Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng said here on Sunday (May 11) that the China-U.S. high-level meeting on economic and trade affairs were in-depth, candid and constructive.
He, the Chinese lead person for China-U.S. economic and trade affairs, made the remarks when briefing the press following the high-level meeting with the U.S. side.
The senior Chinese official said the two sides have reached a series of major consensuses, adding that China and the United States have also agreed to establish an economic and trade consultation mechanism.
China and the United States, He said, will finalize relevant details as soon as possible and release on Monday a joint statement reached during the talks.
He noted that under the current circumstances, the meeting was closely watched by the international community.
Through joint efforts of both sides, the talks were fruitful, said He, adding that it is an important step towards resolving differences through equal dialogue and consultation, and has laid the foundation and created conditions for further bridging differences and deepening cooperation.
Economic and trade relations between China and the United States are not only of great significance to the two countries but also have an important impact on the stability and development of the global economy, said He.
China is ready to work with the United States to actively implement the consensus reached by the two heads of state during their phone call on Jan. 17, He added.
He also called on the two sides to follow a practical attitude for solving problems, carry out candid dialogues and equal consultations, manage differences, explore cooperation potential, extend the list of cooperation list, and make the pie of cooperation bigger, so as to push for new development in China-U.S. economic and trade relations, and inject more certainty and stability into the world economy.
(Source: Xinhua)
Related News:
Watch This | After ceasefire agreement, Pakistani PM thanks China in national address
US considers special status for Greenland amid' strategic competition'
Comment