Foreign Ministry's response to "whether Chinese leaders will participate in the APEC summit in the United States?"

6 days ago • 7 pageviews

Do Chinese leaders plan to participate in this year's APEC summit in the United States? Foreign Ministry response )

On September 18, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning held a regular press conference. Bloomberg asked whether Chinese leaders plan to participate in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in the United States in November this year?


Foreign Ministry spokesman Mao Ning

Mao Ning said: First of all, China attaches great importance to the role of APEC as an important multilateral economic cooperation mechanism, and we are willing to work with all parties to promote positive results at this year's meeting.

"Regarding the situation of China's participation, if there is news, we will release it in real time." Mao Ning said.

Further reading:

Niu playing the piano: The United States banned Li Jiachao from attending the APEC summit The Chinese side is very angry

Comics spoof the American Statue of Liberty

The United States is playing hooligan again, and the Chinese side is very angry.

Looking at the statement made by the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman on 28 July, there is this sentence: "The Chinese side expresses strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition to this, and has lodged solemn representations."

Strongly dissatisfied with what? Resolutely against what? What is solemn negotiation?

As the host of APEC this year, the United States actually ignored the rules written in black and white and prevented our Hong Kong chief executive Lee Ka-chiu from attending the meeting in San Francisco.

It is important to know that the APEC rules are clearly written, and as an APEC member that hosts the meeting once a year, it is the responsibility to send invitations to all APEC members 8 weeks before the leaders' meeting.

It is your responsibility and obligation as a host to send out invitations.

Li Jiachao Infographic

But when it is the turn of the United States, there will be moths.

Interestingly, the U.S. attitude has been wavering.

On February 9 this year, US Deputy Secretary of State Sherman also confirmed in a statement to Congress that he would invite Li Jiachao to attend the APEC meeting. According to Sherman, Li's presence is important for "promoting regional economic dialogue and the joint efforts of China and the United States to maintain global macroeconomic stability."

However, under the clamor of some anti-China lawmakers, according to the disclosure of the Washington Post, the United States has decided not to invite Li Jiachao to participate in the meeting.

The Washington Post also mentioned that at this time, when Sino-US tensions are "slightly thawing", this decision by the United States may further affect the direction of relations between the two countries.

China is naturally strongly dissatisfied. Liu Pengyu, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in the United States, responded that China "strongly opposes" the US plan not to invite Li Jiachao to the meeting, which "violates APEC rules and violates the commitments of the US side."

At the Foreign Ministry's press conference on July 28, spokesman Mao Ning also said: As we all know, APEC hosts have the responsibility and obligation to allow all member representatives to participate in the meeting smoothly. This move by the US side is a mistake compounded by a mistake, a flagrant violation of APEC rules, and a serious violation of the commitment of the US side. China expresses strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition to this and has lodged solemn representations.

Where are the rules? Where is the promise?

But the United States is playing hooligans.

American "hooliganism"

This is certainly not the first time the United States has played hooligans.

Don't forget that the United Nations headquarters is in New York, USA, and in April this year, Russia took over the rotating presidency of the Security Council, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov went to New York to preside over the meeting. But according to Russia, the United States deliberately made it difficult until the Russian delegation boarded the plane and departed, and none of the Russian journalists accompanying him got a visa to the United States.

Without a visa, you can't go to New York. So that time, when the Russian foreign minister went to the United Nations to preside over the Security Council meeting, he could not bring an accompanying reporter.

So angry that Russia lodged a strong protest with the United States. So much so that when then asked if it was the right time to move the UN headquarters out of New York, Lavrov replied particularly bluntly: "I think it's good."

Does the United States only give black hands to Chinese and Russian officials?

Nor is it.

Remember that two years ago, Bensouda, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, announced that he would investigate the Americans for war crimes. Because of the evidence that between 2003 and 2004 U.S. military and intelligence agents were suspected of torture, ill-treatment, violations of personal dignity, rape and sexual violence against detainees "...

If you change to investigate the attitude of Russia, the United States, you will definitely know.

But now that the United States is actually investigated, this is too old to break ground, and the United States is furious.

Poor female prosecutor Bensouda was immediately revoked by the US government.

Moreover, the United States also announced that it will impose comprehensive sanctions on Bensouda, and not only you, but also your family will not want to come to the United States; Moreover, you are not allowed to use US dollars in the future; Anyone who helps you will be sanctioned.

This brings up another legal question, what if Bensouda is going to report to the United Nations?

I remember that UN Secretary-General Guterres was anxious at that time, expressed great concern about the incident, and reminded the United States that it must abide by the agreement signed with the United Nations, and the people of the International Criminal Court are allowed to travel to the United Nations headquarters in New York.

However, the United States said that if it did not allow it, it would not allow it, not only did it not allow it, but I remember that the US Attorney General also said that the ICC is too corrupt, and the US Department of Justice "has received credible materials on long-term financial corruption and malfeasance in the relevant prosecutor's office", and the United States expressed serious concern.

If you want to investigate the United States, we will investigate you first!

Trump is under investigation

What do you think in the end?

It's still three points.

First, the United States is used to playing hooligans.

What rules? What promise? For America, rules are rules for you, and I promise that I can change them at will.

The reason is always cheerful, it is that the other party has problems, the United States wants to replace Skywalk, and the United States wants sanctions.

Of course, the United States also knows that there are rules, but it is a hooliganism, and it does not say that it will not give a visa, or it is to take a delay, and there is no way to drag it until you can.

Therefore, to Lavrov, the United States is quite polite, otherwise, next time even you will not be allowed to enter.

Also, what happened to the war crimes investigation of the Americans?

Naturally, it doesn't work. Because it's very simple, the judges and prosecutors of the International Criminal Court are also afraid, if the investigation continues, everyone may be arrested by the United States and imprisoned...

Second, what about the world?

Frankly, no way. After all, the United States is the only superpower in the world, and the United States plays hooligans, and many countries dare not speak out.

China is certainly strongly dissatisfied and resolutely opposed to refusing Li Jiachao's participation in the meeting, and will certainly lodge solemn representations. But will the United States correct its mistakes?

That's great to think of the United States.

I always feel that the United States is a very difficult country, there is a lot to learn from us, and we must acknowledge this. But the United States plays hooligans, if you don't learn it, you really can't learn it.

It is no wonder that after the "attack on Capitol Hill" incident in the United States two years ago, a Middle Eastern diplomat said faintly: If the United States sees what the United States is doing to the United States, the United States will definitely invade the United States and liberate the United States from the tyranny of the United States.

Thirdly, the United Nations, you cannot be so weak.

Frankly speaking, on the issue of playing hooligans against the United States, the United Nations is too weak and the International Criminal Court is too dense, and they have been bullied by the United States to the head, and they dare not even say a word of strong protest.

Of course, the UN is also aggrieved, after all, on the territory of the United States, it depends on the face of the United States ...

But where is international morality? After all, the United Nations is not the United Nations of the United States.

And, the International Criminal Court, what about your waist pole? Did the Americans commit war crimes?

This brings up another question, if the United States continues to play like this, will it still come to the United States for meetings in the future? Is the United Nations going to move from New York?

Anyway, on the issue of the UN move, Russia is certainly optimistic. At least go to other countries, and you will definitely not encounter such visa difficulties.

So where to move?

Finally, weakly ask: Is there still a place in Xiong'an?