHINESE ORIGIN SAY THAT THEY FEEL UNWELCOME AND ARE THINKING ABOUT LEAVING.

SO WE WANT TO HERE IN THE UNITED STATES CONTINUE TO LEAD IN INNOVATING ON THESE TECHNOLOGIES.

WE ALSO HAVE TO NURTURE THE TALENT THAT IS GOING TO ALLOW THE UNITED STATES TO REMAIN AT THIS FRONTIER.

>> I'D LIKE TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF THIS GREAT AND GROWING CONFLICT WE SEEM TO BE HAVING WITH CHINA POLITICALLY.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S AN AUTHORITARIAN STATE AND IT GOES AGAINST MANY OF OUR VALUES, THE UIGHURS AND THINGS, BUT SHOULD WE TAKE A MORE REALISTIC APPROACH AND SAY FINE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO TRY TO INTERFERE IN THE INTERNAL DYNAMICS OF CHINA AND WE JUST HAVE TO LOOK AT OUR OWN NATIONAL INTERESTS AND BE COMPETITORS WITH CHINA BUT NOT BE IN A CONFLICT WITH CHINA?

>> I THINK YOU'VE PUT YOUR FINGER ON IT.

I THINK WE DO NEED TO.

AND I THINK THE ADMINISTRATION HAS ALREADY, YOU KNOW, RECOGNIZED THAT OUR STRATEGY IS NOT PREMISED ON TRYING TO CHANGE CHINA.

THAT WAS THE NARRATIVE FOR DECADES.

HOWEVER, I THINK MISPLACED, THAT THE UNITED STATES WAS ENGAGING WITH CHINA IN ORDER TO LIBERALIZE CHINA.

I DON'T THINK THAT WAS REALLY THE STORY.

THIS IS FIRST OF ALL ABOUT STANDING TOUPT SOVIET UNION AND OVER TIME THERE WERE A WHOLE VARIETY OF INTERESTS WE PURSUED WITH CHINA AND ULTIMATELY IT WAS BETTER TO HAVE THEM ON THE INSIDE OF THESE INSTITUTIONS THAN THE OUTSIDE.

THAT REMAINS THE CASE.

EVEN THOUGH CHINA IS NO LONGER LIBERALIZING POLITICALLY OR ECONOMICALLY.

AND SO THE QUESTION IS HOW DO YOU FIND A MODUS VIVENDI WITH THE SECOND LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD, ONE THAT IS ARMED WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND THAT IS TO DATE SHOWN ITSELF UNDER XI JINPING QUITE CAPABLE OF GIVING AS GOOD AS THEY GET.

AND I THINK RIGHT NOW WHAT WE REALLY OUGHT TO BE LOOKING FOR IS A WAY TO FIGURE OUT HOW IS IT WE THE UNITED STATES CAN BE SECURE AND TO WHAT EXTENT DOES THAT RUN THROUGH LOWERING TENSIONS WITH CHINA INCLUDING IN THIS DOMAIN, WHICH IS WHAT YOU PUT YOUR FINGER ON, WHICH IS INTERFERENCE IN EACH OTHER'S AAREAS.

>> BUT LET ME PUSH BACK ON THAT A LITTLE BIT, WHICH IS ISN'T IT A STRENGTH OF OUR FOREIGN POLICY AND US AS A NATION THAT WE STAND FOR CERTAIN VALUES AND WE TRY TO MOMENT THOSE VALUES OVERSEAS OR DOES THAT CAUSE US AN INEVITABLE CONFLICT WITH CHINA WE SHOULDN'T HAVE?

>> SO I THINK THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO STAND FOR OUR VALUES AND I THINK THAT ALREADY WE ARE SEEING AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL RECOGNITION, WE CAN STAND FOR OUR VALUES BY BEING AN EXAMPLE TO THE WORLD, WHICH IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM GOING AROUND THE WORLD PUTTING OUR THUMB ON THE LEDGER AND TRYING TO SHIFT THE BALANCE OF POWER DOMESTICALLY IN OUR FAVOR.

SO I WOULD SAY HERE WE MIGHT WANT TO DO A LOT MORE ON THE SIDE OF HELPING THOSE WHO ARE ALREADY DEMOCRATIC STAY DEMOCRATIC AND DEEPEN THEIR DEMOCRACY AND DO A LITTLE LESS TO EXACERBATE THE INSECURITIES OF AUTHORITARIAN LEADERS AROUND THE WORLD.

THAT'S NOT TO SAY WE LOVE AUTOCRACY.

FAR BE IT.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE DEMOCRACY'S LIGHT CONTINUE TO SHINE.

BUT WE NEED TO DO FIRST THE WORK HERE AT HOME AND THEN WE HAVE TO ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED TO PRIORITIZE THE USE OF AMERICAN RESOURCES AND POLITICAL CAPITAL AROUND THE WORLD WHERE IT WILL BE MOST EFFECTIVE AND NOT COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.

AND SO I WOULD SAY THAT STARTING WITH THAT KIND OF CORE GROUP OF DEMOCRACIES WOULD BE AN IMPORTANT PLACE TO START IN THAT EFFORT.

>> I'M GOING TO READ YOU SOMETHING YOU WROTE IN FOREIGN AFFAIRS CALLED THE CHINA TRAP.

AND YOU WRITE OF THE NEED TO CLARIFY THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE UNITED STATES WOULD WELCOME OR ACCEPT CHINESE INITIATIVES RATHER THAN REFLECTIONIVELY OPPOSING THEM.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN ABOUT REFLEXIVELY OPPOSING THEM?

IS THAT SOME POLITICAL PROBLEM WE HAVE HERE?

AND WHAT AFFIRMATIVE VISION WOULD YOU SUGGEST THAT WE PROPOSE?

>> I FEAR WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE IN THIS REFLEXIVE, REACTIVE POSITION WHERE THE IMPETUS WHERE IF THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT PUTS FORTH A NEW INSTITUTION LIKE THE ASIAN INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT BANK OR NOW WE HAVE THE GLOBAL SECURITY INITIATIVE THE INSTINCT IS TO SAY CHINA BAD WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT WHAT IT IS THAT WE WANT.

AND TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THERE OVERLAPPING ELEMENTS OF WHAT CHINA IS PROPOSING AND WHAT WE WOULD ULTIMATELY DESIRE SUCH THAT WE COULD SAY, WELL, HERE'S THE PIECES OF WHAT CHINA'S PROPOSING THAT ARE OKAY AND HERE'S WHAT'S NOT OKAY AND IF WE COULD WORK OUT WHAT THAT OVERLAP IS THAT'S AN AREA WHERE WE CAN AT LEAST AGREE NOT TO NECESSARILY GET IN EACH OTHER'S WAY EVEN IF WE ARE NOT FULLY COOPERATING OR COLLABORATING IN THAT ENDEAVOR.

>> YOU'VE SAID THAT THE REFLEXIVE CRITICISM OF CHINA IS PART OF AN ECHO CHAMBER ALMOST, THAT PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO APPEAR SOFT ON CHINA.

IN BOTH PARTIES.

THEY DO NOT WANT TO APPEAR SOFT ON CHINA AND SO THEY GET INTO THIS ECHO CHAMBER.

YOU WERE IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

ISN'T IT TRUE OF THE DEMOCRATS AND THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION THAT THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT AFRAID OF BEING SEEN SOFT ON CHINA?

>> THIS GOES BACK TO THIS QUESTION OF IS THERE ANY POLITICAL UPSIDE DOMESTICALLY OF RAISING INCONVENIENT QUESTIONS GIVEN THE BROADER MOOD, WHICH IS ONE OF LET'S GET TOUGH ON CHIEN AH?

AND IT'S NOT JUST THE STATE DEPARTMENT.

IT'S NOT JUST THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

I WOULD SAY THIS DYNAMIC OF OUTHAWKING EACH OTHER IS REALLY PRESENT ON CAPITOL HILL AS WELL AS THINK TANKS AND THE BROADER POLICY CONVERSATION.

OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE GENUINELY AND SINCERELY COMMITTED TO THEIR BOTH VERY DIRE ASSESSMENTS OF WHAT CHINA'S DOING AND THE KINDS OF POLICIES WE OUGHT TO TAKE IN RESPONSE.

BUT I HAVE HEARD DIRECTLY FROM PEOPLE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF GOVERNMENT THAT THEY WOULDN'T NECESSARILY AGREE BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO STICK OUT THEIR NECK TO QUESTION THOSE VIEWS AND EVEN GO FURTHER, TO ECHO THEM TO WANT TO BE AS HAWKISH AS THE NEXT GUY IN ORDER TO NOT BE ATTACKED POLITICALLY.

AND SO TO ME THAT SUGGESTS A REAL PROBLEM IN OUR BROADER CONVERSATION WHICH MAKES IT HARD TO THINK ABOUT WHERE ARE WE GOING, WHAT ARE THE RESULTS OF THE POLICIES THAT WE ARE ADOPTING, HOW DO WE FASHION THEM IN WAYS THAT DELIVER FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AS OPPOSED TO JUST SOUND TOUGH ON CHINA BECAUSE ULTIMATELY STANDING UP TO CHINA ISN'T A STRATEGY, IT'S NOT A POLICY AND ULTIMATELY WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SURVIVE IN THIS WORLD AND AVOID WHAT I FEAR IS A LOOMING CRISIS OR CONFLICT WITH CHINA IN PART AS A RESULT OF OUR INABILITY TO PRIORITIZE AS WELL AS OFFER THESE CLEAR CHOICES WHERE IF CHINA DOES THIS THEY CAN EXPECT THAT BUT IF THEY IS CHOOSE A LESS ESCALATORY OPTION THEY CAN ALSO EXPECT SOME DEGREE OF RESTRAINT ON OUR SIDE.

AND RIGHT NOW THE DOMESTIC POLITICS OF THIS ALL POINT IN ONE DIRECTION, WHICH GIVES ME LITTLE, YOU KNOW, CONFIDENCE OR COMFORT THAT WE ARE EVEN INTERESTED IN FIGURING OUT SOME KIND OF MODUS VIVENDI.

>> JESSICA CHEN WEISS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU.

IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE.