2026-05-17T14:00:27-0400 / https://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-full-transcript-05-17-2026/
在本期由玛格丽特·布伦南主持的《与玛格丽特·布伦南直面国家》节目中：
- 美国贸易代表 贾米森·格里尔
- 台湾驻美大使 尤振仲
- 安东尼·萨尔万托，哥伦比亚广播公司新闻选举与调查部执行主任
- 宾夕法尼亚州共和党众议员 布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克 与纽约州民主党众议员 汤姆·苏奥齐
- 前国防部长 罗伯特·盖茨
点击此处浏览2026年《与玛格丽特·布伦南直面国家》的完整文字实录。
玛格丽特·布伦南：我是华盛顿的玛格丽特·布伦南。
本周的《直面国家》节目：在对中国进行旋风式外交访问后返回美国的特朗普总统，在国内面临着有关通胀和经济的强烈反对。
尽管外界对总统的中国之行以及世界两大经济强国会晤成果的细节仍在陆续披露，但特朗普总统在国内经济和通胀问题上的努力正遭到国内的抨击。
当被问及美国人的财务状况在多大程度上推动了他的伊朗外交政策时，他的回应并未起到安抚作用：
（采访片段开始）
唐纳德·特朗普（美国总统）：完全没有。我不会考虑美国人的财务状况。我谁都不考虑。我只考虑一件事。我们绝不能让伊朗拥有核武器。
（采访片段结束）
玛格丽特·布伦南：这些言论，加上显示通胀率三年来最快增速的最新数据，让共和党人越来越担忧本党在中期选举中的胜算。
我们将邀请总统的首席贸易代表贾米森·格里尔，以及台湾驻美大使，还有众议院两党问题解决核心小组的负责人、宾夕法尼亚州共和党议员布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克和纽约州民主党议员汤姆·苏奥齐。此外，前国防部长罗伯特·盖茨也将做客节目。
这些内容都将在《直面国家》中为您呈现。
早上好，欢迎收看《直面国家》。
随着周六路易斯安那州参议员比尔·卡西迪在共和党三方初选中落败，特朗普总统对本党的掌控进一步加强。卡西迪在1月6日国会山遇袭后投票弹劾特朗普。作为一名医生，卡西迪也曾公开批评本届政府的部分卫生政策。
作为回应，特朗普支持了他的一名竞争对手，并公开抨击卡西迪。这个原本属于共和党安全席位的席位将进入第二轮投票。但今年是中期选举年，总统的政绩是全国范围内的关键影响因素。
我们今天上午发布的哥伦比亚广播公司新闻民调显示，七成美国人对政府的经济政策感到沮丧甚至愤怒。三分之二的受访者表示，特朗普的政策至少在短期内让经济形势恶化，仅有27%的人认可他对通胀的处理方式。这在我们的哥伦比亚广播公司民调中是特朗普总统支持率的新低。
今天我们首先邀请到总统经济团队的核心成员、美国贸易代表贾米森·格里尔。
大使，早上好。
贾米森·格里尔大使（美国贸易代表）：早上好。很高兴来到这里。
玛格丽特·布伦南：这不仅仅是情绪问题。目前全国汽油均价为每加仑4.51美元。自战争爆发以来，美国人在燃油上的花费比一年前多了450亿美元。
股市有所上涨，但低收入美国人正在缩减开支。纽约联邦储备银行的报告显示，年收入低于12.5万美元的家庭减少了汽车加油的频率。您将如何为普通美国人提供救济？
贾米森·格里尔大使：我们都清楚，没人愿意看到汽油价格上涨。
但与此同时，总统也在平衡外交政策方面的考量。我们都知道，除了希望汽油价格低廉，我们也不希望子孙后代生活在一个伊朗拥有核武器的世界里。
因此，总统正尽其所能致力于提高民众的负担能力：他正在推动美国本土就业岗位回流。我们正致力于提高薪资水平，以抵消物价上涨带来的影响。我们也看到乳制品、奶酪、面粉等生活必需品的价格正在下降。
因此，我们对此高度重视。总统也对此十分关注。我们期待随着海湾地区军事行动结束，相关价格能尽快回落。
玛格丽特·布伦南：但目前我们还没有相关的时间表。
接下来我想问问您刚刚在亚洲参与的工作。中国方面表示，已与美国同意成立一个投资委员会，审议中国对美投资，并设立双边贸易委员会讨论关税问题。
哪些产品将受到该委员会的影响？这些项目是否超出了您目前正在进行的调查范围？
贾米森·格里尔大使：当我们谈到贸易委员会时，我们考虑的是如何管理美中两国的经济关系。
这两个经济体差异巨大，我们的重点是非敏感商品贸易。当涉及敏感商品时，也就是那些最高端的科技产品，可用于军事用途的产品，这些属于国家安全问题。
因此，我们正在讨论的领域包括对华出口农产品、能源产品、波音飞机、医疗设备。而我们计划从中国进口的商品，则包括各类消费品和低技术含量产品。
我们关注的正是这些可以开展贸易的领域。在投资方面，投资委员会主要是为了讨论美中投资政策中的关键问题。它并非一个投资项目，而是试图像消防员一样，在两国之间出现问题时及时化解。
玛格丽特·布伦南：所以，这更像是一个传递稳定信号的举措，因为你们此前已经在双边层面讨论过许多这类问题，对吗？那么这次有什么新的变化？
贾米森·格里尔大使：我们此前从未设立过贸易委员会或投资委员会。美中两国一直以来都是采取临时磋商的方式，我认为这实际上存在挑战。
我认为将这些关系正式化更为重要。美国对中国实施了一系列关税、进口管制和出口管制措施。而中国长期以来也设置了诸多非关税壁垒，以及其他阻碍我们商品进口的障碍。
通过两国政府之间的正式渠道来讨论这些问题，效果会好得多。除此之外，我们看到中国在过去几天里减少了对牛肉、家禽等农产品的一系列非关税壁垒。
因此，我们已经看到他们开始采取措施，便利美国商品的进口。
玛格丽特·布伦南：我稍后会再回到这些话题。
但我想先问问关税问题。总统对记者表示，他完全没有与习近平主席讨论关税问题。我们是否正处于无限期的贸易休战期？或者你们是否正考虑将关税税率恢复到最高法院裁决之前的水平？
贾米森·格里尔大使：中国方面清楚——这也是我们协议的一部分——美国可以将关税上调至去年10月釜山协议时的水平，当时习近平主席和特朗普总统举行了会晤。
今年2月最高法院的裁决后，对中国的关税税率下调了约10个百分点。我们认为，根据我们的协议，我们可以再次上调关税。总统正在探索他可用的各种工具。我不想预先判断正在进行的多项调查的结果。
正如我们与其他许多国家打交道时一样，中国方面清楚，我们将维持一定水平的关税以管控进口，但我们也期望市场开放。
玛格丽特·布伦南：好的。
但上次您做客节目时，就在最高法院裁决之后，您曾表示，当部分关税在7月到期后，您预计在相关调查结束后，将根据301条款推出新的关税措施。
那么您现在是说，您不再预计7月之后会实施新的关税措施了吗？
贾米森·格里尔大使：嗯，我当时已经说得很清楚了，正如我的法律顾问一直提醒我的那样，我不能预先判断这些调查的结果。
如果调查发现存在关税壁垒或不公平贸易行为，它们可以授权总统采取诸如关税、服务收费、配额等措施。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
贾米森·格里尔大使：因此，如果调查结果显示中国等国家存在严重的产能过剩问题——我们认为这很可能发生——我们将向总统提出这些选项。
我们将在调查结束后向您通报结果。
玛格丽特·布伦南：好的。
我们确实看到中国在周六发布了一份声明，证实了与美国达成的部分协议，但内容相当模糊。声明没有提到特朗普总统对记者所说的，如果首批200架波音飞机订单进展顺利，中国将承诺购买750架波音飞机的承诺。
中国方面表示，美国承诺供应飞机发动机，但没有提及特朗普总统宣布的400至450台通用电气发动机。通用电气也尚未发表评论。那么这些协议的确定性有多高？
贾米森·格里尔大使：首批200架波音飞机订单已经确定。当然，未来还可能有更多的波音订单。实际上，这是近10年来中国首次大规模订购波音飞机。
因此，这一订单正在推进中，正如总统所说。当波音公司交付飞机时，这将带来巨大的利好。至于其他细节，我们正在敲定一份情况说明书，希望能尽快发布，这样我们就能明确说明我们期望中国增加两位数的农产品采购量，以及访问期间达成的其他相关协议。
玛格丽特·布伦南：好的。我知道通用电气今天正在与中国方面会晤，但我们尚未看到他们就飞机发动机问题发表任何声明。
在农产品方面，保守派的《华尔街日报》编辑委员会质疑，由于这些协议内容模糊，此次峰会是否实现了任何宣称的成果。
他们写道：“特朗普先生吹嘘中国将大量采购美国大豆和飞机，但中国并未确认这些销售。据我们统计，这已经是中国第二次，甚至第三次购买相同的美国大豆了？”
他们认为你方在玩数字游戏，反复宣布过去的协议和采购承诺。您能否用具体细节回应这些保守派的质疑？
贾米森·格里尔大使：首先，自去年10月以来，我们与中国已经达成协议，在本届总统任期内，中国每年将购买2500万吨大豆。该协议仍然有效。
我们期待新的采购协议，具体数字将很快公布，农产品采购总量将实现两位数增长。我所说的总量，涵盖所有品类，包括大豆、牛肉、谷物、乳制品等等。
因此，他们可能提到的现有大豆采购协议仍然有效。除此之外，我们还将达成上述农产品采购协议。所有这些都将通过双边贸易委员会与中国的磋商来落实。
玛格丽特·布伦南：所以这些协议仍然没有最终敲定，只是一个总量协议？
那么美国做出了哪些让步？为了达成这些协议，你们做出了哪些让步？
贾米森·格里尔大使：嗯，贸易应该是平衡的，对吗？我们正努力实现与中国的贸易平衡。
长期以来，美中贸易失衡。因此，当你看到中国方面的声明——我可以证实，其中提到了波音飞机的销售，同时也提到了飞机、汽车零部件及备件、飞机零部件等的销售——中国希望确保他们能够定期获得这些备件，以维持机队运营。
这正是我们愿意提供的。我们致力于互利共赢的贸易。因此，当讨论我们应该出口什么、进口什么时，这不再是让步的问题，而是双方如何实现互利共赢的问题。
这也是我们为什么如此关注非敏感商品贸易的原因，因为这不需要双方做出让步，而是需要双方合作，探讨对方的需求、我们想要出口的商品以及我们从对方那里需要的商品。
我们已经看到了成效，中国重新注册了此前过期的啤酒加工厂和牛肉加工厂。他们也恢复了对美国 poultry（家禽产品）的进口。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
贾米森·格里尔大使：他们也在与我们合作解决生物技术特性问题，确保这类转基因产品能够顺利进入中国市场。
玛格丽特·布伦南：好的。
中国对美贸易顺差仍然存在，但顺差规模已经下降了约31.5%。谢谢大使。
现在我们邀请台湾驻美大使尤振仲。
大使，很高兴您能亲临演播室。
尤振仲大使（台湾驻美代表）：谢谢你，玛格丽特。
玛格丽特·布伦南：自1979年以来，没有一位美国总统与台湾地区领导人进行过通话。但特朗普总统对记者表示，可能很快就会有这样一次通话。
是否计划与赖清德总统进行通话？
尤振仲大使：我们拭目以待。
但特朗普总统上次在北京的两天访问中提到，他听到了很多有关台湾的情况。你知道，他在北京的那两天里听到了很多关于台湾的说法。
但问题是，他只听到了中方的一面之词。你知道，他听到的是中国的说法，或者用西班牙语来说，就是“cuento chino”（天方夜谭）。
我想，如果他有时间，我们非常愿意向他讲述我们的故事，台湾的故事，一个关于 resilience（韧性）的故事，一个对抗中国侵略的国家的故事。
这种情况已经持续了77年。这并非始于民进党，也就是台湾当前的执政党，上台之时。这要从1949年中华人民共和国成立开始算起。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
尤振仲大使：……自1949年中华人民共和国成立以来就是如此。
所以这不是最近才发生的事情，仿佛是我们在制造问题。实际上是中国，中华人民共和国，在制造所有这些问题。但……
玛格丽特·布伦南：所以目前还没有安排通话？但是……
尤振仲大使：嗯，台湾与美国之间的沟通一直是持续的、当下的。但如果有任何相关安排，将由美国方面宣布。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。这将是一件大事。他曾在当选总统期间与台湾地区前领导人通过话，但自他就职以来……
尤振仲大使：是的，2015年、2016年，他与蔡英文总统通过话，没错。
玛格丽特·布伦南：没错。
那么，中国将你们的领导人称为分裂主义者，部分原因是赖清德曾谈到要成为“台湾独立的务实工作者”。
在接受福克斯新闻采访时，特朗普总统表示，他不希望看到有人说“让我们宣布独立，因为美国支持我们”。
台湾是否有正式宣布脱离中国独立的意图？
尤振仲大使：首先，我想说明，特朗普总统和鲁比奥国务卿在北京访问期间都明确表示，美国的长期对台政策没有改变，我们对此表示感谢，感谢美方坚持这一立场。
那么，台湾独立意味着什么？我的总统最近刚刚发表了一份声明。它意味着台湾不受中华人民共和国的侵略，事实上是独立的。我国的正式名称是中华民国，我们丝毫不受中华人民共和国的管辖。
我们维护的是我们的主权、生活方式、民主、充满活力的经济以及高科技产业。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
尤振仲大使：这就是所谓的独立。我们是主权独立的国家，不受中华人民共和国企图将我们吞并的影响。他们从未统治或控制过台湾。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
尤振仲大使：所以，这就是所谓的独立的含义。
玛格丽特·布伦南：不过，特朗普总统表示，他希望台湾方面保持克制。他也希望中国方面保持克制。
这似乎表明，他可能听取了习近平主席的说法，或许已经被说服了？
尤振仲大使：嗯，这就是为什么……你知道，如果……我们非常希望能够向他讲述我们的故事……
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
尤振仲大使：……而不是只听那些天方夜谭。
（笑声）
尤振仲大使：但……我认为那番话的意思是，他希望维持现状，特朗普总统希望维持现状，他希望台湾海峡的现状不发生改变，无论是通过经济胁迫还是军事威慑……
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
尤振仲大使：……台湾海峡的和平与稳定符合各方的利益。
这也是鲁比奥国务卿在采访中提到的立场，也是我们长期以来所期望的。我们一直是台湾海峡负责任的一员。我们致力于维护和平与稳定。
你知道，特朗普总统不希望在9500英里之外的地方发生战争。
玛格丽特·布伦南：这正是他所说的。
尤振仲大使：我们……我们也不希望发生战争。我们希望和平与稳定。我们希望我们的生活能够如常继续。
但我们并不是制造麻烦的一方。这就好比我们的房子，有入侵者试图闯入。我们正在努力加强我们的安保系统。然后入侵者却抱怨说，因为我们在改进安保系统，让他们的行动变得更困难了。
玛格丽特·布伦南：没错。
（笑声）
玛格丽特·布伦南：我明白你的意思。而且，从纸面来看，特朗普政府已经承诺向台湾出售接近创纪录数量的防御性武器。但交付工作一直没有真正推进。
而在北京，特朗普总统对福克斯新闻表示，他将推迟台湾今年寻求购买的最新一批武器销售，将其作为与中国谈判的筹码。
如果你方无法获得这些武器，这将对你们威慑中国的能力产生什么影响？
尤振仲大使：嗯，确实如此。
如果我们……如果我们想要防止战争爆发，我认为最好的办法是台湾自身强大，能够自卫，因此我们应该能够购买我们所需的武器，以加强防御能力。
你知道，我们……我们也相信……我们相信以实力求和平。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
尤振仲大使：因此，美国向我们出售武器实际上更符合双方的利益，这样我们就能自卫，你们也不必派遣军队跨越9500英里来保卫我们。
玛格丽特·布伦南：嗯，里根时期美国向台湾做出的六项保证包括承诺不中断对台军售，以及不会就此类军售与北京提前磋商。
但这就是特朗普总统对记者所说的他与习近平主席的讨论内容。请听一下。
（采访片段开始）
唐纳德·特朗普（美国总统）：那么，我应该怎么做，因为1982年签署的协议就不跟你们谈这件事了吗？不，我们确实讨论了对台军售问题……
记者：那么他的要求是什么？
（对话交叉）
总统唐纳德·特朗普：我们讨论了台湾问题——你知道，整个军售问题。实际上讨论得非常详细。我将做出决定。
（采访片段结束）
玛格丽特·布伦南：讨论得非常详细。
这是否违反了美国对台湾的承诺？
尤振仲大使：嗯，再次说明，特朗普总统也明确表示，他没有同意中国方面的任何要求……
玛格丽特·布伦南：但他确实表示他将保留那些武器，不予以交付……
（对话交叉）
尤振仲大使：是的，但他并没有说他同意了任何事情。
因此，自1979年以来，美国历届政府始终根据《与台湾关系法》向台湾出售武器，售台武器的规模与台湾面临的威胁相称。
历届政府，包括特朗普总统的第一任期，都进行了大量的军售，包括F-16 Block 70战机。在他的第二任期内，去年……
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
尤振仲大使：……他也两次向台湾出售武器，最后一次的军售金额也相当可观。
因此，我们再次认为，继续向台湾出售武器符合美国和台湾的利益，有助于维护台湾海峡的和平与稳定。
玛格丽特·布伦南：嗯，我们会尝试询问政府方面这些武器交付的具体时间安排。
非常感谢您，大使。
《直面国家》节目稍后回来，请继续收看。
（广告时段）
玛格丽特·布伦南：现在我们来谈谈最新的哥伦比亚广播公司新闻民调结果，特朗普总统的支持率现已降至其第二任期以来的最低点，仅为37%。
民众对经济的看法也降至几年来的最低点。仅有29%的人认为经济状况良好。
我们邀请到了选举与调查部执行主任安东尼·萨尔万托，为我们深入解读。
安东尼，很高兴你能来。
目前汽油价格为每加仑4.51美元以上。这种压力仅仅是由汽油价格引起的吗？
安东尼·萨尔万托：汽油价格确实是个不利因素。
但这并不是唯一的原因。我总是从民众的感受入手，因为这与他们的财务状况息息相关。他们告诉我们，他们感到压力巨大，对个人财务状况感到担忧。民众的经济安全感较一年前有所下降。
如今，汽油价格越来越成为他们的经济负担。但总体而言，他们仍然认为自己的收入无法跟上通胀的步伐。这是我们在疫情后多年来一直观察到的现象。
因此，从背景来看，汽油价格只是更大问题的一部分。但另一个问题是不确定性，这是人们描述整体经济状况时最常用的词汇。而这与汽油价格的关联在于，以伊朗和霍尔木兹海峡的局势为例。
民众告诉我们，他们每天都感觉不清楚、不了解那里到底发生了什么。当然，这也影响了汽油价格。这就是我所说的不确定性的一部分。
但从更大的图景来看，你再看看就业市场，人们并不确信，如果他们必须另找一份工作，他们能够找到。他们甚至还谈到了新闻中频繁出现的人工智能。
玛格丽特·布伦南：结构性变革。
安东尼·萨尔万托：巨大的结构性变革。他们认为人工智能将会夺走工作岗位。
当你谈到机遇，甚至代际机遇时，认为自己的机遇会优于父母的人数比例正在下降。
玛格丽特·布伦南：通胀问题，或者说生活成本问题，到底是多大的风险？这会损害共和党人的利益吗？
安东尼·萨尔万托：当然，政府方面呼吁民众保持耐心，称一旦战争结束，情况就会好转。
玛格丽特·布伦南：没错。
安东尼·萨尔万托：那么，我调查了民众对总统政策在短期和长期内对经济影响的看法。
在短期内，大量民众认为总统的政策正在让经济形势恶化。这是民众眼前最直接的感受。但人们对长期前景也并不乐观。所有这些不确定性的一部分原因在于，无论是民主党还是共和党，都没有被民众视为能够有效解决生活成本问题的政党。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
安东尼·萨尔万托：你看看公众的态度，民主党确实略微领先，但整体仍然处于负面区间。因此，民众在中期选举中可能会觉得没有什么可以依靠的帮助。
玛格丽特·布伦南：安东尼·萨尔万托，很高兴与你交谈。
安东尼·萨尔万托：谢谢。
玛格丽特·布伦南：我们稍后回来。
（广告时段）
玛格丽特·布伦南：稍后我们将邀请宾夕法尼亚州众议员布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克和纽约州众议员汤姆·苏奥佐继续讨论。他们正在候场，请继续收看。
（广告时段）
玛格丽特·布伦南：欢迎回到《直面国家》节目。
众议院两党问题解决核心小组的联合主席、宾夕法尼亚州共和党众议员布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克，以及纽约州民主党众议员汤姆·苏奥佐将加入我们的讨论。
两位先生，早上好。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员（R-PA）：早上好，玛格丽特。
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员（D-NY）：早上好。
玛格丽特·布伦南：我想先从你开始，菲茨帕特里克众议员。
哥伦比亚广播公司的民调估计，此次重新划分选区的净影响是，共和党将获得大约9个席位，或者说，我应该说，他们将离掌控众议院的目标更近9个席位。也就是说，总统似乎正是希望通过这种方式获得多数席位。为什么你会担心，通过这些手段争取多数席位实际上对本党不利？
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：玛格丽特，这对我们国家来说是一件糟糕的事情。党派选区划分，也就是不公正的选区划分，是我能想到的对我们民主制度最具腐蚀性的做法之一，甚至可能是最严重的。汤姆和我完全同意这一点。我们整个两党问题解决核心小组都对此表示反对。我们上周召开了会议，开始采取切实可行的措施加以抵制。你知道，部分挑战在于，正如选举的进行方式一样，这些选区界线在很大程度上由州政府和州立法机构决定。我们联邦系统能够施加影响的唯一途径是资金。
特别是《帮助美国投票法案》，也就是所谓的HAVA资金，这是在布什诉戈尔案悬而未决的选举后通过的，资金高达数十亿美元，拨付给各州用于开展选举工作。我们可以将这些资金与某些改革措施挂钩。
其中一项必须落实的措施——顺便说一下，全美仅有七个州这样做了——就是成立独立的公民委员会，由计算机辅助绘制选区界线，以确保我们在全国范围内拥有更公平的选区。
玛格丽特·布伦南：我理解你们的努力和意图。但是，苏奥佐众议员，你们的政党——你们政党的领导人也在进行不公正的选区划分。正如我们刚刚从菲茨帕特里克众议员那里听到的，你们的团体支持制止这种行为，但看起来你们的议员自身也将直接受到影响。你们党团会议中约有45名议员可能面临重新划分选区的影响。
你曾说过，这会毁掉这个国家。我的意思是，它实际上是如何破坏你们两位先生正在践行的跨党派合作能力的？
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员：问题在于，当你通过不公正的选区划分创造出安全席位时，真正重要的选举不再是大选，而是党内初选。因此，每位候选人都会迎合其基础选民群体。共和党人会迎合他们的基础，民主党人也会迎合他们的基础，而不是与所有选民沟通他们真正关心的问题。这种情况会导致大量的政治投机。
所以，你知道，我们现在正处于这场竞赛的谷底，我们将以其人之道还治其人之身。民主党将对抗共和党，共和党也将对抗民主党。
这对美国不利。如果所有席位都变成安全席位，那么没有政客会有动力去倾听民众的声音，也没有动力跨越党派界限进行合作。这对美国非常不利。
玛格丽特·布伦南：所以我之前说错了，你们党团会议中有45名议员，其中超过12人可能会直接受到影响。但是，我理解你们更广泛的观点，即这损害了跨党派合作的能力。
但我想问问你，菲茨帕特里克众议员，从共和党人的角度来看，我们刚刚看到路易斯安那州的情况，参议员比尔·卡西迪在三方初选中落败。
你们政党的领袖，也就是总统本人，不仅支持这种选区划分方式，还直接参与了一些初选活动，挑选候选人。他公开反对卡西迪。
他现在还将矛头指向了肯塔基州的托马斯·马西众议员，他曾多次投票反对总统，包括投票要求公布爱泼斯坦文件。
我的意思是，这传递给共和党的信息是不是，如果你背离总统，他就会把你拉下马？
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：嗯，这也是我们推动在全美50个州开放初选的众多原因之一，这也是汤姆和我共同支持的另一项举措。美国超过一半的州实行封闭初选，这意味着如果你是注册的无党派选民，你在一半的选举中都没有投票权。
让我们把这放在具体情境中来看。你可能是一位98岁的二战老兵，曾在诺曼底海滩浴血奋战，拯救了文明，却注册为无党派选民。在我们庆祝独立250周年的这片土地上，在这个倡导独立的国家，在全国一半的州，包括不幸的宾夕法尼亚州——我们的家乡州，如果你注册为无党派选民，你会被告知，你无权参与一半的选举。这太荒谬了。
这不仅是一种不公，玛格丽特，它还对众议院议事产生了极其恶劣的腐蚀性影响。汤姆和我每天都能看到这种情况。我们称之为“投反对票，寄希望于赞成票”的群体。他们来到众议院 floor（议事厅），本想支持一项政策，明知那是正确的政策。但因为他们所在的州实行封闭初选，而只有18%的美国人会参加初选投票，他们在众议院议事时考虑的是那18%的选民，而非全体选民。因此，封闭初选加上不公正的选区划分，正如你之前问到的，确实正在严重损害我们的国家。它们导致了众议院的僵局。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。不过，你们两位似乎正在逆流而上。我想问问你，苏奥佐众议员，关于你的……
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员：是的，玛格丽特，我能不能先快速补充一点……
玛格丽特·布伦南：当然可以，我本来也想问你的竞选情况，但你先请。
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员：但让我……让我先……先快速说一点。
我所在的选区特朗普以19000票的优势获胜。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员：布莱恩所在的选区，作为共和党人，哈里斯赢了。我是民主党人。为了赢得选举，我必须倾听所有人的声音。我需要绝大多数民主党选民支持我，我需要大多数无党派选民支持我，我甚至需要一些共和党选民投票给我。所以，我必须倾听所有人的声音。
玛格丽特·布伦南：嗯哼。
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员：这才是对美国有利的，当选民的代表必须倾听他们的选民。当你进行不公正的选区划分，创造出所有安全席位时，目前国会中的大多数当选官员只需要赢得党内初选——
玛格丽特·布伦南：没错。
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员：——因为他们已经确保了在所属政党的席位上获胜，无论是共和党还是民主党，因此他们只需要迎合他们的基础选民群体，进行政治投机。这与社交媒体、有线电视新闻以及外国敌对势力在我们的社交媒体上充斥的垃圾信息一起，加剧了国家的分裂。
玛格丽特·布伦南：在这个问题上我不打算反驳你，先生。
但回到我原本想问你的关于你竞选的问题——我知道，像你这样的议员必须出去说服选民，你相信民主党能够在负担能力问题上占据上风。我们一直在谈论哥伦比亚广播公司的民调，显示总统所在政党面临的严峻形势。
但民调也显示，两党都没有掌握舆论主动权。民意分布相当平均。35%的人认为民主党会做得更好，31%的人认为特朗普和共和党会做得更好，还有34%的人认为两者都不行，或者不确定。
没有人真正相信两党中有任何一方有解决方案。那么，你们将如何赢得优势？
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员：是的，毫无疑问，这是一个重大问题。负担能力是美国的头号议题。你的民调也证明了这一点。我们看到价格飙升。为什么？因为关税、战争、新的数据中心以及所有的债务。我们必须提出两党能够共同合作的政策。
你知道，关税问题，总统应该提交国会讨论。战争权力问题，总统也应该提交国会。让我们共同努力，制定切实的解决方案，让美国回到这样一种状态：无论你是左翼进步人士还是右翼保守人士，你都相信，只要努力工作，你就能赚到足够的钱买房、送孩子上学、支付医疗保险，并且无忧无虑地退休。
我们必须回到这些基本的、核心的信息上来。不要再互相指责和进行文化战争了。让我们聚焦于民众的生活经济问题，这样我们就能重建中产阶级，并帮助那些渴望进入中产阶级的人们。
玛格丽特·布伦南：但在某种程度上，这项民调结果，菲茨帕特里克众议员，表明民众希望听到两党之外的不同声音。他们没有听到新的想法。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：是的。
玛格丽特·布伦南：请继续。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：是的。美国有超过一半的人 paycheck to paycheck（ paycheck to paycheck，指月光族，收入仅够支付日常开支）。很多美国州议会和美国国会内部讨论的内容，并没有每天都聚焦在这个问题上。
你知道，我们当然必须关注国家安全。我们当然必须关注外交政策。我们必须兼顾所有方面。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：但我们不能忽视这样一个事实：一半的美国人都在为家庭预算发愁。这必须成为我们立法议程的核心。
我认为，这就是特朗普总统在2024年获胜的原因。我认为这也是佐赫兰·曼达尼在2025年获胜的原因。而且我认为，两党都没有传达出这样的信息：我们必须像激光一样聚焦于经济、家庭预算问题，并找出导致高能源成本、高儿童保育成本、高医疗保健成本的根源。汤姆和我通过 discharge petition（罢免请愿）提出了一项法案，众议院通过了延长保费税收抵免的法案。我们正在尽自己的一份力量，跨越党派界限，在中间地带开展合作，聚焦于民众真正关心的问题，也就是关乎日常生活的厨房餐桌问题。
玛格丽特·布伦南：说到这一点，特朗普总统告诉我的同事南希·科德斯，他支持联邦汽油税假期。我认为这项提案仍需提交国会审议。你们两位先生会投票支持这项暂停燃油税的提案吗？
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员：我认为，我们必须考虑到，这只是一个短期解决方案。它可能会影响——
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：这个问题是问汤姆还是问我？
汤姆·苏奥佐众议员：是的，这是一个短期解决方案。我们真正需要做的是——总统应该来到国会，讨论战争以及如何——如何推进，走出战争，从而影响汽油价格。这才是真正的问题所在。关税才是真正影响民众生活成本的因素。
来到国会。与民主党人和共和党人合作。让我们共同努力，推动国家向前发展。
玛格丽特·布伦南：国会——国会——
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：而且，玛格丽特，我的回答——
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的，请继续。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：我的回答——是的，我对这个问题的回答是，我们与劳工工会有很多合作。他们对联邦汽油税假期表示担忧，称这可能会侵蚀公路交通基金，而这正是他们严重依赖的基金，用于所有当地和国家的基础设施项目。因此，我认为关键在于细节。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：当我们谈论联邦汽油税假期时，资金从何而来？这将是核心问题。
是的，我们想尽一切可能降低汽油价格，但我们不想拆东墙补西墙。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：因此，我们必须审视具体细节。
玛格丽特·布伦南：好的，在结束之前，菲茨帕特里克众议员，你是乌克兰的坚定支持者。你在众议院获得了更多——对乌克兰的额外援助支持。这就像是一项授权新安全援助和对俄罗斯实施新制裁的投票。
即使众议院通过了这项法案，我们也听到参议院领袖图恩表示，他没有时间进行审议。接下来你们会怎么做？
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：玛格丽特，我们将尽一切所能，确保他们抽出时间进行审议，因为乌克兰军队的英雄们，在哈尔科夫和乌克兰东海岸其他地区的前线，需要我们的帮助。他们需要士气上的鼓舞。
我曾多次亲临前线。我明确表示支持他们。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：正如你所知，我们本周已经收集到了218个签名，支持一项大规模的罢免请愿，其规模远超仅仅针对俄罗斯的制裁。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：这是其中的重要组成部分，但这是一项针对乌克兰的全面援助法案。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
布莱恩·菲茨帕特里克众议员：因此，我想对乌克兰的朋友们说：援助正在路上。
玛格丽特·布伦南：好的。
好的，先生们，感谢你们在这个两党合作的场合接受我们的采访。非常感谢。
我们稍后回来。
（广告时段）
玛格丽特·布伦南：周五，我们在弗吉尼亚州威廉斯堡的威廉与玛丽学院采访了前国防部长罗伯特·盖茨。我们首先谈到了习近平主席发出的警告，如果不谨慎处理台湾问题，可能会导致极其危险的局势。
（采访片段开始）
玛格丽特·布伦南：美国仍然官方采取战略模糊的立场。但考虑到中国目前的强硬言论，你认为美国的语气是否需要有所改变？
罗伯特·盖茨（前国防部长）：我认为中国的强硬言论由来已久。过去在台湾问题上，每当我们向台湾出售武器，无论是布什政府、奥巴马政府还是其他政府，中国的言论都会变得非常强硬。因此，我认为——我认为习近平主席只是重申了中国在台湾问题上的立场。
我认为，改变美国在台湾问题上措辞严谨的立场将是一个错误。任何细微的改变——这是那些专家们会逐字逐句分析的问题之一。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
罗伯特·盖茨：因此，我认为——我认为维持美国的现有立场非常重要。而且我认为，到目前为止我所了解的情况表明，总统正是这么做的。
玛格丽特·布伦南：因此，保留这样一个悬而未决的问题：如果中国进攻台湾，美国是否会出兵保卫台湾。
罗伯特·盖茨：是的。
玛格丽特·布伦南：这个问题需要保持悬而未决的状态。
那么，从纸面来看，总统在承诺对台军售方面做出了重大承诺，但尚未兑现。特朗普政府推迟批准另一项价值140亿美元的武器销售提案。你认为总统应该批准这项销售吗？
罗伯特·盖茨：我认为他应该批准。我们应该按照与台湾达成的协议行事。我担心的一个问题是，即使是之前的军售，也存在巨大的积压——
玛格丽特·布伦南：没错。
罗伯特·盖茨：——我们已经向台湾出售的武器，由于供应不足，一直无法交付。因此，如果你再提供140亿美元的军售，这仅仅是增加了积压的订单，还是我们能够找到切实的途径，将这些武器实际交付给台湾方面？
我认为近年来发生的一件重要事情是，台湾方面开始专注于购买必要的武器，以抵御中国的两栖登陆。台湾立法机构刚刚最终达成协议，拨款——
玛格丽特·布伦南：没错。
罗伯特·盖茨：——购买这些武器。因此，我认为——我认为我们应该继续推进。这是对习近平主席强硬言论的回应。是的，你有你的立场。我们有我们的立场。
玛格丽特·布伦南：不过，鲁比奥国务卿在另一个网络节目中表示，他认为中国更希望台湾自愿加入中华人民共和国。你认为这种情况更有可能发生吗？也就是共产党通过缓慢扼杀台湾民主的方式实现统一？
罗伯特·盖茨：我认为中国在未来几年内入侵台湾的可能性非常低。部分原因是习近平还有其他风险更低的选择。他们已经在台湾周围部署了军舰和战机，展示了他们能够封锁该岛的海上和空中通道的能力。他们可以随时对台湾实施封锁或隔离，也就是台湾方面所说的“蟒蛇战略”，逐渐扼杀台湾。
我认为他们不会选择进攻台湾。他们不想摧毁那些他们想要接管的芯片工厂。因此——还有网络战。还有各种其他的施压手段。
玛格丽特·布伦南：是的。
罗伯特·盖茨：如今，中国没有任何一位将军或海军上将拥有过一天的实战经验。他们上一次参战是在1979年，越南人给了他们沉重的打击。习近平已经——习近平已经解雇了所有这些将军。现在，中央军事委员会中已经没有一位曾经历过实战的将军了。
玛格丽特·布伦南：让我问问你中东地区的局势。我们上次交谈时，也就是去年春天，距离美国和以色列对伊朗的三个核设施发动打击仅几周之遥。你当时说，那是在5月，作为国防部长，你担心打击伊朗的核计划只会为其争取一到两年的时间，但并不能解决根本问题。你现在仍然这么认为吗？
罗伯特·盖茨：我认为，我们要想让伊朗停止浓缩铀生产，终结其核野心，唯一的途径就是通过谈判。
玛格丽特·布伦南：美国总统是否可以置身事外，将这个问题留给以色列来解决？
罗伯特·盖茨：不，我认为他不能置身事外。而且，以色列也无法单独解决这个问题。我认为，尽管以色列实力强大，但他们并不具备美国那样的影响力。而且，总统似乎一直非常坚定和明确地表示，在任何情况下，伊朗都绝不能拥有核武器。那么，实现这一目标的唯一途径就是解决伊朗的浓缩铀问题以及未来的浓缩计划。我的意思是——我不认为伊朗的核计划构成迫在眉睫的威胁。毕竟，我们已经对其进行了两次打击。
玛格丽特·布伦南：但这仍然是一个足够严重的问题，显然不可能在四到六周内解决，而美国民众此前被告知，冲突预计将持续这么短的时间。
罗伯特·盖茨：我认为当时存在一些不切实际的期望。
玛格丽特·布伦南：你是否听到过清晰阐述的行动核心、最终目标和战略？
罗伯特·盖茨：嗯，我认为一些理由随着时间的推移发生了变化。但有几点从一开始就保持一致。一是消除伊朗拥有核武器的能力。二是消除其攻击邻国的军事能力。三是消除其支持真主党、哈马斯、胡塞武装等代理人武装以及击沉其海军的能力。我认为这些都是——这些都是——此次行动明确阐述的目标。尽管伊朗的核计划受到了重创，倒退了很长时间，但我认为其他目标，很多都已经实现了。
玛格丽特·布伦南：你曾担任中央情报局局长和国防部长。你如何评估赫格斯部长的表现？
罗伯特·盖茨：我不喜欢谈论我的继任者。但我想说点积极的，我认为这与我们之前讨论的内容有关。我认为——我认为五角大楼的领导层，尤其是负责采购的副部长和副部长级官员，正在做一些非常重要且 overdue（ overdue，指早该做的）的事情，即整顿五角大楼的官僚体系。
玛格丽特·布伦南：但他一直强调武士精神。我相信你已经听说了他宣布的很多举措。他召集将军们前往华盛顿，告诉他已经厌倦了看到肥胖的士兵和肥胖的将军。他要求每年对他们称重两次。他下令对军法署、军事律师进行彻底审查。他解雇了大部分监察长，表示计划全面改革五角大楼内部被武器化的监督机构。在你喜欢的举措中，你会把这些举措中的任何一项列入其中吗？
罗伯特·盖茨：不。我想说的是，我——我自己也解雇过相当多的将军和高级官员。但我的做法略有不同，我觉得我需要在媒体面前解释我采取这些行动的原因。
玛格丽特·布伦南：嗯，如今五角大楼甚至没有完整的新闻团队，如果没有获得特别许可，甚至无法在五角大楼举办这样的新闻发布会。他已经解雇了至少16名军方官员，包括海军部长、陆军参谋长兰迪·乔治将军，在伊朗战争期间，他还罢免了南方司令部司令、海军作战部长、空军副参谋长、国防情报局局长。
你认为这些举措是必要的整顿，最终会产生积极影响，还是让你感到担忧？
罗伯特·盖茨：嗯，这让我担忧，但我也必须承认，我不知道这些人事变动的理由。我不知道为什么要做出这些改变。可能有完全合理的理由。但我——我只是不知道具体原因是什么。
玛格丽特·布伦南：你认为这些变动应该向公众和国会解释清楚吗？
罗伯特·盖茨：我认为——我认为，当你进行如此多的人事变动时，是的，我认为——我认为至少有义务向国会解释变动的理由。
玛格丽特·布伦南：目前这个系统似乎并没有按照这种方式运作。
罗伯特·盖茨：是的。
（采访片段结束）
玛格丽特·布伦南：我们与盖茨部长的完整采访可在我们的网站、YouTube频道和播客上观看。
我们稍后回来。
（广告时段）
玛格丽特·布伦南：今天的节目就是这些。感谢大家的收看。这里是《直面国家》，我是玛格丽特·布伦南。
Full transcript of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” May 17, 2026
2026-05-17T14:00:27-0400 / https://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-full-transcript-05-17-2026/
On this “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” broadcast, moderated by Margaret Brennan:
- U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer
- Ambassador Alexander Yui, Taiwan’s Representative to the U.S.
- Anthony Salvanto, CBS News executive director of elections and surveys
- Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, Republican of Pennsylvania, and Tom Suozzi, Democrat of New York
- Former Defense SecretaryRobert Gates
Click here to browse full transcripts from 2026 of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
*
MARGARET BRENNAN: I’m Margaret Brennan in Washington.
And this week on Face the Nation: Back in the U.S. following a whirlwind diplomatic mission to China, President Trump faces backlash here at home when it comes to inflation and the economy.
While the reviews for the president’s trip to China and details about the deliverables from the meeting of the world’s two biggest economic superpowers are still coming in, it’s Mr. Trump’s efforts on the domestic economy and inflation that are getting panned at home.
Asked about the extent to which Americans’ financial situations were motivating his Iran dealmaking, the response didn’t do much to reassure them:
(Begin VT)
DONALD TRUMP (President of the United States): Not even a little bit. I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing. We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon.
(End VT)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Those remarks, plus new numbers showing the fastest increase in the inflation rate in three years, have Republicans increasingly concerned about the party’s chances in the midterm election.
We will hear from the president’s top trade representative, Jamieson Greer, plus Taiwan’s representative to the U.S., as well as the heads of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus in the House, Pennsylvania Republican Brian Fitzpatrick and New York Democrat Tom Suozzi. Plus, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates will also be with us.
It’s all just ahead on Face the Nation.
Good morning, and welcome to Face the Nation.
President Trump’s grip on his party has tightened with Saturday’s defeat of Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy in a three-way Republican primary. Cassidy voted to impeach Mr. Trump after the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. And, as a doctor, Cassidy has been outspoken about some of the administration’s health policies.
In turn, Trump endorsed one of his opponents and has been openly critical of Cassidy. There will now be a run-off for a seat that is a safe Republican one. But this is a midterm year, when a president’s record is a top factor nationally.
Our CBS News poll out this morning says that seven in 10 Americans say they are frustrated or even angry with the administration’s approach to the economy. Two-thirds say Trump’s policies are making the economy worse, at least in the short term, and only 27 percent say they approve of his handling of inflation. That marks a new low for the president in our CBS News polling.
We begin this morning with a top member of the president’s economic team, United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.
Good morning to you, Ambassador.
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER (U.S. Trade Representative): Good morning. Good to be here.
MARGARET BRENNAN: It isn’t just a matter of sentiment. Gas is at an average of $4.51 a gallon. Americans have spent $45 billion more on fuel since the war began versus a year ago.
The stock market is up, but lower-income Americans are pulling back on their spending. The New York Fed reports households earning less than $125,000 a year are fueling up their cars less often. How do you provide relief to the average American?
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: Well, we know that no one wants to see higher gas prices.
At the same time, the president is balancing foreign policy considerations. We know that, in addition to wanting to have low gas prices, we don’t want our children or grandchildren to inherit a world where Iran has a nuclear weapon.
So the president is focused on affordability in as many ways that he can – that he can. He’s bringing jobs back to America. We’re focused on getting wages up to offset any kind of increase in prices. And we’re seeing prices go down for staples like dairy, cheese, flour, et cetera.
So we’re very focused on this. The president’s focused on it. And we look forward to seeing those prices come down soon as the operations wrap up in the Gulf.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But we have no time frame for that at this point.
Let me ask you about what you were just working on in Asia. China said it agreed with the United States to establish a board of investment to consider Chinese investment here in the U.S. and to establish bilateral boards of trade to discuss tariffs.
Which products are going to be affected by that board? Are these items outside the current investigations that you are conducting?
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: So, when we think about the board of trade, we’re thinking about how to manage economic relations between the U.S. and China.
These are two economies that are quite different, and we’re focused on trade in nonsensitive goods. When you talk about sensitive goods, you know, the most high-tech stuff, you know, things that can be used for military uses, those are things that – those are national security issues.
So, we’re looking to discuss things like sales of agricultural goods to China, energy goods, Boeings, medical devices. When we talk about the kinds of things we want to be importing from China, there are a number of things. There can be consumer goods, maybe low-tech items.
And so we look at those types of areas where we should be trading. On the investment side, the board of investment is really about discussing key issues in U.S.-China investment policy. It’s not really an investment program, but it’s to try to almost be like a firefighter and put out issues when they arise between the two countries.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, really, this just seems a message of stability, because you were already discussing a lot of these things on a bilateral basis, right? I mean, what’s new?
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: So we have never had a board of trade or a board of investment before. We’ve always had an ad hoc approach with China and the United States, which I think is actually challenging.
I think it’s more important to formalize these relations. The United States has a host of tariffs, import controls, export controls on China. China has a number of non-tariff barriers that have been in place for a long time, other challenges they impose to block our imports and things like that.
It’s much better to discuss these in a formalized way between our government and their government. In addition to this, we saw China over the past couple of days reduce a host of non-tariff barriers on agricultural products, such as beef and poultry, et cetera.
And so we’ve seen them already starting to do things to facilitate imports from the United States.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I will come back to some of those in a moment.
But I want to ask you about tariffs. The president said to reporters he did not discuss tariffs with Xi Jinping at all. Are we in an indefinite trade truce, or were you – are you looking at bringing that tariff rate back to where it was before the Supreme Court ruling?
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: Well, the Chinese know – and that’s part of our deal – that the United States can elevate tariffs to the higher level that we had at the time of what we call the Busan deal in October, when President Xi and President Trump met.
Following the Supreme Court case in February, about 10 percentage points were knocked off the tariff rate for China. We believe, under our deal, that we are able to elevate that again. The president is exploring different tools that he has. I don’t want to prejudge a lot of the investigations that are happening.
The Chinese know, just like many other countries we’re dealing with, that we’re going to have a certain level of tariff to control our imports, but that we also expect market opening.
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK.
But the last time you were here after the Supreme Court decision, you said that, when some of these tariffs expire in July, that you would expect to roll out new tariffs after the end of these investigations under authority 301.
So, are you saying now that you no longer expect tariffs to come into place after July?
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: Well, I think I was careful to tell you, because my general counsel always tells me to say this, I can’t prejudge the outcomes of those investigations.
Those investigations, if they find on tariff barriers or unfair trading practices, they can authorize the president to take actions like tariffs, like fees on services, like quotas, things like that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: So we’ll certainly be presenting the president with those options, if those – if those investigations show what we think they might show, which is that there’s a huge problem with overcapacity in China and other countries.
So we’ll – we’ll get back to you on the findings in those investigations when they conclude.
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK.
We did see China on Saturday release a statement confirming some of the deals with the U.S., but it was pretty vague. There was no mention of the promise to buy 750 Boeing planes that President Trump told reporters about if the first 200 go well.
China said there was a guarantee by the U.S. to supply aircraft engines, but it didn’t mention the 400 to 450 GE engines that the president announced. GE hasn’t commented either. So, how locked in are these agreements?
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: So, the 200 Boeings, those are locked in. There’s obviously a future to have more Boeings. The reality is, this is the first major purchase by China in almost 10 years of Boeings – or orders, rather.
So that’s – that’s going forward. And, like the president said. You know, when and if Boeing delivers, there’s – there’s a lot of upside there. With respect to some of the other details, we’re finalizing a fact sheet that we will hopefully get out very soon, so we can be clear about the double-digit increase in agricultural purchases we expect from the Chinese and some of the other things that happened and were agreed to during the visit.
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK.And I know GE is meeting with China today, but we haven’t seen anything from them on the aircraft engines.
On the ag products, the conservative “Wall Street Journal” editorial board questioned whether the summit achieved any of the stated wins because of how vague these things have been.
They said: “Mr. Trump boasted about fantastic Chinese purchases of U.S. soybeans and aircraft, but China didn’t confirm the sales. And, by our count, this is the second time China has bought the same American soybeans, or is it the third?”
They’re kind of arguing you’re playing a shell game here with, like, re- announcing past deals on past agreements to purchase over a period of time. Can you answer these conservative skeptics with any specifics?
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: So, first of all, we’ve had a deal in place with the Chinese since October that they would buy 25 million metric tons of soybeans each year for the rest of the president’s administration. So that deal is still in force.
What we expect with the new purchase agreements, where the specific number will be announced very soon, double-digit purchases of aggregate agricultural products. When I say aggregate, I mean everything else. That could be soybeans. That could be beef, that could be grains. That could be dairy products, all kinds of things.
So we have the existing soybean deal that they may be referring to. And then, over and on top of that, we have these agricultural products as well. And all of that will be facilitated by board of trade discussions with the Chinese.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, still not nailed down, just an aggregate agreement?
So, how many concessions did the U.S. make? What were those concessions in order to get this?
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: Well, one thing, they’re – they’re balanced trades here, right? We’re trying to get to balance trade with the Chinese.
For a long time, it’s been out of whack. So, when you see something like what the Chinese said, which I can confirm, about a sale of Boeings, accompanied by a sale of aircraft and auto parts and spare auto parts, aircraft parts, and those kinds of things, the Chinese want to make sure that they have regular access to these kind of spare items, so they can continue to fly their fleets.
So that’s something we want to do. We are focused on mutually beneficial trade. So, when you’re talking about that kind of thing, what we should be exporting, what we should be importing, it becomes less a question of concessions, and more a question of, what’s mutually beneficial for both of us?
That’s why we’re so focused on nonsensitive trade, because that doesn’t – that doesn’t require concessions. That’s about working together, talking about what they need, what we want to sell, what we need from them.
So, we’re already seeing it, as they’ve reregistered beer facilities, where beef facilities expired. They’re taking poultry again.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
AMBASSADOR JAMIESON GREER: They’re working with us on biotech traits to make sure that those types of products that have genetic modification can go into China without any problem.
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK.
China still sells more to the U.S. than it buys, but that difference has decreased by about 31.5 percent. So, thank you, Ambassador.
We turn now to Ambassador Alexander Yui, Taiwan’s representative to the United States.
Ambassador, good to have you here in person.
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI (Taiwanese Representative to the United States): Thank you, Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: There hasn’t – there hasn’t been a call between an American president and a leader of Taiwan since 1979. But President Trump indicated to reporters there might be one coming.
Is there a call planned with President Lai?
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: Well, we’ll see.
But President Trump, when he was in Beijing for the last, well, two days, he mentioned that he heard a lot about Taiwan. You know, he heard a lot about Taiwan those two days in Beijing.
But the problem is, he heard only their side of the story. You know, he heard the Chinese story, or, as I would say in Spanish, el cuento chino.
I think he – if he has time, we would love to tell him our side of the story, the Taiwan story, which is one that – of resiliency, of a state staying up against the Chinese aggression.
This has been going on for 77 years. This is not something that just happened when the DPP, the current ruling party in Taiwan, came to power. This has been going on for 77 years…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: … since the inception of 1949, when they became a people’s republic.
So this is not a recent thing, as if we are the ones creating problems. It is China, People’s Republic of China, creating all this problem. But the commu…
MARGARET BRENNAN: So no call scheduled yet? But…
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: Well, the communication between Taiwan and U.S. is constant. It’s current. But I will leave it to the U.S. to announce anything if it happens.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes. It would be a big deal. He did speak to a past president as president-elect, but not since he came…
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: Yes, with President Tsai, yes, when – in 2015, ’16, yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: In – that’s right.
So, China refers to your president as a separatist, in part because Lai has talked about being a – quote – “practical worker for Taiwan independence.”
In an interview with FOX News, President Trump said he’s not looking to have somebody say “Let’s go be independent because the United States is backing us.”
Does Taiwan have any intention of declaring independence formally from China?
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: Well, let me first say that President Trump and Secretary Rubio have been very categorical during their visit to Beijing, publicly stating that there’s no change in United States’ longstanding position on Taiwan, which we want to express our appreciation for upholding this position.
What is meant by Taiwan independence? My president just made a statement recently, just now. And it means that Taiwan is independent from the Chinese aggression from the PRC, actually. The formal name of my country is Republic of China, and we’re not subordinate to the People’s Republic of China in any way at all.
And that’s maintaining our sovereignty, our way of life, our democracy, our – our vibrant economy, our high-tech production.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: And that is – that is what is meant by independence. We are sovereign, independent, away from the Chinese – People’s Republic of China’s attempt to swallow us as one of their own. They have never ruled or controlled Taiwan ever.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: So, that’s – that’s – that is meant by independence.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, President Trump, though, said he wants Taiwan to cool it. He also wanted China to cool it.
That seems to indicate that perhaps he was listening to Xi Jinping’s version of events and might have been persuaded?
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: Well, that’s why I – you know, if – we’d love to have given our part of the story…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: … not just listen to cuento chinos.
(LAUGHTER)
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: But – but I think that’s a statement of saying he wants status quo, the president wants status quo, President Trump, that he wants no change in the – in the Taiwan Straits, neither through economic or military coercion…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: … and that the peace and stability of the Taiwan Straits is good for all parties concerned.
And that’s the position that Secretary Rubio mentioned during his interview, and that’s the one that we also long for. We have been a responsible member of – of Taiwan Straits. We want to strive for peace and stability.
You know, President Trump doesn’t want a war 9,500 miles away.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s what he said.
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: We – we don’t want a war. We want peace and stability. We want to have our lives going on as – as usual.
But we’re not the ones creating all this trouble. And that’s why you know it’s like we – our house, there’s intruders trying to get into our house. We’re trying to beef up our security system. And then they complain, the intruder complains that, because we’re trying to improve our security system, it’s making his job harder.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
(LAUGHTER)
MARGARET BRENNAN: No, I hear your point. And, on paper, President Trump’s administration has pledged near record amounts of defensive weapons and sales to Taiwan. But the deliveries haven’t really been happening.
And, in Beijing, President Trump told FOX he’s going to hold on to the latest weapons sale that Taiwan sought to purchase this year and use it as a negotiating chip with China.
What impact will that have on your ability to deter China if you don’t get those weapons?
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: Well, exactly.
If we don’t – if we want to prevent a war from happening, I think it’s best that Taiwan is strong, able to defend itself, and, therefore, we should be able to acquire, to buy the arms that we need to have a stronger defense.
You know, we – we also abide – we believe in peace through strength.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: So, actually, it makes more sense for United States to sell us the arms, so we can defend ourselves, and so you don’t have to send your army 9,500 miles away to defend us.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the so-called six assurances that the United States gave to Taiwan back in the Reagan area included a pledge not to cut off arms sales to Taiwan and of no prior consultation with Beijing on such sales.
But this is what the president told reporters about his discussion with Xi. Take a listen.
(Begin VT)
DONALD TRUMP (President of the United States): So, what am I going to do, say I don’t want to talk to you about it because I have an agreement that was signed in 1982? No, we discussed arm sales to…
QUESTION: And what’s his request?
(CROSSTALK)
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We discussed the Taiwan – you know, the whole thing with the arms sales. It was in great detail, actually. And I will be making decisions.
(End VT)
MARGARET BRENNAN: In great detail.
Did that violate America’s commitment to Taiwan?
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: Well, again, but President Trump has also been very clear in saying that he did not agree on anything that the Chinese side…
MARGARET BRENNAN: But he did say he’s going to hold onto those weapons and not give them…
(CROSSTALK)
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: Yes, but he didn’t say he agreed to anything.
So, again, the United States government has been consistent throughout all administrations since 1979 in providing arms to Taiwan, according to the Taiwan Relations Act, which is selling arms commensurate to the threat that Taiwan receives.
And past administrations, including in President Trump’s first term, made considerable amounts of sales, including the F-16 Block 70s. And also, in his second administration, last year…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
AMBASSADOR ALEXANDER YUI: … he made two sales to Taiwan also, again, the last one also a very considerable amount of money on arms sales.
So, we believe, again, that having arms sales continue to Taiwan is in the interest of United States and Taiwan to keep peaceful and stable Taiwan Straits.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, we will try to ask the administration for updates on when those deliveries might happen.
But thank you very much, Ambassador.
Face the Nation will be back in a minute. Stay with us.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: And now with more from our new CBS News poll, President Trump’s approval rating has now dropped to the lowest level of his second term at 37 percent.
And views of the economy have dropped to their lowest level in several years. Only 29 percent now say the economy is good.
Joining us now with more is our executive director of elections and surveys, Anthony Salvanto.
Anthony, good to have you here.
Gas is $4.51 and change per gallon. Is this pressure all due to gas prices?
ANTHONY SALVANTO: Gas prices aren’t helping.
It’s not the only thing. I always start with feelings, because they’re so closely connected to people’s finances. They tell us they feel stressed, they feel concerned about their personal finances. And feelings of economic security are down from a year ago.
Now, gas prices are increasingly, they tell us, weighing, being a financial hardship on them. Overall, though, they continue to tell us they don’t think their income is keeping pace with inflation. And that’s something we have been seeing now for years coming out of the pandemic.
So, contextually, yes, it’s part of something larger. The other part of this, though, is uncertainty, which is a top way that people describe the overall economy. And the way that relates to gas prices is, take, for example, just the situation in Iran and the Strait of Hormuz.
People tell us, day to day, they don’t feel like they have a clear understanding, they’re getting a clear understanding of what’s going on there. And, of course, that is impacting gas prices. That’s part of what I mean by uncertainty.
But the other part of the big picture here, you pull back, you look at the job market, people aren’t confident that, if they had to find another job, they could. They even think – you hear so much about A.I. in the news.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Structural changes.
ANTHONY SALVANTO: Big structural changes. They think A.I. is going to start taking jobs.
And what it leads to when you look at opportunity, even generational opportunity, there’s a lower number who think that their opportunities are going to be better than their parents were.
MARGARET BRENNAN: How big a risk is the inflation problem or at least the price of living, right? Is it going to hurt Republicans?
ANTHONY SALVANTO: So the administration, of course, urges patience, right, once the war is resolved, et cetera.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
ANTHONY SALVANTO: Well, so I tested, what do you think the president’s policies are doing to the economy in the short term and the long term?
In the short term, you get big numbers who say they’re making the economy worse. So that’s what’s right in front of folks. But there also isn’t that much more optimism about what happens for the long term. Part of all this uncertainty is that neither of the parties, not the Democrats, not the Republicans, are net positive on being seen as having policies that help cost of living.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
ANTHONY SALVANTO: So you look at the public, and, yes, OK, Democrats have a little bit of an edge there, but it’s still net negative. And so people are going in the midterms maybe not feeling like there’s help out there.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Anthony Salvanto, always good to talk to you.
ANTHONY SALVANTO: Thanks.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We will be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: We will be right back with a lot more Face the Nation with Pennsylvania Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick and New York Democrat Tom Suozzi. They’re standing by, so stay with us.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to “FACE THE NATION.”
And the co-chairs of the bipartisan House Problem Solvers Caucus, Republican Brian Fitzpatrick joins us from Langhorne, Pennsylvania, Democrat Tom Suozzi from Queens, New York.
Good morning to you both, gentlemen.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK (R-PA): Good morning, Margaret.
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI (D-NY): Good morning.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to start with you, Congressman Fitzpatrick.
You know, CBS estimates that the net impact of all this redistricting is that Republicans are going to get roughly nine seats or get them nine seats closer, I should say, to keeping control of the House. I mean, presumably, that’s the outcome the president was looking for here. Why are you concerned that, you know, driving towards the majority through these methods is actually a negative for your party?
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: It’s a terrible thing for our country, Margaret. Gerrymandering is one of the most, if not the most corrosive things to our democracy that I can imagine. Tom and I completely agree with it. Our entire bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus agrees to it. We met this past week to start taking measurable steps to fight back. Because, you know, part of the challenge, Margaret, is, you know, much like how elections are conducted, these district lines, it’s largely a function of state government and state legislative action. The only jurisdictional hook we have on the federal system is funding.
So, particularly the Help America Vote Act, the so-called HAVA funding that passed after the Bush v Gore hanging chad election, you know, we can tie that money, it’s billions of dollars that gets sent to the states to carry out their elections. We can tie that funding to certain reforms.
And one of the things that has to happen, only seven states, by the way, do this in America, is that independent citizen commissions with computer generated line drawing assisting them to make sure that we have more balanced districts in this country.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I understand the effort and the intent. But, Congressman Suozzi, your party – your party’s leaders also gerrymandering. And your group, as we just heard from Congressman Fitzpatrick, you’re supporting efforts to stop it but it looks like your members are going to be directly impacted themselves. About 45 members of your caucus may face redistricting.
You’ve said it’s going to kill the country. I mean how does it actually kill the ability to reach across the aisle, like you gentlemen are doing?
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI: What happens is, when you create these safe seats through gerrymandering is that the only elections that matter are not the general elections but the primary. So, everybody panders on their base. The Republicans talk to their base, the Democrats talk to their base, instead of talking to all of their constituents about what they care about. And there’s a lot of pandering that goes on.
So, you know, we’re in this battle right now, this race to the bottom, and we’re going to fight fire with fire. The Democrats are going to fight the Republicans. The Republicans are going to fight the Democrats.
It’s bad for America. It’s bad for America to have all these safe seats where no politician is incentivized to listen to people and to reach across the aisle.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, I misspoke, it’s 45 members in your caucus, more than a dozen of them may be directly impacted. But, sill, I take your broader point here that it’s damaging to the ability to work across aisle.
But I want to ask you, Congressman Fitzpatrick, from the Republican perspective, we just saw what happened overnight down in Louisiana where Senator Bill Cassidy lost in the three-way primary.
The president himself, the leader of your party who wanted this redistricting, has also been directly involved in some of these primary races, picking candidates. He came out hard against Cassidy.
He’s also now focusing in on Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who has taken votes in opposition to the president, including for the release of the Epstein files.
I mean is the message here for Republicans that if you descent from the president, he’s going to take you down?
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Well, it’s one of the many reasons, Margaret, why we made to open primaries up in all 50 states. Another cause that Tom and I are behind. Over half the states in the country have closed primaries, meaning that if you’re a registered independent, you are excluded from voting in 50 percent of elections.
And let’s just put this into context. You could be a 98-year-old World War II veteran who stormed beaches of Normandy, saved civilization, who register as independent, in the land of independence, which we’re celebrating 250 years of, and in half of the states in this country, including, unfortunately, our home state here in Pennsylvania, if you register independent, you’re told, you’re not welcome to vote in half of elections. That is insane.
And not only is it an injustice, Margaret, it has a terrible, corrosive effect on the floor of the House. Tom and I see it all the time. We call it the vote no, hope yes crowd. They go to the House floor wanting to support a policy, knowing that policy is the right thing to do. But because they live in a closed primary state and 18 percent of Americans, 18 percent of Americans vote in primary, they’re going to the House floor thinking about 18 percent of their electorate instead of 100 percent of their electorate. So, closed primaries, coupled with gerrymandering, your previous question, are really, really hurting our country. They’re causing gridlock on the House floor.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes. And it would seem, though, that you are really swimming against the tide here, both of you gentlemen.
I want to ask you, Congressman Suozzi, about your –
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI: Yes, Margaret, can I just make one quick –
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes, sure, I was going to ask you about your race, but go ahead.
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI: But let me – let me just – let me just make a quick point.
I’m in a district that Donald Trump won by 19,000 votes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI: Brian’s in a – and I’m a Democrat. Brian’s in a district, as a Republican, that Kamala Harris won. For me to win my race, I have to listen to everybody. I need the large majority of Democrats to vote for me. I need the majority of independents to vote for me. I even need a few Republicans to listen – to vote for me. So, I’ve got to listen to everybody.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Uh-huh.
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI: And that’s what’s good for America is when their elected officials have to listen to their people. When you do all this gerrymandering, and create all these safe seats, the politicians in the safe seats, most of the elected officials in Congress right now, only have to win their primary –
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI: Because they’re guaranteed the Republicans are going to win the Republican seat, the Democrats are going to win the Democratic seat, and then they only listen to their base and they pander to their base. That’s contributing to the division of our country, along with social media, cable news, our foreign adversaries filling our social media feeds with a bunch of dreck (ph).
MARGARET BRENNAN: Not going to push back on you on those points here, sir.
But back to the question I was going to ask you in regards to your race, I know that when it comes to – people like you have to go out and persuade, you believe that Democrats can really make a case on the affordability argument. We’ve been talking about the polling that CBS has done showing how worrisome it is for the president’s party.
But it also shows neither Democrats nor Republicans own the message. It’s pretty evenly split. Thirty-five percent say Democrats would be better. It’s 31 percent who think Trump and Republicans would be. Thirty-four percent, neither or not sure.
No one’s really convinced that either of the parties have an answer here. So, how do you actually make that an edge?
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI: Yes, there’s no question that this is a major problem. Affordability is the number one issue in America. Your polling just shows that. And we see prices are going up like crazy. Why? Because of the tariffs. Because of the war. Because of the new data centers. And because of all the debt. And we have to propose policies that Democrats and Republicans will work together.
You know, the tariff issue, the president is supposed to come to Congress. The war powers, the president’s supposed to come to Congress. Let’s work together to actually put solutions in place so we can get back to a place in America where everybody, whether you’re a left-wing progressive or a right-wing conservative, you believe that in return for working hard you make enough money so you can afford to buy a house, educate your kids, pay for health insurance and retire without being scared.
We’ve got to get back to those basic, fundamental messages. Enough with the finger-pointing and the culture wars. Let’s focus on the economics of people’s lives so we can rebuild the middle class and help those aspiring that are aspiring to the middle class.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But in some ways that polling, Congressman Fitzpatrick, says people want something different from what they’re hearing from both of the parties. They’re not hearing new ideas.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Go ahead.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Yes. Over half of the people in this country live paycheck to paycheck. A lot of the things that are being discussed inside the state capitols across America, inside the U.S. Capitol, is not laser focused on that all day every day.
You know, yes, we have to focus on national security. Yes, we have to focus on foreign policy. We’ve got to do it all.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: But we cannot ignore the fact that half of Americans are stressing over their family budgets. And that’s got to drive the legislative agenda.
I believe that it was that reason that, you know, President Trump won in 2024. I think that’s why Zohran Mamdani won in 2025. And I think both parties, Margaret, are failing to get that message that we have to focus, like a laser, on the economy, on these family budgets and identify the silos, what’s causing high energy costs, what’s causing high childcare costs, what’s causing high healthcare costs? Tom and I stepped forward, through a discharge petition, and passed the, through the House, the premium tax credit extension. We’re trying to do our part to cross the aisle, to work in the center, to focus on the issues that people really care about, which is the kitchen table issues.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, to that point, President Trump told my colleague, Nancy Cordes, that he endorsed a federal gas tax holiday. I believe that still would have to go before Congress. Would both of you gentlemen vote for that? Suspending it?
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI: I think, you know, we have to consider, it’s a short-term fix. It’s going to affect the –
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: Is that for Tom or for me?
REPRESENTATIVE TOM SUOZZI: Yes, it’s a short term fix. We’ve really got to get to – the president’s got to come to Congress to discuss the war and how to – how to move forward to get out of – out of the war and to affect the gas prices. That’s the real issue here. The tariffs are what are really affecting people’s prices.
Come to Congress. Work with Democrats and Republicans. Let’s try and move our country forward.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Congress – Congress –
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: And, Margaret, my answer –
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes, go ahead.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: My answer – yes, my answer to that question, so, we work with a lot with the labor unions. They’ve expressed some concerns about this federal gas tax holiday, that it might raid the highway transit fund, which they rely on heavily for all the local infrastructure and national infrastructure projects for that matter. So, I think the devil is in the detail.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: When we say federal gas tax holiday, where is that money coming from? That’s really going to be the driving question.
Yes, we want to do everything possible to lower gas prices, but we don’t want to rob Peter to pay Paul.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: So, we have to – we have to look at the details here.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Quickly before I let you go, Congressman Fitzpatrick, you’re a big supporter of Ukraine. You did get some additional – support for additional assistance when it comes to the Huse. This is like a vote on authorizing new security aid and imposing new sanctions on Russia.
Even after the House votes, we’re hearing in the Senate from Leader Thune, he’s got no time to take it up. What do you do next?
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: We’re going to do everything we can, Margaret, to make sure they find time to take it up because our – the heroes that are on the front lines of the Ukrainian military, in Kharkiv and everywhere else along the eastern coast of Ukraine, need our help. They need the morale boost.
I have been there on the front lines several times. I have pledged my unequivocal support for them.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: We reached 218 signatures, as you know, this week on a massive, massive discharge petition that is far greater than even just Russia sanctions.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: That’s a big piece of it, but it’s an overall aid package to Ukraine.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN FITZPATRICK: So, my message to our Ukrainian friends, help is on the way.
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK.
All right, gentlemen, thank you for speaking to us in this bipartisan setting. Appreciate it.
We’ll be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: On Friday we traveled to William and Marry in Williamsburg, Virginia, to speak with the former Defense Secretary Robert Gates. And we began with that warning from President Xi that the issue of Taiwan could lead to an extremely dangerous situation if not managed carefully.
(BEGIN VT)
MARGARET BRENNAN: The U.S. still officially has this stance of strategic ambiguity. But do you think the tone needs to shift a little bit from the United States given how strong the Chinese rhetoric is now?
ROBERT GATES (Former Defense Secretary): I think the Chinese rhetoric has often been strong. In the past when it comes to Taiwan, whenever we have made an arms sales to Taiwan in the past, the Bush administration, the Obama administration and so on, the Chinese rhetoric gets very, very strong. And so, I think – I think Xi was reiterating the Chinese position on that.
I think it would be a mistake to take the carefully worded position of the United States with respect to Taiwan. Any change at all, the nuance is – this is one of those things where the experts parse these things down to the tense of the verb and so on.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
ROBERT GATES: So, I think – I think keeping things – the U.S. position as it has been was important. And I think everything I’ve read so far indicates that the president did that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, leave it open to question whether the U.S. would militarily come to defense of Taiwan if China were to move on it.
ROBERT GATES: Yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That needs to be an open question.
Well, on paper, the president made significant pledges to Taiwan in terms of promised arms sales. Not delivered on yet. There’s another 14 billion in proposed weapons sales that the Trump administration has delayed approving. Do you think the president should green light that?
ROBERT GATES: I think he should. I think we should go forward with what – with what we’ve agreed with Taiwan. One of the concerns that I have is, even with respects to previous arms sales, there is a huge backlog –
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
ROBERT GATES: Of weapons that we have sold to Taiwan that we have not been able to deliver because we don’t have the supplies. And so, if you’re offering another 14 billion, is that just going to be added to the backlog or is there a way forward in terms of actually getting these weapons to the Taiwanese?
I think one of the – an important thing that has happened in recent years is getting the Taiwanese to focus on purchasing the kinds of weapons that would be necessary to defend themselves against a Chinese amphibious invasion. And the Taiwanese legislature has just finally reached an agreement to fund –
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
ROBERT GATE: The purchase of these weapons. So, I think – I think we should go forward with it. It is in our own way our counter to President Xi’s strong statement. Yes, you have your position. We have ours.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Secretary Rubio did tell another network, though, that his belief is that China’s preference is to have Taiwan willingly join the People’s Republic. Do you expect that to be the more likely scenario that there is sort of a slow strangulation of Taiwanese democracy by the communist party?
ROBERT GATES: I think chances of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan are pretty low, particularly over the next several years. And partly because Xi has other options open to him that include – that involve far less risk. So, they have surrounded Taiwan with ships and in the air. They have shown their ability to close off maritime and air access to the island. They could create a blockade or a quarantine around Taiwan any time they want. What the Taiwan call an anaconda strategy. And it would strangle Taiwan over time.
I don’t think they want to go in and attack Taiwan. They don’t want to destroy the very chip factories they want to take over. So – and then there’s cyber. There are all kinds of pressures.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
ROBERT GATES: There isn’t one single Chinese general or admiral today that has one day of combat experience. The last time these guys fought was 1979 and the north Vietnamese – the Vietnamese gave them a bloody nose. He’s fired – Xi has fired all these generals. He’s – there are now no generals left on the central military commission that kind of oversees the whole thing.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Let me ask you about what’s happening in the Middle East. The last time we spoke, last spring, we were just weeks away from that U.S.-Israeli strike on the three nuclear sites in Iran. You said at that time, it was May, when you were defense secretary, you were concerned that a strike on the nuclear program would just buy time, a year or two, but it would not solve the problem. Do you still believe that?
ROBERT GATES: I think the only way that we are likely to get the enriched uranium out of Iran and bring about an end to the nuclear aspirations is through a negotiation.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is it possible for the president of the United States to walk away and leave this for the Israelis to settle?
ROBERT GATES: No, I don’t think he can walk away. And, no, I don’t think Israelis can settle it. I don’t think, as powerful as they are, they don’t have the kind of power the United States has. And I think the president seems to have been very consistent and very clear, that under no circumstances can Iran every have a nuclear bomb. Well, the only way you get to that objective is resolving this issue of the enriched uranium and any future plans for enrichment. I mean I think – I don’t think that the nuclear program in Iran poses an imminent threat. After all, we’ve bombed it twice.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But it is a big enough problem that it was clearly not going to be settled in four to six weeks, which was the time stamp that the American people were told to expect in terms of the duration of conflict.
ROBERT GATES: I think that there were some unrealistic expectations.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Have you heard a clearly articulated, sort of center of gravity of this operation, an end goal, a strategy?
ROBERT GATES: Well, I think some of the justifications have changed over time. But one thing – I think there have been a few things that have been consistent from the very beginning. One is to eliminate Iran’s ability to have a nuclear weapon. Another is to eliminate their military capabilities to attack their neighbors. A third is to eliminate the capability to support their surrogates, the Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, to sink their navy. I think those are all – those were – have all been articulated as objectives of this operation. And although the nuclear program has been dramatically damaged and setback a long time, I think those other things, a lot has been accomplished.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You were CIA director. You were a defense secretary. How do you assess Secretary Hegseth’s performance?
ROBERT GATES: I’m not into talking about my successors. But I will say, I want to point to something positive that I think is going on that goes back to something we were talking about earlier. I think – I think the leadership in the Pentagon, and especially the deputy secretary and the undersecretary involved in acquisition are doing some very important and overdue things in terms of shaking up the bureaucracy in the Pentagon.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But he’s got this focus on the warrior ethos. I’m sure you’ve heard a lot of what he has announced. He summoned the generals to D.C., told them he’s tired of seeing fat troops and fat generals. He wants to weigh them twice a year. He ordered a ruthless review of the judge advocate corps, the military lawyers. He fired most of the inspectors general saying he planned to overhaul the weaponized internal Pentagon watch dog. When talking about things you like, would you put any of these things on that list?
ROBERT GATES: No. I will say this, I mean I – I fired a fair number of generals and senior people myself. The way I handled it was a little differently in the respect that I felt that I needed to go in front of the press and explained why I had taken these actions.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, there’s not a full Pentagon press corps even present at the Pentagon these days for a news conference like that without getting special permission to be on the premises right now. He’s fired 16 military officials at least, including the Navy secretary, the Army chief of staff, General Randy George, during the Iran War. He pushed out the admiral at the helm of SOUTHCOM, the chief of naval operations, the Air Force vice chief of staff, the head of defensin intelligence.
Do you see those things as necessary disruption, that ultimately will have a positive impact, or does it concern you?
ROBERT GATES: Well, it concerns me, but I also have to acknowledge that I don’t know the rationale for those changes. I don’t know why those changes were made. And there may be perfectly justifiable reasons. But I’m – I just don’t know what they are.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you think that that should be explained to the public and to the Congress?
ROBERT GATES: I think – I think that people, when you have a lot of changes like that, yes, I think you – I think there is an obligation to explain at a minimum to the Congress the rational.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The systems don’t seem to be operating that way right now.
ROBERT GATES: No.
(END VT)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Our full interview with Secretary Gates is available on our website, YouTube channel, and our podcast.
We’ll be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s it for us today. Thank you all for watching. For “FACE THE NATION,” I am Margaret Brennan.
发表回复