国务卿蓬佩奥在艾奥瓦州得梅因的讲话 
美国国务院发言人办公室华盛顿哥伦比亚特区（Washington, D.C.）2019年3月4日
美国的农业带：日益繁荣
国务卿迈克·蓬佩奥（Mike Pompeo） 世界食品奖荣誉大厅（World Food Prize Hall of Laureates）艾奥瓦州（Iowa）得梅因（Des Moines）
2019年3月4日
下午好。请。诸位下午好。谢谢诸位。谢谢诸位。我经常想到，我往往被称为第70任国务卿，这的确很酷。但是我想到的是，总统是第45任，所以轮到我的时候，按任职的序列高了很多。（笑声）我在讲话中会留神这一点。
谢谢诸位的莅临。我期待——今天我有一些话要说。然后我很高兴回答你们想问的问题。同时也多谢诸位在艾奥瓦州欢迎我。
今天我在这里度过了不平凡的一天。我的妻子苏珊（Susan）出生在艾奥瓦城（Iowa City）。她现在就坐在我的左边。她母亲毕业于艾奥瓦大学（University of Iowa）,感到很自豪。所以，我们的儿子尼克（Nick）和我曾与他外祖母一起多次观看鹰眼球队（Hawkeye）的美式足球比赛。
（笑声和掌声）不错，我知道我此时得到了大概一半的掌声，不错。（笑声） 与在堪萨斯州大同小异。（笑声）
当然，苏珊在堪萨斯州（Kansas）长大，但她在她祖父母居住的珊瑚村（Coralville）度过了很多时光。所以，对于她这样一位女士的情况，不论好坏，我将一切都归功于你们。（笑声）
在场的还有一位特殊的人物，也是艾奥瓦人，刚刚介绍了我。他始终是在中国问题上代表美利坚合众国（United States of America）发挥积极作用的巨大力量。请再次对布兰斯塔德（Branstad）大使为国家付出的努力表示感谢。（掌声）
几分钟前，我与雷诺兹（Reynolds）州长进行了15分钟的交谈，感到很愉快，很高兴。诸位在艾奥瓦州从事的工作十分杰出。谢谢诸位。望你们得到保佑。祝你们好运，同样感谢你们今天到场。多谢。（掌声）
我感谢诸位邀请我来到这个美不胜收的地方，感谢世界粮食奖（World Food Prize）今天对我的接待。我知道奎恩（Quinn）大使也希望出席，但我知道他今天在伦敦（London）有一件更重要、更有意义的活动，即领取因抗击柬埔寨种族清洗获得的奖项。他在那里是多么美好的一件事。这成为他不在这里的很好的理由。（笑声）
美国国务院很自豪地作为伙伴与这样一个组织共同努力。这个组织为帮助全世界解除饥饿做出了如此大量的贡献。你们每一天都在为美国增光，我时常前往世界各地，成为其中的受益者。我也很激动地告诉诸位，经过两年的中断，世界粮食奖得主名单宣布仪式（World Food Prize Laureate Announcement Ceremony）将再次由美国国务院主办。我本人将主持这次活动。我将主持仪式。我对此满怀期待。（掌声）
来到艾奥瓦州令我很激动。感到不同凡响。昨晚我们飞到这里，请相信我，离开华盛顿哥伦比亚特区才有机会呼吸到新鲜空气。（笑声）我还亲身体验到为什么农民是美国的脊梁，为什么粮食保障如此重要，以及你们诸位，艾奥瓦人民，为帮助全世界每一个角落实现这一点付出的努力。
我早年在堪萨斯州被称为温菲尔德（Winfield）的地方度过了很大一部分夏季时光。那里是我叔叔吉姆（Uncle Jim）拥有的家庭农场。这些经历属于我一生中最特殊的时刻之一。 我记得农场旁有一块标语牌写道，“一名堪萨斯农民可养活你们120多人。”(笑声)我坚信，我们如果驾车经过艾奥瓦州各地的高速公路，都会看见类似的标语。我知道这是千真万确的。
乔治·华盛顿（George Washington）有一句著名的语录，“我宁愿在我的农场劳作，也不想成为天下的帝王。”我也相信他的确这样认为。
我想谈谈美国的农业和创新，以及我们与中国的关系。众所周知，两者深深地相互交织在一起。
1980年，当时的广东省省长，现在是一位十分著名的人物，率领第一个中国省长代表团来美国访问，直接来到这里，来到艾奥瓦州。
几年后，他儿子追随父亲的脚步也来到这里访问，并且与州长建立了友谊。今天，特朗普总统（President Trump）与习主席相互交往，努力保证我们能够正确处理这个重要的关系。
你们都了解，富饶的艾奥瓦州的确吸引了很多中国领导人。他们都希望了解这个州繁荣的秘诀。但是他们并没有接受艾奥瓦州成功的原则性要素，这就是自由企业和辛勤的工作，以及一个核心的观念，即允许个人拥有自主权，维护自己的尊严，引领潮流，善于把握机会，敢于承担风险，并创建自己的事业。
毫无疑问，如果政府以强硬手段对经济政策指手画脚，我们都知道生产率就会下降。创新必然戛然而止。而且人民会愈益困苦。只有自由市场才能长期改善生活。
这些自由市场的原则、公平竞争的精神使美国公司成为成功和质量的全球标准。
今天早些时候，我有机会参观了农业科技公司科迪华（Corteva）的设施。
很了不起。科迪华这样的公司树立了一个楷模，说明经济自由、创造发明、敢于承担风险的精神、宽松的监管环境可以使美国农业成为世界的典范，保持其他任何国家都不可能比拟的生命力。
看一看我们的工商业做了哪些工作。我在丧失理智竞选国会（Congress）席位前（笑声），曾在堪萨斯州中南部经营一个小型企业。这几乎是10年前的事。基因编辑技术为消灭玉米枯萎病铺平了道路。量化农业（Quantified Ag）等公司开发了使用生物识别技术的耳标，可及时传递有关牲畜健康状况的信息。
其他公司，例如农业生物信息（Agribotix）公司利用无人机传送数据，有助于农民为提高收成更准确地进行施肥。
这些问题对我们来说似乎很简单，似乎属于普通常识。但这一切诞生于我们美国发挥的创造力和自由。这需要数十载的创造。数十载的创造使我国农民的收成达到短短几年前令全世界大为惊讶的水平。这个观念，这种创新的精神使美国达到在农业世界的地位，以其诚信著称于世，以其安全声誉卓著，同时也认识到，我们每一次、每一刻都提供可靠的产品。
毋庸置疑，消费者在享受美国牛排的时候都确切地知道他们得到的是什么。我们可以说，从农场到餐桌，全世界对美国品牌的信任无可匹敌。
由于我们的自由市场体制，我们还有高质量的保证。在市场导向的经济中，各公司都注重自己的品牌，积极保护自己的声誉。竞争和选择促使人们按规则办事。
毫无疑问，我们有一整套由记者、发明者、食品安全专家、消费者利益的代表和非政府组织组成的生态系统，对我们的公司和我们的市场进行监督。他们中间的一些代表正站在后面。我们公平的司法体系对违法者严惩不贷。
我们农业部门的活力表明，美国的经济动力并不限于曼哈顿（Manhattan）、硅谷（Silicon Valley）或麻省的剑桥（Cambridge, Massachusetts）。美国的腹地具有生机勃勃的经济潜力。
在得梅因这里也是好事连连，丝毫不亚于帕罗奥多（Palo Alto）。以鹰眼著称的州甚至也有酿酒厂！我是听说的。（笑声）所以，与你们希望相信的程度相比，你们更像加利福尼亚州（California）。
特朗普总统关于低税收、精简监管的方案正保障我们的农业及经济其他行业获得继续增长和繁荣的空间。
我们的国家可继续进行创新，不必承担不必要负担。
我们的农民可以将自己从地球获得的富饶成果传给下一代子孙。
遗憾的是，中国采取了不同的方式，由国家主导的一整套经济行为对你们全体通过艰辛努力创建的美国农业生命力构成了威胁。
当我们获悉中国盗窃敏感技术的消息时，我们往往想到推动我们的喷气式战斗机、我们的智能手机和我们的医疗设备发展的技术。但是美国人民应该知道，中国还以对农业至关重要的知识产权和技术为目标。
几年前，艾奥瓦州一名农业保安人员发现田地里有些情况很可疑，进而开展调查。
他发现一名中国公民在泥土里挖掘，试图盗窃多年研究和开发的转基因玉米种子。开发工作花费了大量金钱。此人后来对盗窃孟山都（Monsanto）、杜邦先锋（DuPont Pioneer）和LG良种（LG Seeds）的种子一事供认不讳。
还有一个事例。另有一名中国公民盗窃了他的雇主培养的数百个转基因稻种，藏在自己的住所。
然后，他在中国作物研究机构的代表来访之际将这些种子交给他们，直到我国海关和边境保护局（Customs and Border Patrol）的官员在航班起飞前检查他们的行李时才被抓获。
当然，还发生了盗窃我国农业脊梁的机器人和行业技术的事例。每一次发生的这类盗窃事件都是历史的损失，夺走了你们和你们子孙后代赖以生存的各行业的种子玉米。
诸位应该了解，不仅仅只有大公司遭到损失。一名农民曾说过，“似乎没有人可以理解，他们正在从我这样的人身上盗取东西。他们正在盗窃农民每一次用钱购买孟山都种子体现的研究成果。”
剽窃知识产权也不是中国带来的唯一问题。这是一个多年来依靠保护主义，破坏规则和国家补贴而生存的经济模式。中国利用关税壁垒和非关税壁垒阻挡美国公司进入其市场，使我们无法在公平和对等的基础上竞争。
我在中部腹地这里接触过足够多的工商企业，我知道我们不怕竞争。但是成功的竞争必须要有真正的机会。必须要有相对公平的竞争环境。而中国的保护主义几十年来使之倾斜，朝不利于我国农民和农业企业的方向倾斜。
你们应该也知道，美国农业出口商不是中国国家主导经济的唯一受害者。正如布兰斯塔德大使提醒我的，中国人民也是受害者。回想2008年，成千上万中国儿童因有害的牛奶和婴儿配方奶粉生病，其中一些儿童死亡。直至今天，许多中国人仍出国购买婴儿配方奶粉，海外的中国人通过向国内运送这些而大发其财。
几年前，《时代杂志》（Time Magazine）对中国的假鸡蛋做了研究，结果发现其中含这些美味成分：树脂、淀粉、凝结剂、颜料、海藻酸钠。我不再说下去了。
今天在中国，冒牌商品，冒牌产品，过度使用杀虫剂，地沟油等问题都仍然持续存在。
就像中国把保障人权写入宪法一样，中国制定了很多食品安全法。关键不在于再制定一条规则或规定。但是，执法无力或者根本不存在，而且就像我们在社会主义国家经常看到的，中国国家掌控的经济中腐败成风，使这类弄虚作假往往不被发现，几乎从来不受惩罚。即使被揭露出来，欺骗造假的诱因并未改变。中国人民应有更好的境况。
好消息是：帮助即将到来。美国生产者和中国消费者的境况都将改善。正在进行的特朗普总统的贸易谈判结果将给两国的每一国人民带来好处。
总统正在为制止盗窃知识产权采取非常强硬的路线。对我们的农业生产者而言，特朗普总统正在为打造我前面提到的公平竞争环境而奋斗，以便各方面都有更大的市场准入。
这是大好消息。但是，为更多公司打开市场不仅仅是一个与中国有关的受青睐的项目。它是我所领导的国务院的核心使命之一，虽然它已有200多年，但我们今天有着得到重新明确的目标。
许多美国人看到国务院会想，它对他们有什么用。
他们看到国务卿前往一些遥远的地方，于是会问，“美国，美国人是国务院的首要服务对象吗？”你们需要知道，你们是。其中一点，我们有1,700名经济官员分布在全球各地。他们为艾奥瓦州，或者堪萨斯州，或者任何一个州的家庭所做的很大一部分工作是，为美国工商业创造向海外销售美国产品的机会。就国际商务而言，我认为可以说，外交艺术与达成交易紧密相连。
这里我要稍转一下话题。我如果不就此花点时间会是一种疏忽。经济外交无疑是我的工作的一项主要使命。它是国务院的许多使命之一。但是，如果你是一位想寻找最有成就感和富于挑战性的职业的美国人，那么应考虑进入美国国务院。从抗击恐怖主义，到确保食品安全，到打击人口贩运，这里有让你代表美国国旗的各种机会。我的同事是服务在全球各地的非常骄傲的爱国之士。他们聪明智慧，胸怀使命感。
国务院多年来为多元化，为造就多元的员工队伍，投入了大量资金和力量。我要确保在我们的外交服务系统（Foreign Service）中也有来自中部腹地的人。我们需要这种地理多元化。我们的使命当然是在全球所有地方代表所有美国人，因此员工队伍的构成很重要。如果你希望保持美国的安全与强大并推进我们的价值观，我们这里有极好的机会。你可以名副其实地改变世界。好了，信息广告结束。但是，请你们或你们的孩子前来看看。这是一个了不起的工作机构，是一项崇高的职业。与布兰斯塔德大使和我一道工作的同事是为我们伟大国家服务的真正爱国之士。
我将以此结束。在特朗普总统领导下，我们的外交人员一直在尤其积极地在全球各地为美国农业各方打开市场。本届政府连同美国农业部（USDA）、贸易代表（Trade Representative）办公室和商务部（Department of Commerce）的同仁一道，已经打开了通道，使乳制品和禽肉销售到加拿大，羊肉和山羊肉销售到日本，牛肉和猪肉销售到阿根廷，禽肉销售到印度，羊肉销售到萨尔瓦多，牛肉和禽肉销售到摩洛哥，鸡蛋销售到南非，乳制品销售到土耳其，另外还有其他一些国家。我们希望欧盟（EU）也将很快降低它的贸易壁垒，给予美国产品更大的市场准入。
在关于中国方面，必须有新的市场准入，而且我们必须通过建立可实施的制度做到这点。如果实施中国对我们作出的承诺的机制不能建立起一套可贯彻执行的规则和程序，那么再签署又一个协议，又一个文件，是无济于事的。
与保持美国农业部门的繁荣有关的具有重要意义的最后一点是：我们的丰饶一直是造福世界的巨大福祉。我们必须延续这种传统。对更美好的生活中的一望无际的大地和富饶土壤的期许将数不胜数的定居者吸引到我们的海岸。在第一次世界大战（World War I）之后， 赫伯特·胡佛（Herbert Hoover）帮助主持了我们为千百万欧洲人提供食物的努力，这个项目主要依赖于美国的食品。然后在第二次世界大战（World War II）刚刚结束之后，美国农产品再次帮助为一个被战火所蹂躏的继续遭受饥荒威胁的大洲提供食物。
今天有很多项目——你们都参与其中——帮助满足全世界需求最迫切的人并为他们提供粮食。这种需求有增无减，而且还将继续增加。今天，美国是全世界最大的粮食及农产品出口国，而且我们的慷慨是巨大的。我们的国际发展署（USAID）在2017年向美国农民购买了1.4 [百万] 公吨粮食，为53个国家的7,000万人提供了食物。
但坦率地说，最大的福祉——美国农业给世界带来的最大福祉并非任何政府项目所为，而是诺贝尔奖（Nobel Prize）获得者诺曼·博洛格（Norman Borlaug）的功劳，他是这个伟大机构的创始人。他把毕生精力都贡献给为全世界人口提供粮食，并帮助他们摆脱饥饿和营养不良。而且通过培育小麦新品种并取得过去无法想象的丰收，据估计他帮助拯救了数十亿人的生命。
他所引发的农业生产力大爆炸后来被称为绿色革命（Green Revolution）。你们应当知道这是一场美国革命，是一位美国创新者做到的。
我相信美国的创新、创造力和辛勤劳动还将为今后的数十亿人提供粮食。
而且我们也知道，要做到这一点，我们必须确保美国的企业和人民繁荣昌盛。
今天早些时候，我见到了“美国未来农民”（Future Farmers of America）中的一些年轻人。这是一个让人印象深刻的群体。我记得担任代表堪萨斯州中南部的议员的时候。他们是了不起的未来的年轻领袖。他们所具备的第一手农业知识是全世界任何地方的年轻人都无法与之相比的。
我刚才提到了在堪萨斯州温菲尔德的农场。那是我度过一个个暑假的地方。现在是我们全家节假日的去处，出去小住几天。在那个农场西南角的篱笆上有一个“世纪农场”的牌子，在家族中有100年了。它骄傲地竖立在那里。我叔叔吉姆付出了辛勤努力，让这个农场一直属于我们家族，并继续成功兴旺。我懂得这一点。美国国务院懂得这一点，特朗普总统也懂得这一点。我知道：农耕生活是美国所能给予的精粹。我们在本届政府中致力于确保那些我今天见到的年轻人能够将这种高尚的生活方式传给他们的下一代。我希望上帝保佑他们。我希望上帝保佑你们每一个人，保佑艾奥瓦，保佑美利坚合众国。谢谢你们，我很高兴回答一些问题。（掌声）谢谢。

Michael R. PompeoSecretary of StateWorld Food Prize Hall of LaureatesDes Moines, IowaMarch 4, 2019
 
AMBASSADOR BRANSTAD: Good afternoon. It is my honor to be back in Iowa today to introduce Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. As U.S. ambassador, I have the great privilege of representing the American people in China. (Applause.)
The U.S.-China relationship is the most important bilateral relationship in the world. As President Trump has said, the United States seeks a constructive, results-oriented relationship with China, and of course, the Secretary of Stae has a critical role to play in that relationship. Secretary Pompeo is well qualified for this very important position. He graduated first in his class at West Point and served in the United States Army. A fellow Midwesterner, he was a business leader and served three terms in the Congress from the state of Kansas before President Trump appointed him as director of the CIA and then as Secretary of State.
During the Secretary’s most recent visit to China, I was impressed with his ability to connect and motivate our embassy staff and effectively articulate American interests to the Chinese leadership. We are honored to have Secretary Pompeo at the helm of the State Department and speaking here in Iowa today. Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming our Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo. (Applause.)
SECRETARY POMPEO: Good afternoon. Please. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. I’m often reminded – I often get introduced as the 70th Secretary of State, which is pretty cool, but I’m reminded it’s – the President is 45, so the turnover in my gig is a lot higher. (Laughter.) I’ll be mindful of that as I speak.
Thanks for joining me. I’m looking forward – I’ve got some remarks I’ll make today, and then I’m happy to take questions on things that are on your mind. Thanks so much, too, for welcoming me to Iowa. I’ve had a great day here today. My wife Susan, who’s sitting over to my left, was born in Iowa City. Her mother is a proud graduate of the University of Iowa. So our son Nick and I have watched a lot of Hawkeye football games with Grandma. (Laughter and applause.) And yeah – I know, I got about half the applause here, yeah. (Laughter.) Same deal in Kansas. (Laughter.) Susan grew up, of course, in Kansas but spent a lot of time Coralville where her grandparents live. And so I will be happy to give you all the credit for the lady that she is, good and bad. (Laughter.)
There’s another special person who’s here who is an Iowan that just introduced me, and he has been an enormously powerful force for good in China on behalf of the United States of America. Please, one more time, thank Ambassador Branstad for all he’s doing for the country. (Applause.)
And I got to spend 15 minutes with Governor Reynolds a few minutes ago. It was delightful and wonderful. The things you’re doing here in Iowa are fantastic. Thank you. Bless you. Good luck to you and thank you for being here with me today as well. Thanks so much. (Applause.)
And thank you for inviting me to this enormously beautiful place, and for the World Food Prize for hosting me today. I know that Ambassador Quinn wanted to be here, but I understand he’s on to bigger and better things in London today, receiving his own prize for countering genocide in Cambodia. What a wonderful place for him to be. It’s a pretty good excuse for him not being here. (Laughter.)
The State Department is proud to work alongside as a partner with an organization like this. It has done so much to help feed the world. You every day burnish America’s reputation, and I am the beneficiary of that as I travel this world. And I am excited too to share with you that after two years of hiatus, the World Food Prize laureate announcement ceremony is returning to the State Department. I’ll host it; I’ll preside over the ceremony. I’m really looking forward to it. (Applause.)
I’m so thrilled to be here in Iowa. It was great. We flew in last night, and believe me, it was a breath of fresh air to be out of Washington, D.C. (Laughter.) And I know firsthand too how farmers are the backbone of America, how food security matters so much, and what you all do, the people of Iowa do, to help deliver that every place in the world.
I spent a good part of my summer from my early years in my life in a place called Winfield, Kansas at a family farm owned by my Uncle Jim. They were some of the most special times in my life. I remember the farm next door had a sign that said, “One Kansas Farmer Feeds 120 Plus You.” (Laughter.) I am confident that if we drive down the highways here in Iowa, we’d see a similar sign, and I know it’s true.
George Washington has the famous quote that says, “I would rather be on my farm than be emperor of the world.” I think he mean that, too.
I want to talk about agriculture and innovation and our relationship with China. The two, as you know, are deeply intertwined.
In 1980, a now very famous man, the then-governor of Guangdong Province, led the first-ever Chinese governors’ delegation here to the United States, and they traveled straight here, straight to Iowa.
A few years later, his son followed in his father’s footsteps with a visit here and struck up a friendship with the governor. Today, President Trump and President Xi deal with each other, trying to make sure that we get this important relationship right.
Indeed, you all know Iowa’s bounty has attracted many Chinese leaders, wanting to know the state’s secret for prosperity. But they haven’t fully embraced the principal ingredient for Iowa’s success, which is free enterprise and hard work and the central idea of allowing individuals to have their own autonomy and their own dignity and to lead and take chances and to take risk and to build their own businesses.
Indeed, when the heavy hand of government dictates economic policy, we all know that productivity plummets. Innovation necessarily grinds to a halt. And people are much worse off. Only the free market makes life better in the long run.
These market principles, the ideas of fair competition, have made American companies the global standard for success and quality.
Earlier today, I had the chance to visit the facilities of Corteva, an agricultural science company. It was remarkable. Companies like Corteva are an example of how economic freedom, innovation, risk-taking, a light regulatory touch can make American agriculture the envy of the world and dynamic in ways that no other country can potentially match.
Think about what our businesses do. I ran a small business in south central Kansas for – before I lost my mind and ran for Congress – (laughter) – now almost a decade ago. Gene editing has paved the way to eliminate diseases like corn blight. Companies like Quantified Ag have developed ear tags that use biometric technology to relay information about an animal’s health in real time. Others, like Agribotix, are using data from drones to help farmers make more precise fertilizer applications to boost yield.
These things seem simple to us. They seem like common sense. But they arose out of the creativity and freedom that we have here in America. It has taken decades of ingenuity, the decades of ingenuity which have enabled our farmers to produce harvests at levels the world would have been astounded by just a few years ago. This idea, this spirit of innovation makes America what it is in the agriculture world – renouned for its integrity, known for its safety, and knowing too that we deliver reliable products each and every time.
Indeed, when consumers eat an American steak, they know exactly what they are getting. Worldwide trust in the American brand is unmatched from farm to table, as we might say.
We also have the highest quality because of our free-market system. Companies value their brand in a market-based economy and work to protect that reputation. Competition and choice cause people to play by the rules.
Indeed, we have an entire ecosystem – some of them are standing in the back – an entire ecosystem of reporters, investors, food safety experts, consumer advocates, and nongovernment organizations that keep an eye on our companies and our markets. And our fair-minded justice system punishes law-breakers.
The vibrancy of our agricultural sector shows that America’s economic dynamism is not confined to Manhattan or to Silicon Valley or to Cambridge, Massachusetts. The American heartland is vibrant with economic potency.
And good things are happening here too in Des Moines, no less than they are in Palo Alto. There are even wineries in the Hawkeye State, or so I’m told. (Laughter.) So look, you’re more similar to California than you want to believe. (Laughter.)
And President Trump’s low-tax, regulation-cutting agenda is ensuring that our ag industry, along with all the other sectors of our economy, have room to continue to grow and thrive, that our countries continue to innovate without undue burden, that our farmers will be able to bequeath their rich piece of earth to their children.
Unfortunately, China has taken a different approach. It has a state-led set of economic practices that threaten the health of the American agriculture industry that you’ve all worked so hard to develop.
When we hear the stories of China stealing sensitive technologies, we often think of the technology powers – that powers our fighter jets, our smartphones, and our medical devices. But Americans should know that China has targeted intellectual property and technology essential to farming, too.
A few years ago, an Iowa farm security guard saw something suspicious in a field and stopped to investigate. He caught a Chinese national digging in the dirt, trying to steal genetically engineered corn seed that took years of research and development to create and which had cost a lot of money to build. That individual later pled guilty to stealing seed from Monsanto, DuPont Pioneer, and LG Seeds.
There’s another story, a different Chinese national, who stole hundreds of genetically engineered rice seeds produced by his employer. He stored them in his residence. He then passed the seeds to representatives of a Chinese crop research institute when they came to town, and it wasn’t until the Customs and Border Patrol, our CBP officers, searched their bags before a flight that he was caught.
And then, of course, there’s the theft that takes place in the robotics and industrial technologies that form the backbone of our agriculture industry as well. Every time there’s a theft of this kind, it eats away at the history, it eats away at the seed corn of the industries upon which you and your children and grandchildren depend.
And you should know too it’s not just big companies that suffer. As one farmer said, quote, “What no one seems to understand is that they’re stealing from people like me. They’re stealing the research that farmers pay [for] each time they buy a Monsanto seed.”
IP theft too isn’t the only problem that China presents. It’s an economic model that has for years survived on protectionism, rule-breaking, and state subsidies. China denies American companies access to its market through tariff barriers and non-tariff barriers, and they deny us the ability to compete on a fair and reciprocal basis.
I’ve been around enough businesses here in the heartland to know we don’t fear competition. But to compete successfully, you have to have a real shot. You have to have a relatively level playing field. And China’s protectionism has for decades tilted it, tilted the field against our farmers and agricultural companies.
You should know too that American agriculture exporters aren’t the only folks that are the victims of China’s state-dominated economy. As Ambassador Branstad reminds me, it is the Chinese people who suffer as well. Think back to 2008, when tens of thousand of Chinese children got sick from contaminated milk and baby formula, with several of them dying. Even today, many Chinese travel abroad to buy baby formula, and Chinese expatriates make big bucks shipping it back home for profit.
A few years ago, Time Magazine investigated fake Chinese eggs and came up with this list of scrumptious ingredients: resin, starch, coagulants, pigments, sodium alginate. I’m going to stop there.
Today in China, counterfeit goods, counterfeit products, the overuse of pesticides, reprocessed cooking waste all remain persistent problems.
And just as China has guarantees of human rights written into its constitution, China boasts plenty of food safety laws. It’s not about writing down one more regulation or one more rule. But enforcement is weak or nonexistent, and as we see so often in socialist countries, the prevalence of corruption in China’s state-commanded economy frequently allows this kind of fraud to go undetected and almost always unpunished. And even when it’s uncovered, the incentive to cheat remains unchanged. The Chinese people deserve better.
The good news is this: Help is on the way. American producers and Chinese consumers will both be better off. The outcome of President Trump’s trade negotiations currently underway will pay dividends for people in each of our two countries.
The President is taking a very hard line on stopping the theft of intellectual property. For our ag producers, President Trump is fighting to level the playing field to which I earlier referred so there will be greater market access for each of them.
This is great news. But opening up markets for new businesses isn’t just a pet project related to China. It’s one of the core missions of the State Department which I lead, and it has been for more than 200 years, but we’re doing so today with a renewed focus.
Many Americans look at the State Department and wonder what it does for them. They see the Secretary travel to far-off places and they ask the question, “Is America, are Americans, the first client of the State Department?” You should know that you are. For one thing, we have 1,700 economic officers serving all across the globe. A huge part of their work on behalf of families in Iowa or Kansas or any other state is to create opportunities for American businesses to sell their products abroad. And when it comes to international commerce, I guess you could say that the art of diplomacy goes hand-in-hand with getting deals done.
This brings me to a quick detour. I would be remiss if I didn’t spend a few minutes. Economic diplomacy is certainly a central mission of what it is that I do. It’s one of the State Department’s many missions. But if you’re an American looking for one of the most rewarding, challenging careers possible, consider the U.S. State Department. There are opportunities to represent the American flag in everything from counterterrorism to ensuring food security to fighting human trafficking. My colleagues are incredibly proud patriots serving all across the globe. They’re smart and they’re mission-driven.
The State Department has spent a lot of money and energy over the years to make sure we have a diversity, a diverse workforce. I want to make sure that we have people from the heartland serving in the Foreign Service as well. We need that geographic diversity. Our mission is, of course, to represent all of the American people in all corners of the globe, so the makeup of our workforce matters. And if you want to keep America safe and strong and advance our values, we’ve got great opportunities. You can literally change the world. Okay, infomercial over, but please, you or your kids, come check it out. It is a great place to work. It is a noble calling. The people who work with Ambassador Branstad and I are true patriots serving our great nation.
I’ll close here. Under President Trump, our diplomats have been especially busy opening up markets around the world for all kinds of American agriculture. And along with our colleagues at USDA and the Trade Representative’s office and the Department of Commerce, this administration has opened up a path for dairy and poultry to Canada, lamb and goat meat to Japan, beef and pork to Argentina, poultry to India, lamb to El Salvador, beef and poultry to Morocco, eggs to South Africa, dairy to Turkey, and handfuls of others. We hope that the EU too will soon lower its trade barriers and grant expanded access for American goods.
Where China is concerned, new market access must come, and we must do so in a way that creates systems that are enforceable. It doesn’t do any good to sign one more agreement, one more document, if a mechanism to enforce those commitments that the Chinese make to us doesn’t have the capacity to create a set of rules and processes that are enforceable.
One final point of importance related to keeping the American ag sector prosperous. Our abundance has always been an incredible blessing to the world. We have to extend that legacy. The promise of land and the rich soil stretching into the horizon in a better life drew innumerable settlers to our shores. After World War I, Herbert Hoover helped quarterback our efforts to feed tens of millions of Europeans, a project that depended substantially on American foodstuffs. And in the years immediately following World War II, American farm output again helped feed a continent ravaged by war and continuing to suffer from the threat of famine.
There are many programs today – you all are part of them – that help satisfy and provide food for the world’s neediest. That need has only grown and will only continue to grow. Today, the United States is the world’s number one exporter of food and ag products, and our generosity is legion. Our USAID bought 1.4 [1] metric tons of food from American farmers in 2017 and fed 70 million people across 53 countries.
But frankly, the greatest blessing – the greatest blessing from American agriculture to the world isn’t due to any government program. It was the work of Nobel Prize winner Norman Borlaug, the founder of this great institute. He devoted his life to feeding the world’s population and bringing it out of starvation and malnourishment. And by breeding new species of wheat that yielded once unthinkable harvests, it’s estimated that he helped save billons of lives.
The explosion of agriculture productivity he triggered became known as the Green Revolution, and you should know that it was an American revolution and an American innovator who did that. I am confident that the next billion, and the billion after that of people who will be fed around the world, will also be fed by American innovation, creativity, and hard work.
And we too know that to do that, we have to make sure that American businesses and people prosper. Earlier today I met with some young people in the FFA. It’s an impressive group. I remember my time representing south central Kansas. These are great young leaders of the future. They have firsthand knowledge of agriculture that is unparalleled anyplace in the world by young people.
I mentioned earlier the farm in Winfield, Kansas. It’s where I spent my summers. It’s now where we go for family holidays to just hang out and get away. There is in that farm on the fence on the southwest corner a century farm sign, a hundred years in the family. It’s proudly staked right there. It took hard work by my Uncle Jim to keep this family farm in the family and to continue to make it prosperous and successful. I get that. America’s State Department gets that and President Trump gets that as well. I know this: Farm life is the best of what America has to offer. We’re committed in the administration to making sure that those young people that I met with today can pass on that noble way of life to their children. I hope that God will bless them. I hope that God will bless each of you and Iowa and the United States of America. Thank you, and I am happy to take a handful of questions. (Applause.) Thanks.
QUESTION: I have a question.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yes, sir.
QUESTION: First I would like to thank you and the ambassador for coming to visit us, and we’d like to thank you for all your hard work on our behalf. And we know its hard work out there, and I’d like to thank you for men of integrity working on our behalf. Thank you for that.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you.
QUESTION: My question is this: What are some of the major obstacles left in the trade negotiations with China?
SECRETARY POMPEO: So I won’t – so I can’t give away the details of where they’re still working or the exact details of what’s going on, but it won’t surprise you what’s really difficult. The issue of opening up markets and access is a hard one for sure but not the hardest of the issues. I think we’ll actually get to a place where the Chinese will put this in a place where they’ll buy more soybeans, buy more American products. I think we’ll be successful on that.
The more complicated issues are around the structural challenges, structural challenges that not only impact agriculture but manufacturing services, frankly all sellers of goods and services inside of China. This risk of IP stealing, forced technology transfer, about which I spoke in my remarks, is real and difficult, and not something the Chinese are going to give up easily. And you attach on the back side of that that you need more than just a promise to undo those structural things. You need a mechanism by which those commitments can be enforced, and that’s the focus. It’s where Ambassador Lighthizer, Secretary Mnuchin, and the trade team are fully engaged. They have made progress on every one of those components of the agreement. They truly have. I’ve seen that and I know Ambassador Branstad has seen that as well. So real progress on every one of those elements. But if you ask what the hurdles are that remain, it’s those last couple items that will inevitably prove tricky but which I’m very, very hopeful we’ll be able to wrap up and get a truly successful outcome for the United States and for American ag.
Yes, sir. Go ahead, I’m sorry. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Secretary Pompeo, I also want to thank you for coming here to Iowa and visiting. My grandfather in 1932 left Clearwater, Kansas to come to Iowa because it would just get too dry down there for him. (Laughter.) Life was better in Iowa. And I’m a lifelong —
SECRETARY POMPEO: I’m going to tell the people of Clearwater you said that. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Well, I’ve still got relatives down there. I have my great-great aunt still living in Wichita as well. I’m a big farmer here in central Iowa. Our family has been involved in pork production, corn, soybeans as well. We’re still dealing with retaliatory tariffs, not only from China but also from Mexico. The pork industry is very important to the state of Iowa and really the whole Midwest, and we’ve really taken a double whammy. And so could you address maybe the Mexican issue as well, please?
SECRETARY POMPEO: So this risk of retaliatory tariffs – you’ve seen it in pork, we’ve seen it in other places as well – is real. The President is deeply aware of this. The trade teams are all aware. We’re working – when we get a comprehensive agreement – we now have a relatively comprehensive agreement in the USMCA. We are working to clean up all of these issues alongside of that.
And I hesitate to get too far out over my skis, but I’m optimistic that we’ll get that, that we’ll get resolution and get pulled back some of these risks from retaliatory tariffs. But I do want to emphasize those commitments are as good as the paper they’re written on if there’s not a mechanism that permits the United States to respond in a way that doesn’t require us going into court someplace in a country that doesn’t have the rule of law, that doesn’t have an advanced justice system. We have to make sure that when we sign up for those things and we pick them, that we really have.
There’s a long history – you would probably know this history better than I do – a long history of us having celebrations, having signing ceremonies, everyone thinking, boy, we’ve put this problem to rest, only to find that in relatively short order we didn’t really solve much. And we are trying not to – we’re trying to make original mistakes, not repeat the past ones. We’re trying to make sure we don’t fall the same trap that American trade negotiators have done so many times. We’re deeply aware of these retaliatory tariff issues. We know how they much impact you and companies – businesses like yours. Know that they’re in the front of our mind and we’re working our way to put America in a place where our businesses don’t suffer them.
QUESTION: Yeah, Mr. Secretary, thanks for being here. We appreciate it. As soybean farmers, you know, have been hit particularly hard with the tariffs. We – the market facilitation provided much-needed relief. And my question would be: We’ve heard comments that maybe tariffs could be dropped on certain products or commodities. I – and I know in the negotiating process you can’t show your cards, but is there a chance that tariffs on soybeans could be dropped in exchange for something else, make some concessions, and then some of these more tricky issues like intellectual property that take a lot of time and a lot of work could be put off or worked on – continued to be worked on while there’s some relief for some of the ag products?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. It’s a good question. You saw the President make the request that the Chinese do that. I think it was on Friday of last week he asked the Chinese, given the status of the negotiations and the fact that he made the decision on the 1st of March not to increase tariffs – something that he had previously said that he would do – he picked a date certain – he’d asked them to reduce some piece of their tariffs as well. The best I know, we haven’t received a formal response to that.
Beyond that, I don’t really want to comment too much, for rest that Ambassador Lighthizer and Secretary Mnuchin will kill me. (Laughter.) So it is a good question. It’s something I know they’re giving due thought to.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Ambassador, thank you – or Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today, and Ambassador Branstad. And the work you’re doing on our IP, protecting that, you’ve heard it from everyone else around the room. And I’m a corn farmer in northeast Iowa. You’ve heard from hog producers, cattle producer, perhaps, and some soybean farmers. And we all invest money in our checkoffs, commodity checkoffs that help build these markets, and we rely heavily on investing in these markets and building them over time. They – we build great relationships. They are important for sending our products. You know all of this, I’m certain.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah.
QUESTION: Mexico right next door is important to all of us, Canada also. We dearly need to see USMCA signed and done. One of the hurdles for that is the steel, aluminum tariffs, and – from getting that signed. What are the thoughts on getting those removed and helping this – that agreement move forward?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Fair question. Let me say this: I am very confident that there are enough votes to pass – to get the USMCA moved through our government, through the United States Government. And without getting in the business of other sovereign nations’ decision-making processes, I am confident that those countries too will conclude that this deal is their best outcome and they’ll move forward. I truly believe that. How we’ll handle these 232 tariffs as part of that, I think, remains to be seen, but as I’ve engaged with my – with Foreign Minister Freeland and the new foreign minister, Marcelo Ebrard, in Mexico, I think we’re in pretty good place getting each of those two countries to move forward with this agreement. You never want to count your chickens or pigs or anything before they hatch or before they grow up, but I feel pretty good about that. Unless it becomes a real political football in Washington, I think we’ll, come the end of this year, have an agreement.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: John Maxwell (ph), eastern Iowa dairyman. Would you comment on any kind of timeframe? Because every day that marches on, it’s getting tougher and tougher.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah – no. (Laughter.) You remember how I said I’d answer almost anything? It’s just – I’m not trying to be short or – I – or not take your question seriously. I do. I am – the President is too – is enormously sympathetic to what you all are going through, but I wouldn’t want to predict a date or a week or how this is going to fall. I’ve been part of too many of these negotiations that truly – they look they’re home, they look like you see a path forward, only to find that there was something buried somewhere. And that – there’s risk that that happens here as well.
QUESTION: Thank you.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah.
Yes. Get the microphone, yes. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Secretary Pompeo, thank you for being here today. I would like to ask a question – yet another question on trade. With the loss of the TPP, do you see a bilateral trade agreement – I know there’s been news on some work with Japan. Do you see that coming soon?
SECRETARY POMPEO: I do. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. Look, there’s been some real progress made. There are – we – there’s an enormous amount of focus on China and the trade negotiation with China. I completely get why that dominates the news, but we have efforts ongoing in China, there’s work that’s being done with the EU. Our task, the U.S. Government’s task, the State Department’s task, the trade representative’s task isn’t confined solely to the markets in China. We need to get market access – good, rules-based trade – with each of those countries.
And I will – I had an ambassador – our ambassador to the United Kingdom said the other day – he just – he said, look, they’ve been – in the EU, they’ve been smearing the quality of our food. They’ve been saying things about the quality of our food that just simply aren’t true. We have an obligation too to make sure that facts are out there. We deliver consistent, stable, affordable, high-yield, high-quality food products all around the world, and boy, they – the folks use these myths to try and knock down our capacity to sell into their markets so that these countries can protect their farmers. The State Department has an obligation to fix that too, and that goes every place in the world.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) Vietnam?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Vietnam – we talked about trade on our trip to Hanoi. People forget we actually met with the Vietnamese as well in addition to the reason we departed there. I think Vietnam is going to make big steps forward as well. They made a number of offers while there. I’m not at liberty to disclose them yet, but things that you all would be very happy with. It’s a reasonable market, right – about 97, 100 million people in Vietnam. Not quite as wealthy as you see in other places, but certainly making real strides. A larger middle class there is inevitable and will be a very important market for you all here in Iowa.
QUESTION: Bilateral?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yes, almost certainly a bilateral agreement with the Vietnamese. It may not even be a formal trade agreement. It may be just elements of what you would see in a normal trade agreement, full-on – full free trade agreement. And to your point on doing – it would – we could do this piecemeal and get a really good outcome, a really good quick hit, which I think would be great given the conditions we’re in today.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, I just wanted to congratulate you and thank you for reducing the tension between India and Pakistan. I understand after their airstrikes, both foreign ministers spoke to you, and you spoke and the tension was reduced then. I want to congratulate you for your first diplomatic —
SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you. I appreciate that. It’s a place with great tension. I hope that the efforts that I made and others in the United States Government made did reduce the risk that we get escalation. It would be a bad thing for everyone. As with lots of these things, I think everyone knew that, but in times of high tension, it is often difficult, and so it requires sometimes someone else to come in and try and make sure that good reason and logic prevail in the midst of really challenging conflict that’s been going on, as you well know, for an awfully long time.
And it’s not certain. We certainly have reduced tension through the weekend and today. My team on the ground in each of those two countries is working diligently to help ensure that it stays there and that these – this conflict is resolved in a way at the negotiating table and through peace, rather than through armed conflict and the loss of lives. So thank you. Thanks for that.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, thank you so much for coming here. I really do appreciate it. It’s always nice to see high-ranking members of U.S. Government coming and letting Iowans know that you are really working for us.
My question was actually just secondary based off of the last question. Does China use those third-party influences or auxiliary countries in the negotiating table? Specifically saying Pakistan is very important for U.S. militarily, but it’s important for China economically. Does that ever come up regarding those trade negotiations, or do you guys just review it as one large, dynamic problem or isolated incidents?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. I will tell you that the – that’s a good question because it is absolutely the case that every one of these trade negotiations that I’ve referred to today takes place in the context of much broader set of relationships – security relationships, military relationships, diplomatic relationships, and broader set of economic relationships as well.
When it has come to the trade negotiations with China, it has been pretty compartmentalized. The focus has been on this. Neither of us has raised the specter of bringing outside things into this. It has been about trying to find a set of rules and incentives that will provide a lasting outcome that gives American businesses real opportunity to compete in China in a way that’s fair and reciprocal, without the risk of losing the property that they’ve so heavily invested in. So it’s been pretty squared off, which we thought at the beginning made sense, and the Chinese have honored that in good measure as well.
QUESTION: Thank you.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yes, sir. Gordon, good to see you.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
SECRETARY POMPEO: I’m good, good. You never know where you’re going to see an old friend.
QUESTION: Yeah, I had to come to Iowa to see you. And by the way, we’d take you back. (Laughter.) Believe me, we would take you back.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Don’t – do not start that rumor. (Laughter.) You’ve got media in the back.
QUESTION: No, I know. I know.
SECRETARY POMPEO: There is no upside to that.
QUESTION: And hello to your better half, by the way. Mike did marry up, believe me. (Laughter.) She’s a wonderful lady.
Mike, my question is kind of simple: What’s it like working for Donald Trump?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. (Laughter.) It is really very simple. It’s an enormous privilege. I mean, to stand here in front of you as America’s most senior diplomat, trying to deliver on the promises that President Trump made during his campaign, right – 60-plus million voters wanted him to do things different, to fundamentally change some of the courses that America had been on. And to get a chance to serve for him is truly an enormous privilege. I’ve now done it twice. I’m on my second gig. I saw him almost every day when I was the director of the Central Intelligence Agency. I provided him with his daily brief. And now I talk to him almost every day, sometimes more than once.
He is the kind of leader that sets a direction, charts the course, gives guidance, says, Mike, this is the – these are the outcomes that I need you to deliver, and then allows me and my team to go implement and execute. I appreciate that. He then in turn holds us each accountable to achieve the mission that he set out for us, and it’s a wonderful thing to have this opportunity. And then you all get to read his Twitter account too, so. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Thank you, Secretary, and thank you, Ambassador.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Yes.
QUESTION: Secretary, my name is Ben Renche (ph). I farm in northeast Iowa – Jesup, Iowa – and I just wondered if you could shed some light on when we might see our colleague, Indiana farmer Kip Tom, reach final confirmation on his post to UN ambassador for food and ag.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Oh my goodness, I should have you all sign letters on his behalf. I have at the State Department several dozen people pending confirmation, all of whom are highly qualified, capable people who have agreed to go serve America, and they’re not on the battlefield. They’re not on the playing field. They’re not on the diplomatic field. That’s most unfortunate.
If there are – if either of your senators are sitting in the back of the room, they’re probably going to throw something at me here in a minute, but moving these confirmations forward for qualified candidates for which there is no objection seems like a basic underpinning of what the American people are owed. So it has proven enormously frustrating for me at the State Department and I know for my colleagues in the Cabinet who have people in various positions in Department of Agriculture, Department of Treasury, you name it, to not be able to get them out actively doing the task which they have so graciously agreed to accept.
I couldn’t tell you. I don’t know what these timelines are going to look like. I hope – at the State Department – I’m following that much more closely – we’ve got some 40-plus. I hope we get most of them done by the next couple months. There are qualified candidates for which no senator objects who have been sitting on the list pending confirmation for over a year.
Now I’m going to have to go testify in front of the Senate, so here we go. (Laughter.) I promise you I’ll hear that sentence back.
Yes, ma’am.
QUESTION: Secretary, thank you so much for being here. As a Midwest farmer, you understand the power of a handshake deal. Being a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency and now in your current position, I’m sure you understand that facts really matter. And with the Chinese we see that there’s some flexibility with facts.
I work for Iowa Select Farms. We’re the largest pork producer here in the state of Iowa. African swine fever is a huge problem for the Chinese right now and across the world actually, and we’re not getting good facts from them. So a twofold question: In your time there, did you see or hear anything about African swine fever you could share with us from a firsthand experience? And secondly, how does this flexibility with facts play into trade negotiations with the Chinese Government?
SECRETARY POMPEO: So when I was there on the recent trip, it was raised. We talked about it some. Ambassador Branstad has been very engaged on this issue to try and understand the scope, the challenge, all of the various characteristics of the risk that is presented to that, and I’m – I think I’ll just leave it at that.
With respect to being fact-challenged, you should know that there are many countries around the world that present fact challenge situations to the United States. Indeed, some of our friends from time to time. Our task is to separate the wheat from the chaff. How’s that for a good analogy here in Iowa?
It’s a real challenge, and one of the things that we have I think an absolute duty to do is provide the moral clarity around that. When countries are engaged in activities, sometimes so far as information campaigns – disinformation campaigns – we have an obligation to call it out from whatever voice that information is emanating. When we do that, I think we achieve some level of deterrence, but most importantly I think we protect America – that is, in the sense we remain a country that does act in ways that are very fact-based.
You should know I’m so proud to represent the 75,000 people of the United States Department of State. When I travel the world, I’ll hear from our counterparts all over that, Mike, we learn a lot from the United States. You all help us. You provide foreign aid, whatever it is the assistance might be, but one of the things that you bring to my country is people of integrity. We see how your diplomats work. We see how hard they work. We see how they’re honest. We see how they don’t show up with paper bags full of cash to get a deal done. We see how it is that they interact with their colleagues, that they treat every human being with the dignity and respect that they deserve.
They see that. They see the representation of these core understandings of the United States of America, which are part of what you’re talking about with respect to fact-based presentations. It’s literally the case that when I enter a room to try and wrap up a negotiation, whether it’s us trying to complete a trade deal or a arms weapon sale or getting permission for our embassy to have more people – whatever it is, our counterparts know that whatever it is I tell them will be truthful, that we won’t be playing games, that we won’t be engaged in a series of deceits. It’s not that we don’t make mistakes, it’s not that we don’t get things wrong, but we’re showing up with a facts-based – a fact-based presentation on behalf of the United States of America, something you all should be incredibly proud of. And I wish it was the case that there were fewer – there were more countries that engaged in international activity in the same way that we do. (Applause.)
Looks like I’ve got time for one more. Anybody, or did I wear you all out? Yes, sir.
QUESTION: I’m a fifth-generation farmer from northwest Iowa, and I was kind of ready, positioned myself for these trade negotiations, but I grew a really good crop, so I haven’t – I’m not all priced ahead. And I just – we’re going to have big carryouts; at least, they’re all predicting that we will. Do you have a plan B or whatever to peddle these things someplace other than China that – more reliable for us? I mean, I’m going to encourage you to sell all you want, we’ll grow more. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY POMPEO: So there’s been lots of ideas floated. I don’t know that there’s a concrete solution to the question that you raise. I wish I could tell you, yes, we’ve got them – markets identified, we know the price at which we can clear. I can’t tell you that. But there are lots of ideas about how we might do that, ways that we might assist. I know there was some assistance, interim assistance that was provided, but I also know I heard from farmers in Kansas. They appreciated that, they thought it was great, but they’d rather just sell their stuff and run their business and pass it on to the sixth generation.
Yeah, one more. Yes, sir. I saw you had one. Yes.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, thanks for coming to Iowa. Ambassador Branstad, thanks for coming back. (Applause.) I wondered if you could touch on North Korea situation and maybe opening up a trade agreement with them, if something (inaudible).
SECRETARY POMPEO: I live in hope. (Laughter.) So a little bit of color on the President’s trip to Hanoi perhaps would be of some interest. So I’ve been at this since the beginning. I took the first trip on behalf of the administration when I was the CIA director. I told a story that’s not for repeating to your governor a little bit ago from the first trip. We’ve been engaged in the fundamental proposition of trying to convince Chairman Kim, who is 35 years old, that the historic strategy which said that absent nuclear weapons North Korea will fall, that the government will fall, that it was their only way of achieving security for the country – and they trust that. They’re confident that that will protect them.
We’ve been trying to convince them with a fact-based presentation that says, actually, your best way – if your goal is tomorrow, you may well be right. But if your goal is two, five, ten, twenty-five years, then, in fact, those nuclear weapons will actually present risk to your country, that running a nation in the way that North Korea has been run is not a sustainable model for the next ten, twenty, thirty years. But it’s going to require Chairman Kim to make that strategic decision.
We didn’t get there this past trip. In spite of lots of hard work that was done by State Department team, DOD team, all the folks at the Department of Energy over the past weeks working with the North Koreans to try and outline what a real big deal would look like, we didn’t get there. So I am hopeful, although I have no commitment yet, that we will be back at it, that I’ll have a team in Pyongyang in the next couple weeks continuing to work to find those places where there is shared interest.
A team will also be out working with our partners, right. We’ve built an enormous coalition, right, all the members of the UN Security Council. People think of these sanctions as being ours. They’re not. They’re the world’s sanctions. Everyone understands the threat from North Korea. We think we still have everyone on board. We think the whole world still understands the threat, even after the deal that was proffered, which the President didn’t think rose to the level of something that he ought to accept, and we’re still working at it.
A big component of what we have presented the President refers to as a brighter future for the people of North Korea. A significant component of that brighter future is the economic opportunity that sits in North Korea. For any of you who have studied this, there are enormous structural challenges – infrastructure challenges, electricity challenges. There are many, but it’s a pretty fertile place. It’s a place with 25 million people, an economy that has enormous potential for growth, and we believe that there are resources and willing partners who will come if we can make it across the Rubicon on the nuclear weapons to build a brighter future for the people of North Korea. And there would almost certainly be an enormous opportunity for American business to serve that 25-million-person market as well. It’ll take a while to build them out to a place where they have a significant, scalable middle-class economy, but we’ve seen other Asian countries do this in time periods that no one believed that it could be pulled off.
MODERATOR: Sir, we have time for one more.
SECRETARY POMPEO: All right, great. Thank you.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Do you think China’s Belt and Road policy could eventually remove Africa and Europe and Southeast Asia from the American sphere of influence for markets?
SECRETARY POMPEO: No way. So the question is do you think China’s Belt and Road is going to take down the United States of America – I summarize. No chance. As I travel the world, people are on to it. They get the shtick. These deals are, in fact, often too good to be true, and many countries have already begun to see that. They show up with products that aren’t world-class, with Chinese labor and an enormous debt package which is almost certainly designed for foreclosure. And I think the world is beginning to see that.
And I think too America sat still for too long. We didn’t respond to this economic activity, and we’re determined to do it. And so you’re now seeing American businesses, American diplomats showing up in these conversations, making sure that there’s a fact-based discussion about what’s really taking place and how it is the case that there are better alternatives than doing some of these deals with China.
I want to be clear: We’re perfectly prepared and we welcome China moving around the world when competing. On a fair and level playing field, they have every right to go out and have Chinese companies go compete their brains out, work their tails off, and go compete with us. And if they show up with a project that is an economically viable project and it is better than what the Europeans show up with or the Americans show up with or what the Japanese or the Australians show up, so be it. We want the Chinese Government to grow its economy and be successful. We see no problem with that.
Where we have a real problem is when they show up with deals that just not a soul in this room would do, that none of you would. How many bankers do we have in the room? Any financing folks? None of you would loan into these deals, and none of you would see the economic outcome that got you to the right place in that transaction. That means almost certainly that there’s a political component to the investment.
And I’m very convinced that the world is waking up to this risk. I’m very convinced that America is responding to this risk. And I always believe that over a substantial period of time that markets always beat centralized government every place you find them. And I think that’ll be what happens here with the China Belt and Road Initiative as well.
Well, look, thank you all. Thank you so much for your time today. Good luck and God bless you all. Thanks. (Applause.)