On August 16, Ambassador Qin Gang gave interviews to Reuters, The Associated Press, Bloomberg, NPR, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The New Yorker, The Hill, POLITICO in Washington , AXIOS, "Defense No. 1" and other mainstream American media conducted joint interviews, and answered questions from reporters on Sino-US relations, Taiwan issues, Hong Kong-related issues, and Chinese diplomacy.

Answers are as follows:

  Rokin (The Washington Post): Ambassador, thank you for speaking with us today.

Your colleague, the Chinese Ambassador to France, recently spoke on two occasions that the Chinese government is planning to "re-educate" the people of Taiwan after reunification.

Can you explain what this refers to?

What kind of "re-education" is it like in Hong Kong, or like in Xinjiang and Tibet?

  Ambassador Qin: I'm not quite sure under what circumstances and context the Ambassador to France made the remarks.

But my understanding is that both sides of the Taiwan Strait are Chinese, and both sides belong to one China.

We must strengthen the identity of the Chinese nation.

This should be what he wants to express, of course I can't speak for him.

  Luo Jin: Let me follow up. Your signed article in the Washington Post not long ago stated that you still want to strive for peaceful reunification, but it seems that you still need to persuade the people of Taiwan to return to China voluntarily.

How is this work going?

Have you made progress in your efforts to win the hearts and minds of Taiwanese people?

Will it work?

  Ambassador Qin: In fact, in the past few years, the mainland has made a lot of efforts for the peaceful development of cross-strait relations, showing goodwill.

Taiwan has a small territory and limited market, and there is not much room for its own economic development and improvement of people's livelihood.

Taiwan's future depends on reunification with the mainland.

Over the past few decades, we have made a lot of efforts, and now there are 1 million Taiwanese compatriots working and living in the mainland, and they are living happily.

In the past few decades, the cross-strait trade volume has grown significantly to 320 billion US dollars. (Last year) Taiwan's trade surplus with the mainland reached 170 billion US dollars. The mainland is Taiwan's largest export market and the largest source of trade surplus. contacts.

These all help to enhance mutual understanding.

  Luo Jin: So why do Taiwanese overwhelmingly say they don't want to return?

  Ambassador Qin: We are striving for peaceful reunification. We have such a desire, because peaceful reunification is in the best interest of the people on both sides of the Strait.

As compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, the last thing we want to do is kill each other.

Therefore, we strive for the prospect of peaceful reunification with the utmost sincerity and our best efforts.

We do not promise to give up non-peaceful means to achieve reunification. This is not aimed at Taiwan compatriots, but to curb "Taiwan independence" separatist forces and prevent external forces from interfering.

  After reunification, we proposed the implementation of "one country, two systems".

This is the best solution for Taiwan.

"One country, two systems" was originally proposed to solve the Taiwan issue, fully considering the reality of Taiwan, and it is also conducive to Taiwan's long-term stability and prosperity.

  Regarding the specific implementation form of "one country, two systems" in Taiwan, we will fully absorb the opinions and suggestions from both sides of the strait, and will fully take into account the interests and feelings of Taiwan compatriots.

"One country, two systems" is the most inclusive solution to the Taiwan issue. It is a peaceful solution, a democratic solution, a goodwill solution and a win-win solution.

The different systems on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are neither an obstacle to reunification nor an excuse for division.

It is believed that after China's reunification, the "two systems" plan for Taiwan will have more space and possibilities.

  Clemens ("The Hill"): Ambassador, the US believes that China is using Pelosi's visit to Taiwan to establish a new normal, and the US believes that China is escalating the situation.

Many people in the U.S. government have great reservations about Pei's visit, and there are differences of opinion within the government.

Which official told you that China used this as an excuse to change the status quo?

  Ambassador Qin: It's no secret.

I remember that the senior officials of the White House National Security Council held a press briefing last Friday, accusing China of escalating the situation and using this visit as an excuse.

  Clemens: That's Campbell.

  Ambassador Qin: This is a public release to the media.

  Lin Hai (POLITICO): Ambassador, in Missouri, Pennsylvania and other places in the United States, the "China threat" occupies a considerable part of the political discourse system.

The PLA's reaction to Pelosi's visit to Taiwan will exacerbate this phenomenon.

Are you concerned about the "China threat" occupying the (US) selected topic?

Do you have anything to say to the U.S. Congress, voters, and how should they view China?


  Ambassador Qin: I have been ambassador to the United States for a year, and I feel that I am in a "threat phobia" (of the United States towards China).

China is misunderstood and misjudged as a challenge or even a threat to the United States, as you just said.

Such an important set of bilateral relations between China and the United States is now driven by fear (of the United States toward China) rather than by the shared interests and responsibilities of both countries.

It is not difficult for you to draw this conclusion from the words and deeds of politicians in this country.

But what I will say is that China is not a threat, it is not a challenge.

China's development intention is to make people live a better life.

We have no intention of replacing or undermining America.

We just want people to live a happy life.

We need a peaceful and cooperative external environment, especially with the US, to better focus on domestic construction.

Unfortunately, our intentions were misunderstood.

I hope the US can get rid of "threat phobia" and stop blaming China for all the problems of the US.

China and the US are different, and neither can change the other.

But disagreement is not an excuse for making groundless accusations, nor for those insane and unreasonable words and deeds.

We should not allow differences to take center stage in China-US relations, and should not be used to define China-US relations.

If the Sino-US relationship is handled out of fear of China, it will cause tension between the two countries, and it will continue to be tense.

  Kelly (NPR): In Washington, there's been a lot of discussion about what lessons China should learn from Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Could you answer this question, what has China realized as the war in Ukraine develops?

Do you see similarities or differences with yourself?

  Ambassador Qin: I don't know what lessons the US should learn from the Ukraine crisis.

China is not a direct party to the Ukrainian crisis, neither historically nor now.

Everyone knows the root cause of the Ukrainian crisis.

This crisis is not a crisis between China and Ukraine, and China is not a member of NATO.

So why is there a crisis?

This has complex historical and practical reasons.

Russia's demands cannot be met by China.

China supports peace and has called for a ceasefire from the outset of the crisis, urging all parties to seek a political solution through diplomatic negotiations.

We did not send any weapons and ammunition, but only sent sleeping bags, medicines and other humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

If there is any lesson for the US, NATO or other parties to learn, it is how to achieve security.

A country's pursuit of its own security should not be at the expense of other countries' security, and all countries' legitimate security concerns should be taken seriously.

This is not a zero-sum game, and a Cold War mentality is not the solution to the security problems of today's world.

  Therefore, President Xi Jinping proposed the "Global Security Initiative", calling on all countries to establish a common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security concept.

I hope that all parties to the Ukrainian crisis can finally sit at the negotiating table, find a solution to the current predicament, and jointly negotiate and build a security framework for the future.

  Ignatius (Washington Post): Mr. Ambassador, I would like to ask you about the strategic stability of the United States and China.

I remember you talking about the importance of stability between the two countries at the Aspen Forum.

In November, in a video meeting with President Xi Jinping, President Biden proposed talks on the strategic stability of the two nuclear powers, the United States and China.

But as far as I know, despite what you mentioned in the Aspen Forum and also by some other Chinese officials, the relevant talks have not been substantially advanced.

Now the US-China relationship is obviously tense due to the Taiwan issue, and the situation is dangerous.

Is China ready for dialogue?

Do you expect President Xi Jinping and President Biden to meet this year to discuss this and other issues?

  Ambassador Qin: First of all, I don't know about the possible summit of the heads of state, and I have no relevant information to provide.

In terms of strategic stability, China, of course, attaches great importance to maintaining stable relations with the US.

As members of the "five permanent members" of the UN Security Council, China and the United States share common responsibility for world peace and stability.

We hope to have communication and dialogue with the US side on this.

But strategic stability as we understand it is not only on the military side, but also on a political basis.

It's like a house. To be strong and stable, it needs a solid foundation. The same is true of state-to-state relations.

So what is the foundation of Sino-US relations?

It is the one-China principle and the three Sino-US joint communiqués.

We cannot just talk about strategic stability and ignore the political underpinnings of bilateral relations.

If the political foundation, especially the one-China principle, is eroded and destroyed, the entire edifice of China-US relations will be shaken, which is not good for both countries and the world.

  Beckett (Wall Street Journal): After Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, some cooperation between the United States and China was suspended, such as cooperation in the field of climate.

What do you think the US can do to restart bilateral cooperation?

  Ambassador Qin: Cooperation on climate change?

  Beckett: How can any collaborations that are frozen right now change the status quo?

  Ambassador Qin: China is taking countermeasures.

The US should not be surprised, because before the visit, we have repeatedly warned the US that if Pei goes, it will have serious consequences for the exchanges and cooperation between the two countries.

She still went, then we will do what we say.

We have suspended dialogue, communication and cooperation in some areas, including China-US climate change talks.

Now the US says China is punishing the world by suspending climate change talks.

But the question is, can America represent the world?

  Beckett: Then (the U.S. side) how can the cooperation between the two countries be restarted?

  Ambassador Qin: In my opinion, to restart cooperation, the US should seriously reflect on what it has done on the Taiwan issue, seriously reflect on what is the real one-China principle, and refrain from any actions that will escalate tensions.

Recently, some people in China believe that the United States will take more actions politically and militarily. If this is true, it will cause a new round of tension and China will have to respond again.

  Beckett: What do you think of the US Congressman's visit to Taiwan after (Pelosi's visit to Taiwan)?

  Ambassador Qin: We firmly opposed it from the beginning.

For decades, China has opposed visits by U.S. lawmakers to Taiwan because it violates the one-China principle and the three Sino-U.S. joint communiques, and violates the U.S. commitment not to develop official relations with Taiwan.

Congress is part of the U.S. government, not independent and uncontrollable. Congress is obliged to abide by U.S. foreign policy.

Therefore, we are very dissatisfied with Senator Markey's visit to Taiwan and express our firm opposition.

The approach is provocative and unhelpful.

  Nick Mayer (AP): The U.S. side said it would send warships through the Taiwan Strait, a move they do regularly in the region.

Is this provocation?

How does China respond to this?

  Ambassador Qin: The US has gone too far in this region!

Since 2012, the US has conducted nearly 100 sailings through the Taiwan Strait, which has intensified tensions and fueled the arrogance of the "Taiwan independence" forces.

As you just mentioned, we have noticed that the US military recently stated that they will conduct military exercises or overflight again.

Here I call on my American colleagues to exercise restraint and refrain from escalating tensions.

If the US takes any action that damages China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, China will respond.

  Barron (Defense One): You talked a lot about what the U.S. would do to de-escalate tensions.

But can you talk about what the Chinese side will do to change the American side's view?

As you just said, fear of China is on the rise in the US political discourse.

In fact, FBI Director Christopher Wray said that all 50 U.S. states have espionage cases involving the Chinese, including espionage and commercial theft.

There are indeed debates in the political field, such as how should we view China, whether we can do business with China, and where should we go?

What can China do to convince more Americans that China is not a threat, and they don't have to be afraid of China, because they have heard many different opinions from the US intelligence and security departments.

Also, as the reporter mentioned earlier, they also saw that in Hong Kong, China abolished or forcibly ended the democratic system and imposed the system and will of the mainland.

  Ambassador Qin: You mentioned that the director of the FBI accused China of espionage, which is a typical "China phobia".

China is spying in all 50 US states, do you believe it?

Is there any evidence?

Normal communication should not be mistaken for espionage.

This is a typical "threat phobia", intimidating people, intimidating Chinese people, young people and the Chinese community, and also making Americans afraid to do business or carry out cultural exchanges with China.

These are driven by ideological biases.

  When you ask about Hong Kong, I will say a few more words.

The riots in Hong Kong were not caused by the "one country, two systems" issue. The real reason was that some anti-China forces used human rights and democracy as excuses to manipulate the concept of "one country, two systems" and undermine the stability and prosperity of Hong Kong.

The unrest in Hong Kong is a struggle for secession and anti-separatism.

With the support of external forces, some anti-China forces are creating chaos in Hong Kong and causing trouble for China.

They want "two systems" rather than "one country". Some people prepare British and American flags in Hong Kong, clamoring for "two systems, two systems", demanding "Hong Kong independence" or returning to British colonial rule.

Under such circumstances, the Chinese central government must defend national sovereignty, security and development interests, and safeguard the long-term stability and prosperity of Hong Kong.

The unrest in Hong Kong is a struggle between violence and anti-violence, lawlessness and law enforcement.

Since the turmoil of the Legislative Council amendment in 2019, serious violence, vandalism, arson, obstruction of traffic, and attacks on police and civilians have occurred in Hong Kong.

Some extremists even stormed the Hong Kong Legislative Council building, causing far more damage and danger than the "rushing into Capitol Hill" incident on January 6, which seriously endangered Hong Kong's security, stability, economy, democracy and people's livelihood.

You can search for their atrocity videos on Youtube, and after watching it, you will understand that this has nothing to do with democracy, and it is not a "beautiful landscape" as Pelosi calls it.

Their actions were absolutely criminal and violent.

The United States is investigating and liquidating the incident of "rushing into Capitol Hill" on January 6.

Likewise, Hong Kong cannot tolerate such violent crimes.

  In the face of the turmoil in 2019, the central government decisively implemented the Hong Kong National Security Law, improved the election system for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and implemented the principle of "patriots ruling Hong Kong".

We have taken a series of measures to uphold and improve "one country, two systems".

As a result, Hong Kong has achieved a major transformation from chaos to governance, and "one country, two systems" has returned to the right track.

  I would like to stress that this transformation proves that "one country" is the premise and foundation for the implementation of "two systems", and "two systems" are subordinate and derived from "one country".

Questioning "one country, two systems" is short-sighted.

Those pessimistic arguments about "one country, two systems" are premature and doomed.

We believe that under the "One Country, Two Systems" framework, Hong Kong will enter a new era of vigorous economic and social development and sound governance.

The results of a survey I just saw showed that American businessmen had an 18% increase in confidence in Hong Kong over last year.

  Marlowe (Bloomberg): I was working in Hong Kong until Christmas.

This morning I heard from some of my colleagues at Bloomberg that banks in Hong Kong are now offering hardship grants to encourage people to come to Hong Kong because no one wants to go to Hong Kong because of the "zero out" policy.

Can you talk about how long these measures will be in place?

I'm not just talking about Hong Kong, but China as a whole.

We saw Condoleezza Rice appear to be mocking China's "zero out" policy at the Aspen Forum.

The policies are starting to take a toll on China's political reputation.

China imposes all kinds of restrictions on the people, and no one wants to imitate China.

How long do you think these "zeroing" measures will continue?

Do you think this has any negative impact on China's position and connectivity in Asia and the world?

  Ambassador Qin: I don't understand why Rice is mocking China's response to the COVID-19 outbreak.

As far as the epidemic is concerned, the United States has the highest number of infections and deaths in the world.

Why does she laugh at China?

Considering China's size and population, our anti-epidemic work has been successful and great.

You can see that the number of infections and deaths in China is very low, and the Chinese economy is recovering, the recovery is strong.

This is because the Chinese government and the Communist Party of China adhere to the people-centered approach, and have been practicing their original aspirations and missions in the fight against the epidemic, serving the people wholeheartedly.

Our "dynamic clearing" policy is dynamic, not rigid, and we will adjust the policy according to the actual situation, especially the extent of the spread of the epidemic.

This policy has protected people's lives and health, stabilized China's economic development, and maintained the stability of global production and supply chains.

If the epidemic in China is serious, what will the consequences be?

In difficult times, China is still manufacturing and providing diversified products to countries around the world, including the United States.

Of course, the epidemic has made travel and people's lives very difficult, and this is the same in other countries.

This is understandable.

China is no exception.

So we hope that the epidemic will ease as soon as possible, people can return to normal life, and economic activity and travel can resume.

China and the United States need more interaction to enhance mutual understanding between the two peoples.

  Yiwen Ou (The New Yorker): Can I ask one more question about the timetable for reunification of Taiwan?

President Xi Jinping has said that this problem cannot be passed down from generation to generation.

I'm curious if what's happened in the past year or two, the state of the US-China relationship, or the wider world situation, has accelerated this timeline?

It has been reported recently that some people in the United States have assessed that China's reunification process may be speeding up, is that true?

  Ambassador Qin: I don't know any specific timetable.

But I know that we have the desire and the prospect of a peaceful reunification.

This is the wish of more than 1.4 billion Chinese people.

We wrote in the white paper titled "Taiwan Issue and China's Unification in the New Era" recently that the Taiwan issue arose out of national weakness and chaos, and will surely be resolved with the rejuvenation of the nation.

That's the outlook, but I don't know what the timeline is.

I think some people are overly nervous about it, there's a lot of speculation, and it's all baseless.

  Ou Yiwen: In the process of unification, how does China expect the international community to react?

Is it expected that the international community will accept this progress or reject it?

Is China ready to face the consequences?

  Ambassador Qin: What consequences do you mean?

  Ou Yiwen: For example, being isolated by other countries or withdrawn by multinational companies.

  Ambassador Qin: Why are they isolating China?

  Rokin: If the Chinese attack them.

  Ambassador Qin: This assumption does not exist.

First of all, Taiwan is a part of China, and the Taiwan issue is purely China's internal affairs, which brooks no interference from any external forces.

Secondly, as I mentioned earlier, we will continue to strive for peaceful reunification with the utmost sincerity and best efforts.

Non-peaceful means will only be adopted under the fact that Taiwan's secession from China is caused by the interference of "Taiwan independence" separatist forces and external forces.

In any case, this is purely China's internal affairs.

  You mentioned the international community. 181 countries have established diplomatic relations with China based on the one-China principle.

The vast majority of countries in the international community support and accept the one-China principle.

On the issue of Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, more than 170 countries (and international organizations) around the world have expressed strong support for upholding the one-China principle, accounting for 80% of the world's population.

China abides by international law and basic norms governing international relations.

Why do other countries criticize or isolate China because of China's internal affairs?

This has no legal and factual basis.

  Martin (Reuters): I would like to ask a question about the US crossing the Taiwan Strait.

We believe that the US will continue to sell arms to Taiwan, just like in the past.

But in the post-Pelosi era, will China respond more forcefully than in previous years?

  Ambassador Qin: In the past few years, the US has sold a lot of weapons to Taiwan in violation of the three Sino-US joint communiqués, especially the August 17 Communiqué signed on August 17, 1982.

Tomorrow is the 40th anniversary of the signing of the August 17 Communiqué.

We need to look back at history, and there are people who have no interest in history and law right now, and that's how we got here.

Let me read the original text of the communiqué here, "The U.S. government declares that it does not seek to implement a policy of long-term arms sales to Taiwan, and that the weapons it sells to Taiwan will not exceed, in performance and quantity, those supplied in recent years after the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States. level, it is prepared to gradually reduce its arms sales to Taiwan, and lead to a final settlement after a period of time." 40 years later, has the US solved this problem?


Instead of seeing the U.S. fulfilling its promises, we see that the U.S. continues to sell weapons to Taiwan, with larger quantities and more advanced capabilities.

These are all written in black and white in international documents, but the US has stepped back from its own commitments.

Of course, we must strongly oppose the US arms sales to Taiwan. This is the US side changing the status quo, creating tension and obstructing our efforts to achieve peaceful reunification.

  Basil (AXIOS): I have another question about one country, two systems. You said that the Chinese people overwhelmingly have a strong desire for reunification.

Do you accept the poll's result that the Taiwanese people overwhelmingly do not want to be reunified by the mainland, although China intends to change this situation?

What do you think about this?

  Ambassador Qin: What I want to stress is that no matter how different the political systems of the mainland and Taiwan are, the historical fact that both sides of the strait belong to one China has never changed and will not change, and the fact that both sides of the strait are Chinese has never changed and will not change.

Compatriots on both sides of the strait share the same origin, have the same history and culture, and share a common national identity.

Of course, we also fully recognize that Taiwan has been separated from the motherland for decades, fully understand the (differences) in the political and social systems between Taiwan and the mainland, and fully understand the feelings of the Chinese compatriots on the island of Taiwan.

Therefore, we have formulated the basic policy of "one country, two systems", which is the most inclusive plan, and fully respects the differences between the systems of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, the reality and the feelings of the people.

Can you imagine that the United States could allow a completely different political and social system to exist in one part of the country?

There are differences between the United States federal and local, but still follow a set of political and social systems.

On the Taiwan issue, we have maintained sufficient patience and goodwill towards peaceful reunification.

After reunification, Taiwan's current political system can be retained.

"Two systems" itself is democracy.

  Basil: This leads me to my next question.

You said that "one country, two systems" is still being implemented in Hong Kong.

  Ambassador Qin: Yes.

  Basil: So is Beijing deciding the "two systems", or is it Taiwan?

In the case of Hong Kong, it is clear that Beijing defines "two systems".

  Ambassador Qin: The solution to Taiwan's future system will be negotiated through equal consultation between people on both sides of the strait. This is a democratic process.

On the basis of the one-China principle, the interests and concerns of the Taiwanese people will be fully considered and taken care of.

When we talk about "one country, two systems", please don't forget that "one country" is the basis and premise, and it is not allowed to use "two systems" to negate the basis and premise of "one country".

Without "one country", how can there be "two systems"?

  Marlowe (Bloomberg): Do you think the practice of "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong is helpful for the implementation of "two systems"?

Because Hong Kong's national security law was implemented hastily, even the SAR chief executive and other senior officials did not see the law before it was implemented.

For those of us who have lived in Hong Kong, seeing Taiwanese people change their minds about mainland China because of what happened in Hong Kong.

I think a lot of Taiwanese who saw what happened in Hong Kong would say, we don't want to go through the same experience.

Do you think a law similar to the Hong Kong National Security Law will apply to Taiwan in the future?

  Ambassador Qin: Hong Kong was once under British colonial rule for 100 years. People naturally need time to adapt to the new reality of Hong Kong's return to the motherland.

It has been 25 years since Hong Kong returned to the motherland.

Over the past 25 years, "One Country, Two Systems" has been generally successful in Hong Kong, although it has experienced some ups and downs, especially the chaos three years ago.

But we have learned from our experience and improved it.

We are constantly improving "one country, two systems" to ensure the long-term stability of Hong Kong.

Our successful practice of "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong will help Taiwan compatriots better understand "one country, two systems" and better think about the future.

  Politico: Your response is basically the same as China's talking points, and it seems that you didn't really answer the question.

This is standard diplomatic rhetoric.

I'm just curious, as a Chinese diplomat, do you really feel empowered?

Do you think the Chinese Foreign Ministry holds power in the Chinese political system?

Where do you think China's diplomacy will go in the next few years?

Because if the U.S. and China collide or become adversaries, or something else, what important role will diplomacy play?

Can you talk about the prospects of Chinese diplomacy?

  Ambassador Qin: First of all, I am the Chinese ambassador, not a freelance writer (laughs).

I represent the position of the Chinese government and the will of the Chinese people.

I think what I said today is actually helpful.

I didn't spread lies or false information, and I didn't scare people.

I'm just telling you the facts and the truth, and I'm not scripting it. I believe everyone here can hear it clearly.

On hot-spot issues, of course, the Chinese side has some key points to make, which is the same as that of officials from the White House and the State Department.

But I made an elaboration on China's policy.

If you conclude that what I'm talking about today is all diplomatic rhetoric, then I'm wasting my time.

I sincerely hope that everyone here today finds this conversation necessary and useful.

In my opinion, I believe enough information has been provided today.

  The goal of China's diplomacy is to get along well with other countries in the world and better safeguard China's interests.

At the same time, China's diplomacy is also committed to maintaining global peace and security and promoting common development.

My colleagues and I would like to build bridges between the Chinese and American people.

We are not here to chat or preach.

At this difficult time, I would like to listen to the voice of the American people, communicate with people from all walks of life, and understand their views.

For example: Why is the Sino-US relationship going downhill now?

What can we do to get out of the current predicament?

Only then can the Sino-US relationship be stable and fruitful, ensuring that the bilateral relationship is not clouded by fear, but driven by common interests.

I need the wisdom and advice of the American people to digest and report to Beijing.

This is my role: a bridge, a listener, and a helper.

  Tutsi: So please be clear, you will give each of us the opportunity to interview individually at some point in the future.

You want to be a bridge and share our wisdom, of course I'm not saying any of us can give you advice, but maybe...

  Ambassador Qin: Welcome anytime.

  Clemens: Ambassador, many Republicans applaud Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, and many expect Republicans to take control of the House of Representatives after the next election.

You're likely to see another Republican Speaker of the House coming to Taiwan soon, maybe Kevin McCarthy, maybe another leader.

How will China respond to the new House Speaker's visit to Taiwan?

  Ambassador Qin: I noticed that there are no Republicans in Pelosi's visit to Taiwan.

Although as you mentioned, they support Pei's visit.

China has always firmly opposed the visit of US congressmen to Taiwan.

The Speaker of the House of Representatives is not an ordinary person, and his identity is very sensitive and important.

The Speaker's visit to Taiwan violated the US commitment to maintain unofficial relations with Taiwan.

But I can't answer hypothetical questions, so let's wait and see.

China will definitely take decisive action to resolutely defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

I hope Pelosi will be the last Speaker of the House of Representatives to visit Taiwan.

  Reporters: Thank you, Ambassador.