最后三小时，费斯塔彭（图）所在车组还以超过10秒优势领先，但随后因传动轴故障痛失好局。 （法新社档案照片）

（尼尔堡综合电）在星期天（5月17日）结束的纽博格林24小时耐力赛中，著名一级方程式赛车（F1）车手费斯塔彭（Verstappen）和队友轮流驾驶的3号马赛地赛车，在比赛尾声突发机械故障，在一度大幅领先的情况下痛失好局，最终由80号马赛地赛车夺得冠军。

这是四届F1车手总冠军费斯塔彭的纽博格林24小时赛首秀。他与琼卡德拉（Juncadella）、古农（Gounon）和奥尔（Auer）轮流驾驶的3号马赛地赛车，在这项长达24小时的比赛，还剩约三小时结束的情况下，仍保持着超过10秒的领先优势，但随后一切急转直下。

轮到琼卡德拉驾驶时，他收到防抱死刹车系统（ABS）报警提示。起初，他认为问题还能控制，但随后驾驶舱内开始出现“异响和震动”，他在两圈后将赛车驶回维修区。

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X41s_nX2i4Y

马赛地最终确认，故障源于右后方传动轴断裂，让3号马赛地赛车彻底退出争冠行列。这一戏剧性变故，让原本排在第二的80号马赛地赛车得以相对轻松地冲向终点。

他们稳稳守住领先优势，最终以领先全场超过一分钟的成绩冲线夺冠——这也是马赛地自2016年以来首次赢得纽博格林24小时赛冠军。

84号红牛兰博基尼赛车获得亚军，获得季军的是34号瓦尔肯霍斯特阿斯顿马丁赛车。去年的冠军罗威宝马则在比赛约进行八小时后因油箱故障退赛。

虽然因技术故障错失冠军，但费斯塔彭的驾驶水平有目共睹。他两次将排名从原本落后的状态追至领先位置，驾驶表现极为惊艳。

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQzP1pQhe9A

费斯塔彭：失利令人难以接受

这名荷兰车手赛后也感到非常失望：“事情就是这样。这真的让人非常难以接受。 我们在领先时，赛车的传动轴突然断裂，我们争夺胜利的希望也随之破灭。不过我还是要感谢整个周末支持我们的所有人。”

这并非费斯塔彭今年第一次在“绿色地狱”纽博格林赛道遭遇打击。在今年3月的纽博格林耐力系列赛（NLS）第二轮正赛中，费斯塔彭所在车组以接近一分钟优势夺冠。但由于车队使用了超出规定的七套轮胎，成绩在赛后被取消。

不过，这应该不是费斯塔彭最后一次踏上纽博格林赛场。他此前称，希望未来每年都能参加纽博格林24小时耐力赛。值得一提的是，在他确认参加这次比赛后，赛事门票首次售罄。

费斯塔彭说：“纽博格林24小时赛是全年最重要的赛事之一，这也是我们来到这里的原因。我们拥有职业级阵容，而我的加入也让这件事变得非常令人兴奋。这是我希望每年都参与的赛事——无论是一辆车还是多辆车——而我们的主要目标就是赢得比赛。”

《联合早报》开设全新IG体育账号@zaobaosg.sports，欢迎关注，获取更多体育资讯！

Irish researchers find oldest English-language poem in forgotten medieval book in Rome

May 17, 2026 / 10:44 AM EDT / CBS/AP

Researchers in Ireland marveled at their computer screen as they flipped through the digitized pages of a medieval book tracked down in a Roman library. Within them, they found their sought-after treasure: the oldest surviving English poem.

“We were extremely surprised. We were speechless. We couldn’t believe our eyes when we first saw that,” Elisabetta Magnanti, a visiting research fellow at Trinity College Dublin’s school of English, told The Associated Press.

What’s more, she said, the poem was within the main body of Latin text: “It was extraordinary.”

Composed in Old English by a Northumbrian agricultural worker in the 7th century, “Caedmon’s Hymn” appears within some copies of the “Ecclesiastical History of the English People,” written in Latin by a monk and saint known as the Venerable Bede. His history is one of the most widely reproduced texts from the Middle Ages, with almost 200 manuscripts, according to Magnanti’s colleague Mark Faulkner, an associate professor of medieval literature at Trinity.

“About three million words of Old English survive in total, but the vast majority of texts come from the 10th and 11th centuries,” Faulkner told CBS news partner BBC News. “Caedmon’s Hymn is almost unique as a survival from the seventh century – it connects us to the earliest stages of written English.”

A rare, long-lost copy of Caedmon’s Hymn — the first poem ever written down in Old English — appears in an 8th-century manuscript copy of the Venerable Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People. AP Photo/Andrea Rosa

Faulkner considers Caedmon’s poem to be the start of English literature. A modern English translation of the poem reads:

“Now we must praise the guardian of the heavenly kingdom, / the might of the creator and his intention, / the work of the father of glory, in that he of each wonder, / eternal lord, established the beginning. / He first created the earth for men, / heaven as a roof, the holy creator, / then the middle earth, the guardian of mankind, / the eternal lord, afterwards created / for men on earth, the almighty lord.”

The manuscript he and Magnanti found is one of the oldest, dating from the 9th century. Two earlier copies contain the poem in Old English, but as afterthoughts — translated from Latin and scrawled into the margin or appended but not within the text’s main body, according to the researchers.

blob:https://www.cbsnews.com/240c9972-f188-4c2a-89c9-73d65ecbad39

The discovery sheds light on the English language’s wide diffusion, long before what was previously understood, Faulkner said in Rome, where the duo had traveled to view the text in person for the first time.

“Prior to the discovery of the Rome manuscript, the earliest one was from the early 12th century. So this is three centuries earlier than that. And so it attests to the importance that was already being attached to the English in the early 9th century,” Faulkner told The Associated Press.

And it’s something of a miracle they uncovered it at all.

A rare, long-lost copy of Caedmon’s Hymn visible in the five lines above the final line of a page from an 8th-century manuscript copy of the Venerable Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People, at Rome’s National Library. Andrea Rosa via AP

Caedmon is said to have composed the poem while working at Whitby Abbey in North Yorkshire, after guests at a feast began reciting poems, Faulkner said.

“Embarrassed that he didn’t know anything suitable, Caedmon left the feast and went to bed,” he said. “A figure then appeared to him in his dreams telling him to sing about creation, which Caedmon miraculously did, producing the nine-line hymn.”

Some 1,400 years later, this copy of his poem resurfaced in Rome’s main public library — but not before crossing the Atlantic Ocean at least twice and changing hands even more times.

Monks transcribed this copy of Bede’s history in the scriptorium of the Benedictine abbey of Nonantola, one of the most important transcription centers during the Middle Ages, located near modern-day Modena in northern Italy, according to Valentina Longo, curator of medieval and modern manuscripts at Rome’s National Central Library.

In the 17th century, as the abbey’s importance declined, its vast collection of manuscripts was shifted to another abbey in Rome, then moved to the Vatican and finally on to a small church.

Along the way, some of the texts went missing, only to emerge in the early 19th century in the possession of famous international collectors, Longo said.

This copy of Bede’s history went to renowned English antiquarian Thomas Phillipps. He fell on hard times, selling off bits and pieces of his collection, and Swiss bibliophile Martin Bodmer secured the book. From there, somehow, it arrived in New York City, in the trove of Austrian-born rare bookseller H.P. Kraus during the 20th century.

Italy’s culture ministry was scouring the world for the Nonantola abbey’s missing manuscripts, snapping them up in auctions and from collectors around the world. It bought the copy of Bede’s history from Kraus in 1972, Longo said, and since then the illustrious text has remained in Rome’s library — but received scant notice.

Enter Magnanti, who had spent over four years studying Bede’s history and was compiling a catalog of extant copies.

From left, Elisabetta Magnanti and Mark Faulkner from Dublin’s Trinity College and Valentina Longo of Rome’s National Central Library. Andrea Rosa via AP

“I knew that the book was listed in the library’s catalog, so I was almost certain that the book was, in fact, still here,” she said. “I realized that, because of the very complex history of this book, no Bede scholar had really looked at it. So it had been virtually unstudied.”

She emailed the library, which confirmed the book was in its stacks. Three months later, she received digital images of the entire manuscript.

More rare books becoming available

The library has digitized the entire Nonantolan collection and it is freely accessible through the website, Longo said.

It’s part of a massive project by the library to make thousands of rare books and manuscripts available to researchers around the world, according to Andrea Cappa, the library’s head of manuscripts and the rare books reading room.

“The discovery made by the experts of Trinity College is just one starting point, a single manuscript that might pave the way for countless other discoveries, in countless other fields, through international cooperation like this,” Cappa said.

Transcript: U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” May 17, 2026

2026-05-17T09:05:00-0400 / CBS News

The following is the transcript of the interview with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on May 17, 2026.

MARGARET BRENNAN: 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.

JAMIESON GREER: 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?

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, etc. 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?

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 non-sensitive 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?

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 nontariff 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’ll 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?

JAMIESON GREER: Well, the Chinese know, and that’s part of our deal, that the United States can 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: Okay, 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?

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. 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 over capacity 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: Okay, 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?

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 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: Okay, 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 in 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, reannouncing past deals on past agreements to purchase over a period of time. Can you answer these conservative skeptics with any specifics?

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 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 US make? What were those concessions in order to get this?

JAMIESON GREER: Well, one thing, they’re- they’re balance 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, 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 non-sensitive 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 re-registered beef facilities, where beef facilities expired. They’re taking poultry again, 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: China still sells more to the US than it buys, but that difference has decreased by about 31 and a half percent. So, thank you, Ambassador.

JAMIESON GREER : Yes, we’re very happy to see that progress. It’s a main goal that we have, and it’s good to be achieving it.

Transcript: Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” May 17, 2026

2026-05-17T10:03:00-0400 / CBS News

The following is the transcript of the interview with former Defense Secretary Robert Gates that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on May 17, 2026.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Mr. Secretary, if you’re ready, we’ll dive right in.

FORMER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ROBERT GATES: Absolutely.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So it’s great to be back here with you, but there’s a lot going on in the world. You said in December we’re living in perhaps one of the most, if not the most, dangerous periods in our modern American history. Why do you feel that way?

SECRETARY GATES: For the first time in our history, we face nuclear-armed adversaries in both Europe and Asia. When China finishes their strategic nuclear modernization, China and Russia together will have nearly twice as many strategic nuclear warheads deployed as we do. We have never faced a country, at least- at least since the British Empire, that had greater manufacturing and industrial capacity than the United States. We have not faced a country that was as technologically advanced as we are, ahead of us in a few areas, behind us in a few areas, pretty much even with us in a few others. So we face an adversary that is more powerful and- and has more non-military instruments of power than- than any adversary we’ve faced, certainly than the Soviet Union. So whether it’s strategic communications or development assistance or trade or whatever, the Chinese are all over the world dealing with these things, so I think if you take all those things together and- and- and the nature of the two regimes, this is a very, very perilous time.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The two regimes, Russia and China–

SECRETARY GATES: Right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The chief adversaries, in your view, of the United States.

SECRETARY GATES: Yeah.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, President Trump was in China, standing across from Xi Jinping, and he referred, almost jokingly, to the grouping as the new G2. He seemed to mean the two global powers. Do you think that the U.S. and China are on equal footing? Is that how you would describe it?

SECRETARY GATES: I don’t think so yet. I think China is a- you know, the military refers to China as a near peer, and I think our- right now our military power is greater than theirs, although they’re catching up and certainly ahead of us in terms of ship building and so on. But we- that we still have a lead economically, we still have a lead technologically, and, and I think- I think, you know, we have our own problems here at home, but the Chinese have some real problems as well, domestically, in terms of their economy and demography, and so on. So, you know, they’re- they’re approaching our level of power, but- but I think they’re not there yet.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But the meeting itself seemed to be the message between President Xi and Trump. There weren’t a lot of, as they call it, deliverables coming out of this summit. There was an announcement of working groups to study artificial intelligence and talk about tariffs. What do you think was accomplished?

SECRETARY GATES: I think that the main objective for the administration, for the president, probably was simply to keep a lid on the relationship, to keep a floor under it so it doesn’t deteriorate, to continue the trade truce that has existed for about a year now. We’re still batting back and forth various measures against each other, but by and large the trade truce has- has been sustained. And- and so I think avoiding a re-escalation of the economic conflict between the two. I think putting this floor under the relationship, keeping it on even keel, probably was the primary objective of both sides, frankly.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Certainly, for the business community, that was their concern.

SECRETARY GATES: And- and if they- if we can get some greater business opportunities, of course, take advantage of that, and we’ll see what happens.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, Xi Jinping’s language in that public statement that was released by his government was very strong on Taiwan. China considers it a core issue, as they described it. 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?

SECRETARY GATES: I think the Chinese rhetoric has often been strong in the past when it comes to Taiwan. Whenever we’ve made an arms sales to Taiwan in the past, the Bush administration, Obama administration, and so on, the Chinese rhetoric gets very, very strong. So I think- I think Xi was reiterating the Chinese position on that. I think it would be a mistake to change the carefully worded position of the United States with respect to Taiwan. Any change at all, the nuances- this is one of those things where the experts parse these things down to the tense of the verbs, and so on. 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 the defense of Taiwan if China were to move on it–

SECRETARY GATES: Yes.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –that needs to be an open question. Well, on paper, the president has made significant pledges to Taiwan in terms of promised arms sales, not delivered on yet. There’s another $14 billion in proposed weapon sales that the Trump administration has delayed approving. Do you think the president should green light that?

SECRETARY 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 respect to previous arms sales, there is a huge backlog 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. In the past, they wanted the kinds of high-end weapons that would enable them to retake the mainland. Well, that’s never going to happen. And- and so getting the, the old Chinese- the old Taiwanese generals to adapt their thinking to the kinds of weapons that the Ukrainians, for example, have been using, and so on.

MARGARET BRENNAN: — The HIMARS, the THADDS–

SECRETARY GATES: It has been an achievement, and, and the Taiwanese legislature has just finally reached an agreement to fund 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: So you talk about the demand for weapons. There’s a bigger problem with supply and readiness and access to them right now. A retired colonel in China’s People’s Liberation Army was recently quoted in the New York Times saying the depletion of US stockpiles has “significantly diminished the US military’s ability to project its combat power.” They’re looking at what’s being used in Iran and Ukraine. I know Admiral Paparo, the head of Pacific Command, has said he doesn’t see any real costs on our ability to deter China, but isn’t that pretty time dependent? It’s fairly well reported and established that there is a lag in terms of replenishing American weapons stockpiles. Isn’t that a problem?

SECRETARY GATES: It is a problem, and I, and I think I think this administration, especially, has- has been very aggressive in working with the Congress in trying to expand our defense industries and bring new companies into the defense industrial mix that can produce the kinds of numbers of these weapons that are necessary. I’ve read that Ukraine is going to produce 7 million drones next year, or over the next year. We need that kind of capacity in the United States, and so, but it’s a matter of getting the factories built, expanding factories. Part of the problem in Washington is you get all the right rhetoric about increasing our ability to produce these weapons, but the money is slow to come, and it’s unpredictable, and so what’s needed is- is accelerated action in actually starting to get these factories built and expand these capabilities.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But when you compare it to Ukraine, that’s a wartime economy, that’s an emergency they’re responding to. You’re saying we need to act like it is here?

SECRETARY GATES: Absolutely, absolutely. We do need to replenish, and I would say that I’m well aware- well away from it now, but based on everything I’ve seen, I think that where we have the real shortfalls are in presided- precision-guided munitions, but also defensive missiles like Patriots, the THAAD missiles, and the Navy’s Standard Missile-3 that are our most effective, although very expensive air and missile defense systems, and those are the ones that have been expended especially.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Recently?

SECRETARY GATES: Yes.

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?

SECRETARY GATES: Let me put it this way, I think- I think the chances of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan are pretty low, particularly over the next several years, and partly because Xi has other- 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 anytime they wanted, what the Taiwanese 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- there’s cyber, there are all kinds of pressures. I also think that the Chinese are hoping that over time the Kuomintang, KMT, which has been more friendly toward China, will be a vehicle that will allow them over time to get more and more influence in Taiwan and maybe have some kind of a Hong Kong style transition over a period of time. I think- think that the Chinese would far prefer that kind of, if you will, takeover of Taiwan than all the risks inherent in a military invasion. 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. Xi has fired- 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. He’s fired- and they’re slated for execution his last two defense ministers. So this is not an outfit that I think he has enormous confidence in right now, and there- he’s been fighting against corruption in their military ever since he became president of China. So I’m not sure that he thinks his military is the greatest in the world.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Or he’s threatened by them.

SECRETARY GATES: Yeah.

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 US-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?

SECRETARY GATES: I think the only way that we are likely to get the enriched uranium out of- out of Iran and bring about an end to their nuclear aspirations is through a negotiation. To go after that enriched- that buried 1000 pounds of enriched uranium, some huge and complex military operation. And so I think- I think that the only way you do this and bringing pressure to bear on them to force them into negotiations is certainly- is certainly the only path that seems to offer any chance of success, but- but I think ultimately that that the only way you actually end the Iranian nuclear program for good is to negotiate it.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, that offer of having the UN go in and inspect the sites and possibly remove the enriched uranium was on the table before the strikes were carried out in February. They weren’t quite at a deal, but that was being discussed. Is that where we end up at the end of this, back with some kind of UN agency going in and doing what the US and Israel have not been able to do?

SECRETARY GATES: I- I suspect that the administration would not settle for any arrangement that did not include getting that enriched uranium out of Iran, or as has- has been said, or diluting it in some way that makes it no longer usable for- for a potential weapon.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But the diplomacy seems to be at a stalemate, and so does the military operation, at this moment in time, with Iran still having control over the Strait of Hormuz. Is it possible for the President of the United States to walk away and leave this for the Israelis to settle?

SECRETARY GATES: No, I don’t think he can walk away. And no, I don’t think the 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- and I think the President seems to have been very consistent and very clear that under no circumstances can Iran ever 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- for enrichment. I mean, I think- I don’t think that the nuclear program in Iran poses an imminent threat. After all, we bombed it twice. The nuclear material is pretty deeply buried, to- you’d have to spin up, use the centrifuges to spin it from 60% enriched to over 90% enriched. The centrifuges are very sensitive, they’re also mostly destroyed. Many of their nuclear scientists have been killed, so I don’t think- this is not a problem for tomorrow, but it does, you know, the President’s got it right in terms of this is a long-term threat that cannot be allowed to develop, and if left alone, they clearly are- have been trying to move in that direction.

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 timestamp that the American people were told to expect, in terms of the duration of conflict.

SECRETARY GATES: I think that there were some unrealistic expectations.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re smiling as you say that. Do you have a clear- have you heard a clearly articulated sort of center of gravity to this operation, an end goal, a strategy? Because there are members of Congress who are saying they’re not getting enough information from the administration on many of these points.

SECRETARY GATES: Well, I think some of the justifications have- 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. 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 set back a long time, I think those other things, a lot has been accomplished.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Prime Minister Netanyahu told my colleague Major Garrett over the weekend, on 60 Minutes, that the war was not over, because there were still nuclear issues, there were still missiles that needed to be dealt with, and militias. He did not seem to be saying he was done.

SECRETARY GATES: I think- I think it would be hard to say the war is over, I think from either the standpoint of the United States or Israel at this point.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Prime Minister Netanyahu is someone you had a lot of experience with over the years.

SECRETARY GATES: Yes.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And you were very critical of him in your 2014 book. You referred to his arrogance and outlandish ambition in his approach, specifically to Iran. You recalled a disagreement during a 2009 meeting, where he argued an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would trigger the Iranian people to overthrow the regime, and that Iran would not attack, he said, American targets or oil facilities in the region. That was in 2009 and he was trying to press an American president to do what this American president has done. Was he overly optimistic then, and is he now?

SECRETARY GATES: He told me all those things in July of 2009 and I told him then he was dead wrong, that he was underestimating the resilience of the Iranians, that I thought he had been lulled into an unrealistic position by the absence of an Iraqi reaction when the Israelis destroyed the Osirak reactor in Iraq. he- he’d been lulled by the Syrian lack of reaction when we destroyed their- when Israel destroyed their reactor, that was during the second Bush administration, and I told him–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But this is the war he’s been trying to sell for years?

SECRETARY GATES: –and I told him that, that this notion, that- that the- he was saying, then the regime is fra- this is 2009, the regime is fragile, it’ll crumble at the first attack and they won’t have time to do anything else. I told him then, he was wrong.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The regime was historically weak at the moment of these strikes. Is it possible he’s- right now, even though we haven’t seen those things, like an uprising among the Iranian people?

SECRETARY GATES: I think that the likelihood of an uprising, of course, this is one of those predictions that can get you into a lot of trouble, but I think the likelihood of a near-term uprising is very low, because the besiege and the internal controls seem very much intact in Iran. You haven’t seen any demonstrations, or very few demonstrations in the street. People are cowed, they’re afraid, and right now they’re concerned with how they- how they can eat and live under the current circumstance. This is a regime that couldn’t provide water to Tehran before the attack started. So I think that- I think when the danger will come, will be some time after the- after the war stops, but I also think what you generally see in regimes like this is not so much a change of regime from the streets, but that the regime itself begins to fracture, and that you have people within the regime who want to take a different tack, and so you have an internal fight for control.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Let me ask you about how America is handling its own problems here at home. You were a CIA director, you were a Defense Secretary. How do you assess Secretary Hegseth’s performance?

SECRETARY GATES: Well, I will. I mean, 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, in trying to figure out ways not only to expand industrial production of defense materials and to do it on-time and on-budget, but also to bring and develop new new companies into the defense and industrial business that have new kinds of manufacturing capabilities and that can crank out what we need much faster and much cheaper than that has been the case in the past. I think- I think some of the moves to reduce the autonomy of the services will- will help this, so I think some of the things they’re doing to try and- and shake up the defense industrial base is really important and a high priority.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But we’re here at William & Mary, where you are chancellor. This is one of the universities that Secretary Hegseth included on his list of quote “woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination.” He has ordered U.S. troops cannot attend this school or institutions like it, including ones he studied at Princeton and Harvard. He referred to them as “factories of anti-American resentment and military disdain.” What’s your response to that? Because I’m sure you have some feelings, but also, what’s the impact on telling our fighting force that they can’t attend a school like this?

SECRETARY GATES: Well, I think he’s badly misinformed. The fact is, this is a very military-friendly campus. We have a lot of relationships with military organizations here in the Tidewater of Virginia. And even in Washington, we do a lot of national security work here, and we have a very active ROTC program, I just commissioned 10 officers last night. So I think this is a very, very military-friendly campus, and- and we have very good relationships with the services.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But a “woke breeding ground of toxic indoctrination.” What’s the impact on our next generation of American troops who won’t have access to top universities because of his description?

SECRETARY GATES: Well, I think they will, and I think–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –you don’t think this lasts.

SECRETARY GATES: I think, well, first of all, I think the practical application of this has been one fellowship here at William & Mary. We’ve got a lot of other relationships going. And I think that first of all, I think that’s a complete mischaracterization of this- of this campus, but- but I think the military is still going to be active on U.S. campuses through the ROTC programs and various other national security programs.

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 watchdog. When you’re talking about the things you like, would you put any of these things on that list?

SECRETARY 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 explain why I had taken these actions. And in the case of where I, on the same day, fired the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Air Force, I not only had a press conference explaining why I had done it in terms of the mishandling of nuclear materials and weapons, I went to three different air bases to talk to airmen, assemblies of airmen to explain why I had relieved their superior officers. So I think you need to be able to make changes in personnel, but I think the way you do it, and is important, and I think it’s important to explain to people why you have done it.

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 and 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 defense intelligence. Do you see those things as necessary disruption that ultimately will have a positive impact, or does it concern you?

SECRETARY 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?

SECRETARY GATES: I think, I think that people, when, when you have a lot of changes like that, yeah, I think you, I think there is an obligation to explain, at a minimum, to the Congress the rationale.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The systems don’t seem to be operating that way right now.

SECRETARY GATES: No.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re being very diplomatic in your description of oversight of the Pentagon and Pentagon operations. Let’s ask about another country before I let you go, because I’m getting the wrap here. The CIA director was just in Havana, meeting with Raúl Castro’s grandson, along with the head of intelligence and the head of- the minister of the interior. The U.S. is offering Cuba aid, they’re pressing for political change and floating the potential of indicting 95- 94-year-old Raúl Castro, who’s no longer in power, but he’s clearly influential. Does it matter to U.S. national security what happens on this island?

SECRETARY GATES: I think that actually the biggest risk is that we end up with another Mariel evacuation from Cuba that has tens of thousands of Cubans heading to the United States out of desperation, as has happened a number of years ago. So I think that’s actually at this point the biggest threat. You know, the Cubans have- have had a lot of security people in Venezuela, they were, they were- formed the security cordon around Maduro. He didn’t trust his own people. They’ve done this in other countries, so they have been involved in ways that have impacted our national security and our interests in their engagement in other countries for a long time. And- but are they an imminent threat to the United States? Other than in these, if you will, peripheral ways, I think, I think the main threat is, frankly, is collapse.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Which the administration says they’re trying to avoid.

SECRETARY GATES: Right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.

对伊战争重创商业命脉 以色列首季经济萎缩3.3%超预期

2026年5月17日 20:35 / 联合早报

耶路撒冷老城的西墙广场上，一面巨幅国旗在年度“耶路撒冷日”庆祝活动中格外醒目。 （路透社）

受美以伊冲突升级影响，以色列经济第一季度出现明显收缩。

彭博社报道，以色列中央统计局星期天（5月17日）公布的数据显示，经季节性调整后，第一季度国内生产总值（GDP）按年率计算萎缩3.3%，跌幅高于市场预期。

这是自今年2月底美国与以色列对伊朗发动空袭后，首批反映冲突对经济影响的官方数据。

在持续六周的冲突期间，以色列实施集会限制措施，学校停课一个月，并动员超过10万名预备役人员，导致商业与经济活动受扰。

统计局数据显示，第一季度私人消费和公共消费分别下降4.7%和4.8%，商业部门GDP下降3.1%，人均GDP则减少4.5%。

不过，本轮经济收缩程度仍低于2025年6月以伊12天冲突后的水平。当时，以色列许多企业一度全面停运，GDP在当季萎缩4.3%。

目前，以色列央行和财政部均预计，今年经济增长率为3.8%，低于此前分别预测的5.2%和4.8%。两家机构指出，若要实现相关目标，经济必须在今年余下时间加快复苏，而这在很大程度上取决于伊朗、黎巴嫩与加沙停火协议能否维持。

自2023年10月哈马斯袭击以色列并引发加沙战争以来，以色列长期处于接近持续冲突状态，截至2025年的两年间，相关冲突造成的经济损失已相当于年度GDP的8.6%。

对伊战争重创商业命脉 以色列首季经济萎缩3.3%超预期

2026年5月17日 20:35 / 联合早报

耶路撒冷老城的西墙广场上，一面巨幅国旗在年度“耶路撒冷日”庆祝活动中格外醒目。 （路透社）

受美以伊冲突升级影响，以色列经济第一季度出现明显收缩。

彭博社报道，以色列中央统计局星期天（5月17日）公布的数据显示，经季节性调整后，第一季度国内生产总值（GDP）按年率计算萎缩3.3%，跌幅高于市场预期。

这是自今年2月底美国与以色列对伊朗发动空袭后，首批反映冲突对经济影响的官方数据。

在持续六周的冲突期间，以色列实施集会限制措施，学校停课一个月，并动员超过10万名预备役人员，导致商业与经济活动受扰。

统计局数据显示，第一季度私人消费和公共消费分别下降4.7%和4.8%，商业部门GDP下降3.1%，人均GDP则减少4.5%。

不过，本轮经济收缩程度仍低于2025年6月以伊12天冲突后的水平。当时，以色列许多企业一度全面停运，GDP在当季萎缩4.3%。

目前，以色列央行和财政部均预计，今年经济增长率为3.8%，低于此前分别预测的5.2%和4.8%。两家机构指出，若要实现相关目标，经济必须在今年余下时间加快复苏，而这在很大程度上取决于伊朗、黎巴嫩与加沙停火协议能否维持。

自2023年10月哈马斯袭击以色列并引发加沙战争以来，以色列长期处于接近持续冲突状态，截至2025年的两年间，相关冲突造成的经济损失已相当于年度GDP的8.6%。

英国前卫长确认竞选工党党魁

2026年5月17日 21:02 / 联合早报

英国前卫长确认竞选工党党魁

英国前卫生部长斯特里廷周六在一个亲工党政治组织主办的会议上，首次发表公开演讲时宣布将参加工党党魁竞选。 （彭博社）

（伦敦综合电）日前辞职的英国卫生部长斯特里廷宣布，如果工党举行党首选举，他将参选。他是首位公开确认将竞选工党党魁的议员。

斯特里廷（Wes Streeting）周六（5月16日）在一个亲工党政治组织主办的会议上说：“我们（工党）需要一场真正的竞选，让最优秀的候选人都参与其中，而我会参选。”

他称，工党近期在地方选举的惨败是前所未有的，进步派人士越来越不相信工党能够迎接挑战，他重申工党需要的是思想的较量，而不是个人的较量。

他还说，英国脱离欧盟是一个“灾难性的错误”，脱欧导致英国目前的财富、权势和掌控力比工业革命前的任何时期都逊色。他称，英国的未来属于欧洲，有朝一日应重新加入欧盟。

工党在地方选举惨败后，斯塔默陷入执政危机。据英国广播公司（BBC）统计，目前已有超90名工党议员呼吁斯塔默辞职，但也有超过150名议员对他表示支持或认为目前不是举行党魁选举的适当时机。

工党规定，在任议员必须获得至少20%的工党议员支持，才能启动挑战党魁的程序。

斯特里廷表示不会立即发起党魁挑战，因为在大曼彻斯特市长伯纳姆（Andy Burnham）重返国会之前举行党魁选举，“不符合工党利益，也不符合国家利益”。他说，如果仓促举行党魁选举，新领导人可能缺乏足够合法性，从而延长不稳定和不确定性。

斯特里廷再次呼吁斯塔默制定“适当的领导层交接时间表”，并允许内阁部长自由提名新的工党党魁和首相人选。

伯纳姆告诉BBC，他正在寻求参加梅克菲尔德（Makerfield）选区的补选，以“拯救”工党。

他表示，这次选举必须成为重振工党、使工党脱离困境的契机。外界普遍预期，如果伯纳姆在补选中获胜重返国会，他将试图挑战首相斯塔默的工党领袖职位。

英国前卫长确认竞选工党党魁

2026年5月17日 21:02 / 联合早报

英国前卫长确认竞选工党党魁

英国前卫生部长斯特里廷周六在一个亲工党政治组织主办的会议上，首次发表公开演讲时宣布将参加工党党魁竞选。 （彭博社）

（伦敦综合电）日前辞职的英国卫生部长斯特里廷宣布，如果工党举行党首选举，他将参选。他是首位公开确认将竞选工党党魁的议员。

斯特里廷（Wes Streeting）周六（5月16日）在一个亲工党政治组织主办的会议上说：“我们（工党）需要一场真正的竞选，让最优秀的候选人都参与其中，而我会参选。”

他称，工党近期在地方选举的惨败是前所未有的，进步派人士越来越不相信工党能够迎接挑战，他重申工党需要的是思想的较量，而不是个人的较量。

他还说，英国脱离欧盟是一个“灾难性的错误”，脱欧导致英国目前的财富、权势和掌控力比工业革命前的任何时期都逊色。他称，英国的未来属于欧洲，有朝一日应重新加入欧盟。

工党在地方选举惨败后，斯塔默陷入执政危机。据英国广播公司（BBC）统计，目前已有超90名工党议员呼吁斯塔默辞职，但也有超过150名议员对他表示支持或认为目前不是举行党魁选举的适当时机。

工党规定，在任议员必须获得至少20%的工党议员支持，才能启动挑战党魁的程序。

斯特里廷表示不会立即发起党魁挑战，因为在大曼彻斯特市长伯纳姆（Andy Burnham）重返国会之前举行党魁选举，“不符合工党利益，也不符合国家利益”。他说，如果仓促举行党魁选举，新领导人可能缺乏足够合法性，从而延长不稳定和不确定性。

斯特里廷再次呼吁斯塔默制定“适当的领导层交接时间表”，并允许内阁部长自由提名新的工党党魁和首相人选。

伯纳姆告诉BBC，他正在寻求参加梅克菲尔德（Makerfield）选区的补选，以“拯救”工党。

他表示，这次选举必须成为重振工党、使工党脱离困境的契机。外界普遍预期，如果伯纳姆在补选中获胜重返国会，他将试图挑战首相斯塔默的工党领袖职位。

Transcript: Alexander Yui, Taiwan’s representative to the U.S., on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” May 17, 2026

2026-05-17T10:48:59-0400 / CBS News

The following is the transcript of the interview with Ambassador Alexander Yui, Taiwan’s representative to the U.S., that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on May 17, 2026.

MARGARET BRENNAN: We turn now to Ambassador Alexander Yui, Taiwan’s representative to the United States. Ambassador, good to have you here in person. 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?

ALEXANDER YUI, TAIWAN REPRESENTATIVE TO THE UNITED STATES: Well, we’ll see, but President Trump, when he was in Beijing for the last 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, 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, 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 problems–

MARGARET BRENNAN: — So no call scheduled yet?–

YUI: Well, the communication between Taiwan and U.S. is constant, it’s current. But I’ll leave it to the U.S. to announce anything. If it happens.

MARGARET BRENNAN: It would be a big deal. He did speak to a past president as president-elect.

YUI: Yes, with President Tsai, yeah, 2015-16.

MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s right. So, China refers to your president as a separatist, in part because Lai has talked about being a “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?

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, United States’ longstanding position in 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: Yeah.

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: Yeah.

YUI: So that’s- that’s- that is meant by independence.

MARGARET BRENNAN: What 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?

YUI: Well, that’s why I, you know, if- we’d love to, given our part of the story–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.

YUI: Not just listen to cuentos chinos, but- but I think that’s a statement of saying he wants status quo, President wants status quo, President Trump. That he wants no change in this- in the Taiwan Straits, neither through economic or military coercion, 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’s 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.

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, those are 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. 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?

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, 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 U.S. gave to Taiwan back in the Reagan-era 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.

[SOUND ON TAPE STARTS]

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: 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.

QUESTION: What’s his request?

TRUMP: We discussed the Taiwan, you know, the whole thing with the arms sales, it was in great detail, actually, and I’ll be making decisions

[SOUND ON TAPE ENDS]

MARGARET BRENNAN: In “great detail.” Did that violate America’s commitment to Taiwan?

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–

YUI: 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 a Taiwan Relations Act, which is selling ours commensurate to the threat that Taiwan receives. And past administrations, including President Trump’s first term, made considerable amounts of sales, including the F-16 box 70s. And also in his second administration last year, he made two sales to Taiwan. Also, again, the last one also 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.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Face the Nation will be back in a minute. Stay with us.

一辆标志性的古巴老爷车在哈瓦那街头缓缓驶过，一旁的巨幅广告牌上，依次展示着古巴已故领导人菲德尔·卡斯特罗、前领导人劳尔·卡斯特罗以及现任总统迪亚斯-卡内尔的肖像。 （路透社）

美国新闻网站Axios引述机密情报报道称，古巴已获得300多架军用无人机，并最近开始讨论利用这些无人机袭击美国关塔那摩湾基地、美国军舰以及可能位于哈瓦那以北90英里处的佛罗里达州基韦斯特的计划。

一位美国高级官员星期天（5月17日）透露，有情报显示，特朗普政府将古巴视为一大威胁，这不仅是由于无人机战的发展，也因为伊朗军事顾问在哈瓦那的存在。这份情报甚至可能成为美国采取军事行动的借口。

路透社未能立即核实这一报道。