{ "error": "", "type": "text", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at Coronavirus Task Force in Press Briefing - China", "slug": "remarks-by-president-trump-at-coronavirus-task-force-in-press-briefing-china-1", "text": "
\"Q So can you explain why it is appropriate, in the middle of a pandemic, to be talking about cutting or eliminating funding for the World Health Organization?<\/p>\n
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we\u2019re going to talk about the WHO next week in great detail. I didn\u2019t want to do it today \u2014 Good Friday. I didn\u2019t want to do it before Easter. I also didn\u2019t want to do it before we have all the facts.<\/p>\n
But over the years, many years, we\u2019ve been paying them from 300 to 500, and even more, million dollars a year. China has been paying them less than 40 over the years. So we\u2019re paying them more than 10 times more than China. And they are very, very China-centric, as I said during the week. China-centric.<\/p>\n
China always seems the to get the better of the \u2014 the argument, and I don\u2019t like that. I really don\u2019t like that. I don\u2019t think that\u2019s appropriate. I don\u2019t think it\u2019s fair to the American people. And, you know, I tell that to President Xi. I tell that to Dr. Tedros. I spoke to him one time. I think he\u2019s a very nice man. I liked him.<\/p>\n
But we\u2019re going to be talking about that next week in great detail. We\u2019re looking at it very, very closely. We want to make sure money is properly spent.<\/p>\n
But again, why is the United States paying $500 million a year? It\u2019s a lot. And why is \u2014 okay? That\u2019s a lot. And why is China paying \u2014 last year, this year \u2014 $42 million? But generally under $40 [million]. So it\u2019s in the 30s.<\/p>\n
So we\u2019re at 500, 452, 400, 401 \u2014 different amounts, different years. And they\u2019re at 40, 38, 36, 35, 32, 31.<\/p>\n
Q But why now \u2014<\/p>\n
THE PRESIDENT: No, no. But \u2014 but you have to ask yourself that question. And then the answer always turns out to be in China\u2019s favor. Well, I have the same thing with the World Trade. Isn\u2019t it interesting? World Trade. So we have World Health and we have World Trade. So we have the World Trade Organization. And until I came along, we were losing cases \u2014 so many cases. It was ridiculous. We were always losing these cases. I mean, almost every case. And now we\u2019re winning cases. We just won $7 billion because they know I\u2019m not going to put up with it.<\/p>\n
China has been \u2014 unbelievably taken advantage of us and other countries. You know, for instance, they\u2019re considered a developing nation. I said, \u201cWell, then make us a developing nation too.\u201d They get big advantages because they\u2019re a developing nation. India, a developing nation. The United States is the big developed nation. Well, we have plenty of development to do. Okay?<\/p>\n
And now we\u2019re winning cases because they know that if we\u2019re not treated fairly, I\u2019m going to pull out. Now, you never heard this before because nobody ever talked about the World Trade Organization. But the World Trade Organization has treated us very unfairly. But they know I\u2019m not going to put up with it because all of these countries are taking advantage of the United States.<\/p>\n
Now, in the courts and the court system, we\u2019re not approving new judges over the last year. We\u2019re not going to approve them. And Bob Lighthizer is working very hard on that.<\/p>\n
But we had always a minority position, meaning numbers of judges. So we\u2019d have a minority number of judges. I said, \u201cHow do you win with a minority number of judges?\u201d But all of a sudden, we\u2019re winning. And the reason we\u2019re winning is they know if they don\u2019t treat us properly \u2014 and we won $7 billion just this very recently. And the money is pouring in. And we won other cases too. We won a lot of cases.<\/p>\n
But you know from covering it \u2014 I know you know \u2014 that the United States was taken advantage of by the World Trade Organization.<\/p>\n
And, by the way, speaking of China: If you look at the history of China, it was only since they went into the World Trade Organization that they became a rocket ship with their economy. They were flat-lined for years and years. Frankly, for many, many decades. And it was only when they came into the World Trade Organization that they became a rocket ship because they took advantage of all there is. I\u2019m not even blaming them. I\u2019m saying, how stupid were the people that stood here and allowed it to happen? But we don\u2019t allow that to happen. And if they don\u2019t treat us fairly, we\u2019ll leave. But now we\u2019re starting to win cases. [...]<\/p>
Q If I may, China and some other countries that have been particularly active \u2014 seen as maybe taking advantage of the U.S. during this process, during this period. China particularly acted in the South China Sea. Got a carrier down, obviously. What\u2019s your message to some of these adversaries and competitors?<\/p>\n
THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, the way I view it is this: China has taken advantage of the United States for 30 years. Okay? I mentioned the World Trade Organization. China has taken advantage of us through that and using rules that are unfair to the United States. And they should have never been allowed \u2014 this should have never been allowed to happen.<\/p>\n
When China joined and was allowed to join under those circumstances \u2014 the World Trade Organization \u2014 that was a very bad day for the United States because they had rules and regulations that were far different and far easier than our rules and regulations. Plus, they took advantage of them down to the last \u2014 and you know China and you studied China and you know what I mean. They took advantage of them like very few people would even think to take advantage of them.<\/p>\n
And again, they are considered \u2014 right? \u2014 a developing nation. We are not considered a developing nation. They\u2019ve given advantages. Okay.<\/p>\n
For many years, China has ripped off the United States. And then I came along. And right now, as you know, China is paying 25 percent, and we\u2019ve taken in billions and billions and billions of dollars in tariffs from China. And I know a lot of the people kept saying, \u201cOh, no. We\u2019re paying.\u201d Well, we\u2019re not paying. You know, countries are different. Not every country is China. But China would devalue their currency, and they\u2019d also pour out money. And they, essentially, were paying most of those tariffs, not us.<\/p>\n
And, as you know, we\u2019ve taken in tens of billions of dollars. They targeted our farmers. But we took in so much money that I was able to give back. One year it was $12 billion. One year was $16 billion. I was able to give back our farmers the money that they were targeted \u2014 hurt.<\/p>\n
China bought $12 billion and bought $16 billion \u2014 one year, 12; one year, 16. I was able to give them back the 12, and then give them back the 16 \u2014 the farmers. And they weren\u2019t targeted, and they\u2019re all in business. Now we\u2019re doing it because they got targeted in a different way.<\/p>\n
Now, I\u2019m going to be very interested to see. So we signed a deal with China. And under that deal, they\u2019re supposed to buy substantially in excess of $200 billion from us. That\u2019s not only farm product, it\u2019s manufacturing product, it\u2019s lots of different things. They\u2019re going to buy a lot. I just want to see if they live up to that deal.<\/p>\n
I know President Xi. I would say he would live up to the deal. But remember this: I never took off the tariff. It\u2019s still 25 percent. That\u2019s a big \u2014 25 percent of $250 billion dollars.<\/p>\n
So, for the first time \u2014 and you saw also \u2014 now again, I\u2019m going before the virus hit. Because that\u2019s sort of like \u2014 that\u2019s like, \u201cLet\u2019s start all over again.\u201d Okay? I can\u2019t tell you that yet, because that chapter hasn\u2019t been written yet. But go up a few weeks ago, the deficit with the United States and China was coming way down. Nobody has seen that. Nobody has ever seen that before. But the deficit has come way down.<\/p>\n
So, now we start a new chapter. And I can only tell you, if a smart person is standing where I\u2019m standing, we\u2019re going to do very well with China. Okay?<\/p>\n
And I think it\u2019s \u2014 I have to also say this: I think our relationship, and having the relationship I have with China is a good thing. But for the first time, we\u2019re benefiting instead of being the sucker that could \u2014 you know, that got taken advantage of for years. Nobody.<\/p>\n
You know, I said to China, \u201cHow did this ever happen?\u201d I got to know them very well. I said to them \u2014 representatives of China at the top level, you know who I\u2019m talking about \u2014 I say, \u201cHow did this ever happen?\u201d They looked at me and they said, \u201cBut nobody ever called us.\u201d We didn\u2019t have a deal. It\u2019s not like we had a bad deal. We had worse: We didn\u2019t have any deal at all, so they just took advantage.<\/p>\n
Think of it: $500-billion-a-year deficit. Not \u2014 $500 million is a lot of money, right? It\u2019s not \u2014 everyone thinks I\u2019ve made a mistake when I say \u201c$500 trillion.\u201d \u201cNo, you mean $500 million.\u201d \u201cNo, I said 500-billion-dollar-a-year deficit with China for a long time.\u201d But it was 200. It was 300. It was 400. It was 500 \u2014 556 billion, 507. Five-hundred-billion-dollars-plus-a-year deficit with China. Now I\u2019m charging them tariffs.<\/p>\n
And, you know, it\u2019s very interesting. A lot of people that don\u2019t want to do that \u2014 they all agreed because China has taken advantage of this country like nobody has ever taken. We have built China with the money we gave them.<\/p>\n
Now, I give them a lot of credit. Okay? I give them a lot of credit. They did it. But you know what? We made it a hell of a lot easier. We gave them a fortune.\"<\/p>", "quote": null, "citation": "