♪ THEME MUSIC ♪ >>GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES.

FROM OUR HOME STUDIOS I'M DAVID DUMKE.

>>AND I'M KATIE CORONADO.

WELCOME.

>>TODAY WE ARE JOINED BY FRANCISCO SANCHEZ, WHO WAS UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR TRADE DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AND HAS ALSO HELD SENIOR POSITIONS IN THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION.

WELCOME TO THE SHOW FRANCISCO.

>>THANK YOU DAVID.

IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE WITH YOU AND KATIE.

>>FRANCISCO, FOR OUR AUDIENCE HERE IN CENTRAL FLORIDA, IF YOU CAN GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON YOUR EXPERIENCE AND TRADE AND IN GENERAL THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

>>SURE.

WELL FIRST I SHOULD SAY I'M A NATIVE FLORIDIAN AND I CURRENTLY DIVIDE MY TIME BETWEEN TAMPA AND WASHINGTON DC.

AND I GOT MY START IN PUBLIC SERVICE WORKING FOR THEN GOVERNOR BOB GRAHAM.

AND MY FIRST ROLE IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE WAS PROMOTING A PROGRAM CALLED THE CARIBBEAN BASIN INITIATIVE, ALSO KNOWN AS THE CBI.

AND YEARS LATER I WOULD GO ON TO WORK WITH THE HARVARD NEGOTIATION PROJECT.

AND IN THAT WORK I DID A LOT OF WORK IN LATIN AMERICA.

IN ADDITION TO THE SKILLS TRAINING IN NEGOTIATION AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION I WORKED ON THINGS LIKE BORDER DISPUTES BETWEEN PERU AND ECUADOR AND OTHER, BOTH BUSINESS AND POLITICAL, CONFLICTS THROUGHOUT LATIN AMERICA.

AND IT WAS THAT WORK THAT CAUGHT THE ATTENTION OF THE WHITE HOUSE WHERE I WENT TO WORK AS THE CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE THEN SPECIAL ENVOY TO THE AMERICA'S UNDER BILL CLINTON.

AND SERVED IN THAT ROLE FOR A LITTLE OVER A YEAR.

AND THEN PRESIDENT CLINTON NAMED ME ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION FOR AVIATION AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS.

IT'S A JOB THAT REQUIRED OVERSEEING THE NEGOTIATION OF AVIATION AGREEMENTS AROUND THE WORLD.

AND THEN I LEFT WASHINGTON FOR A WHILE, CAME HOME, AND EVENTUALLY MADE MY WAY INTO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION.

I WAS NAMED A US UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR TRADE WHERE I RAN THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION.

AND IN THAT ROLE I HELPED SET TRADE POLICY ALONG WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF THE ADMINISTRATION, PEOPLE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE US TRADE REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT, FROM TREASURY, A NUMBER OF AGENCIES COME TOGETHER TO DEVELOP TRADE POLICY.

AND I ALSO RAN THE US FOREIGN COMMERCIAL SERVICE, WHICH IS A SUPPORT FOR AMERICAN BUSINESS WHO WANTS TO DO INTERNATIONAL TRADE.

WE HAVE OFFICES IN 72 COUNTRIES AND WE HELP BUSINESSES THAT MAY HAVE 10 EMPLOYEES AND WE HELP BOEING AIRCRAFT AND EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN.

SO THAT'S KIND OF A SNAPSHOT IF YOU WILL KATIE OF MY PUBLIC SERVICE CAREER.

>>THANK YOU.

>>WELL THERE'S A LOT IN THERE TO UNPACK.

AND I KNOW WE WANT TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT LATIN AMERICA, BUT I WANTED TO START WITH TRADE.

WE HAVE A NEW ADMINISTRATION IN WASHINGTON AND THIS ADMINISTRATION COMES AFTER THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION REALLY WAS PERCEIVED AS PROTECTIONIST AND AGAINST FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS, WHICH YOU WORKED ON A GOOD PORTION OF YOUR PUBLIC CAREER.

SO WHERE ARE WE GOING WITH TRADE RIGHT NOW?

>>I THINK TRADE POLICY IS EVOLVING AND PRESIDENT TRUMP CLEARLY TOOK A WHAT I WOULD DESCRIBE AS A PROTECTIONIST BENT.

BUT IN MANY WAYS I THINK HE WAS ALSO MOVING IN THE DIRECTION OF PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF A FREE TRADE.

AND THAT BEING THAT NOT EVERYBODY WAS BENEFITING FROM FREE TRADE, THAT SOME COUNTRIES WOULD BE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF AMERICAN BUSINESSES AND THEREFORE AMERICAN WORKERS.

AND SO I THINK THAT WHAT YOU SAW DURING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WAS A PROTECTIONIST POLICY, BUT THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING BIGGER GOING ON.

AND I THINK THAT THAT SENTIMENT THAT RETRADE HAS NOT YIELDED THE BENEFITS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD HAVE HOPED OR EXPECTED, THAT SENTIMENT IS STILL CARRYING FORWARD.

SO IT MAY SURPRISE MANY PEOPLE THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE A RADICAL SHIFT IN TRADE POLICY FROM TRUMP TO BIDEN.

I THINK WHAT YOU WILL SEE THOUGH IS A MORE PROCESS INVOLVED IN DECISION MAKING.

IT SEEMED LIKE PRESIDENT TRUMP WOULD SEND OUT A TWEET ONE MORNING AND THAT BECAME POLICY.

AND I THINK WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS YOU'LL SEE MORE OF THE FEDERAL AGENCIES ENGAGED AND NOT KNEE JERK REACTIONS.

BUT THE OVERALL POLICY, I THINK THERE REALLY HAS BEEN A SHIFT TOWARD BEING A LITTLE MORE CAUTIOUS AND BEING NOT SO EMBRACING IF YOU WILL OF A PURE FREE TRADE POLICY.

>>FRANCISCO CAN YOU TELL US WHAT YOU THINK WILL HAPPEN WITH COUNTRIES THAT CURRENTLY HAVE SANCTIONS SUCH AS IRAN AND CUBA?

>>WELL I THINK FIRST I HAVE TO TURN TO PROCESS.

I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ANY DRAMATIC SHIFTS BECAUSE PRESIDENT BIDEN REALLY DOES BELIEVE IN USING THE FULL FORCE OF HIS ADMINISTRATION TO GIVE HIM THE BEST ADVICE ON WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

HE ALSO WANTS TO CONFER WITH STAKEHOLDERS, STAKEHOLDERS BOTH WITHIN THE UNITED STATES AS WELL AS ALLIES WHO WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH US.

SO IN EACH ONE OF THOSE THAT YOU MENTIONED, WHETHER IT BE CUBA, WHETHER IT BE IRAN, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A VERY RIGOROUS PUBLIC POLICY REVIEW WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION AND A LOT OF CONSULTATION WITH ALLIES.

YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN SECRETARY BLINKEN IN CONSTANT CONTACT WITH OUR ALLIES.

AND I THINK THIS HAS TWO PURPOSES.

ONE IS TO TALK ABOUT SPECIFIC POLICIES, SOME IN EUROPE COULD VERY WELL BE ABOUT IRAN, BUT ALSO TO REASSURE OUR ALLIES THAT WE WANT TO WORK WITH THEM, THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO IT ALONE, THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE STRENGTH IN NUMBERS WHEN WE WANT TO TRY TO AFFECT PUBLIC POLICY, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO FOREIGN POLICY.

BUT I GUESS, KATIE, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO SAY WE HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE AND LET THESE CONSULTATIONS, LET THIS PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS PLAY OUT BEFORE WE CAN REALLY GIVE ANY KIND OF DEFINITIVE ANSWER ON WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH IRAN, CUBA OR OTHER COUNTRIES.

>>YOU MENTIONED ABOUT THE PERCEPTIONS OF TRADE AND HOW PEOPLE HAD KIND OF TIRED OF THE IDEA OF FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS.

HAVE FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS DELIVERED FOR AMERICANS IN TERMS OF ECONOMICS?

>>THE PUBLIC VIEW OF FREE TRADE IS PROBABLY A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED AND I SHOULD BE A LITTLE MORE NUANCED BECAUSE THE PUBLIC IS OF TWO MINDS ON FREE TRADE.

I DO BELIEVE THE PUBLIC HAS SEEN BENEFITS FROM FREE TRADE.

YOU SEE IT IN JOBS THAT ARE CREATED.

ABOUT 13% OF OUR GDP COMES FROM TRADE RELATED ACTIVITIES.

THAT'S NOT AN INSIGNIFICANT AMOUNT, WHICH MEANS THAT THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF JOBS THAT ARE SUPPORTED BY FREE TRADE.

BUT YOU ALSO SEE THEM WHEN YOU GO INTO A STORE TO BUY CLOTHING OR TO BUY OTHER PRODUCTS.

AND BECAUSE OF FREE TRADE A LOT OF THOSE PRODUCTS ARE GOING TO BE LESS COSTLY TO THE AMERICAN CONSUMER.

SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF WAYS WHERE AMERICANS HAVE DIRECTLY BENEFITED AND I THINK THEY GET IT.

BUT I THINK THEY ALSO BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE COUNTRIES THAT GAME THE SYSTEM AND DON'T PLAY BY THE RULE.

AND THAT'S CERTAINLY BEEN THE CASE WITH CHINA, FOR EXAMPLE, WHO WOULD ARGUE THAT MAYBE THEY DON'T LIKE THE RULES AND MAYBE THEY WANT TO CHANGE THEM.

FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, WELL, BUT THESE ARE THE RULES AND YOU'RE NOT PLAYING BY THEM.

AND SO I THINK THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU SEE THE PUBLIC BEING FRUSTRATED WITH FREE TRADE, IT HAS MORE TO DO WITH CERTAIN COUNTRIES THAT THEY FEEL ARE NOT PLAYING FAIR.

>>FRANCISCO, WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT INCENTIVE THAT IS IN PLACE OR THAT YOU MAYBE SEE HAPPENING WITH THIS ADMINISTRATION?

>>A COUPLE OF THINGS.

THE IDEA BEHIND FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS IS TO REDUCE BOTH TARIFF AND NON-TARIFF BARRIERS, THAT IS TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR AMERICAN BUSINESSES TO SELL THEIR PRODUCTS OR SERVICES ABROAD WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY A HEAVY TARIFF WHEN THEY GET THEIR PRODUCT TO ANOTHER COUNTRY OR PROVIDE A SERVICE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY.

AND ALSO NOT TO BE BURDENED WITH NON-TARIFF BARRIERS BECAUSE A LOT OF COUNTRIES WILL GAME THE SYSTEM IF YOU WILL BY CREATING BARRIERS THAT THEY MIGHT PUT IT UNDER THE GUISE OF PUBLIC HEALTH OR PUBLIC SAFETY WHEN IN FACT THAT IT REALLY HAS LITTLE TO DO WITH PROTECTING THE PUBLIC AND REALLY USING IT JUST TO MAKE IT HARDER FOR A FOREIGN GOOD TO BE SOLD THERE.

SO FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS HAVE THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF REDUCING BOTH THOSE TARIFFS AND NON-TARIFF BARRIERS.

AND I'D SAY THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD INCENTIVE AND AMERICAN BUSINESSES AS WELL AS AMERICAN WORKERS HAVE BENEFITED WITH SALES MORE CLOSE TO HOME.

CANADA AND MEXICO.

THE FREE TRADE AGREEMENT THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THOSE TWO COUNTRIES FOR MORE THAN 25 YEARS NOW AND RECENTLY HAS BEEN UPDATED WITH WHAT IS NOW CALLED THE USMCA.

A LOT OF AMERICAN COMPANIES AND AMERICAN WORKERS HAVE BENEFITED FROM TRADE AS A RESULT OF THOSE FREE TRADE BARRIERS.

AND THEN SOMETHING MORE TACTICAL KATIE IS SOMETHING CALLED THE EXIM BANK.

AND SO WE HAVE A FORM OF FINANCING EXPORTS, SOMETIMES CONVENTIONAL BANKS ARE A LITTLE HESITANT TO FINANCE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS.

THE RISK PROFILE IS TOO HIGH FOR A LOT OF CONVENTIONAL BANKS.

SO EXIM BANK HELPS FINANCE EXPORTS THAT MIGHT NOT OTHERWISE RECEIVE FINANCING.

AND THAT REALLY HELPS THE FLOW OF GOODS AND THE CREATION OF JOBS.

SO THAT'S AT BOTH THE MACRO LEVEL WITH THE FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS AS WELL AS SOMETHING, A TOOL THAT'S VERY SPECIFIC, THAT HELPS AMERICANS.

AND THEN FINALLY, WHAT I USED TO RUN, THE FOREIGN COMMERCIAL SERVICE.

WE LITERALLY HAVE HUNDREDS OF TRADE SPECIALISTS AROUND THE WORLD AND THEIR JOB IS IF YOU WANT TO SELL SOMETHING TO GERMANY, WE HAVE AN OFFICE OR MULTIPLE OFFICES IN GERMANY WITH TRADE SPECIALISTS AND THEY CAN HELP YOU IDENTIFY POTENTIAL AGENTS IF YOU NEED A LOCAL AGENT, POTENTIAL BUYERS, THEY CAN HELP YOU WITH SOME INITIAL DUE DILIGENCE, THEY CAN TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT OF WHERE YOU CAN LEARN ABOUT LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT APPLY TO YOUR PRODUCTS OR SERVICES.

AND SO THIS IS ANOTHER SERVICE THAT THE US GOVERNMENT PROVIDES TO HELP AMERICAN BUSINESSES SELL THEIR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES ABROAD.

>>TRADE IS NOT JUST A TOOL FOR ECONOMICS, IT'S ALSO A TOOL OF POLICY.

SO I'D LIKE YOU TO EXPLAIN A LITTLE ABOUT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SANCTIONS, NUMBER ONE, AND WHETHER TRADE ACTUALLY CAN BE A TOOL TO GET OTHER POLICY GAINS.

>>WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL AS A GOVERNMENT, AS THE US GOVERNMENT, IN USING TRADE FOR PURELY POLITICAL PURPOSES BECAUSE IT CAN BACKFIRE ON US.

TRADE HAS LARGELY BEEN ABOUT TRYING TO STRENGTHEN OUR OWN ECONOMY AND IF YOU LOOK OVER THE YEARS, PROMOTING FREE TRADE AND PROMOTING A RULES BASED APPROACH TO TRADE, THE WTO, AND TRYING TO GET AS MANY COUNTRIES TO FOLLOW THOSE RULES HAS BEEN REALLY QUITE HELPFUL TO THE UNITED STATES.

WHEN YOU START TRYING TO USE TRADE AND HURT ANOTHER COUNTRY ECONOMICALLY WITH TRADE, MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO END UP HURTING AMERICAN COMPANIES AND AMERICAN WORKERS IN THE PROCESS.

SO I THINK YOU NEED TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS WITH THAT.

AND I THINK THAT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION WILL BE CAUTIOUS.

ECONOMIC SANCTIONS HAVE BEEN APPLIED, BUT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN FOR ECONOMIC MEANS.

THEY LARGELY HAVE BEEN TO PUNISH A COUNTRY OR A LEADER WHO HAS DONE SOMETHING THAT WE BELIEVE IS WRONG, IS INAPPROPRIATE, AND WE SHOULD NOT STAND IDLY BY WITHOUT DOING THAT.

THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION RECENTLY IMPOSED SANCTIONS ON CERTAIN PEOPLE AND COMPANIES OF RUSSIA FOR RUSSIAN HACKING OR THE POISONING OF POLITICAL OPPONENTS.

AND THEY MAY IMPOSE MORE IF ONE OF PUTIN'S CHIEF POLITICAL ADVERSARIES WHO'S CURRENTLY IN PRISON ENDS UP DYING THERE.

BUT I THINK YOU NEED TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS USING TRADE FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES BECAUSE IT CAN BACKFIRE ON OUR ECONOMY AND WE DON'T WANT THAT.

>>SURE.

>>THAT'S A REALLY GOOD TRANSITION TO MY NEXT QUESTION.

WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON THE US EMBARGO AGAINST CUBA AND HOW DO YOU SEE THAT EITHER CHANGING OR STAYING THE SAME UNDER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION?

>>AS SOMEONE WHO GREW UP IN FLORIDA, AND ALTHOUGH I'M NOT OF CUBAN DESCENT, I HAVE A LOT OF CUBAN FRIENDS, I HAVE A LOT OF TIES TO CUBAN PEOPLE, IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING FOR ME TO SEE WHAT'S HAPPENED ON THAT ISLAND FOR MORE THAN 60 YEARS.

AND THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT IN CUBA DOES NOT DO ITSELF OR ITS PEOPLE ANY FAVORS.

HAVING SAID THAT, THE OVERALL POLICY OF HAVING AN EMBARGO OF NOT HAVING RELATIONS WITH CUBA HAS HAD ITS PURPOSE RESTORING DEMOCRACY, RESPECTING HUMAN RIGHTS, RESPECTING PROPERTY RIGHTS.

THOSE ARE THREE POLICY OBJECTIVES OF US POLICY TOWARD CUBA.

AND I WOULD SAY WE'VE FAILED PRETTY MISERABLY IN MOVING THE NEEDLE IN ANY ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES.

THERE'S STILL POLITICAL PRISONERS IN CUBA.

THERE'S STILL FROM MY PERSPECTIVE A LACK OF RESPECT OF PROPERTY RIGHTS.

AND I DON'T REALLY SEE MUCH EVIDENCE OF DEMOCRACY TO SPEAK OF.

SO I KIND OF ADHERE TO THE ADAGE THAT THE DEFINITION OF INSANITY IS DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND EXPECTING A DIFFERENT RESULT.

AND I THINK THAT THE POLICIES OF AN EMBARGO, OF HAVING AN ARMS LENGTH, OR NOT ARMS LENGTH, HAVING NO REAL DIPLOMATIC CONNECTION TO CUBA HASN'T WORKED.

AND SO IT WOULD BE MY HOPE THAT WE TRY OTHER THINGS.

AND THERE HAVE BEEN MILD ATTEMPTS OVER THE YEARS.

THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION HAD PEOPLE TO PEOPLE POLICY THAT ENCOURAGED CULTURAL, RELIGIOUS, ATHLETIC VISITS BY US CITIZENS AND BY CUBAN CITIZENS HERE TO THE UNITED STATES.

I THINK WE NEED TO BE MORE ROBUST THAN THAT.

AND SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A QUICK CHANGE BECAUSE I SUSPECT, AS I SAID EARLIER, THAT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION WILL REVIEW CUBA POLICY AND USE THE COLLECTIVE WISDOM OF PRESIDENT BIDEN'S AGENCIES AND ADVISORS.

BUT I HOPE THAT THERE IS AND I HOPE THERE'S A CHANGE BECAUSE I WANT TO SEE CHANGE IN CUBA.

AND WE HAVEN'T REALLY CONTRIBUTED TO THAT IN MY VIEW FOR 60 PLUS YEARS.

>>YEAH.

YOU WERE SAYING EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN, EXPECTING DIFFERENT RESULTS.

IT'S 60 YEARS AND OBVIOUSLY THE CHANGE HAS NOT HAPPENED WITH THE CUBAN GOVERNMENT.

BUT THE REALITY IS THE POLITICS ARE PRETTY INTENSE, CERTAINLY IN FLORIDA, BUT IN THE US NATIONALLY.

AT WHAT POINT DOES A POLITICAL DECISION MAKER SAY THAT WE HAVE TO SERVE THE BETTER INTERESTS RATHER THAN FOCUS ON A PARTICULARLY NARROW, BUT POLITICALLY SENSITIVE CONSTITUENCY?

>>WELL I THINK PRESIDENT OBAMA DID THAT.

PEOPLE IN FLORIDA HAVE VERY STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT CUBA POLICY.

CUBANS THEMSELVES HAVE VERY STRONG OPINIONS.

SOME FEEL VERY STRONGLY WE NEED TO TOE THE LINE AND CONTINUE TO HAVE A HARD LINE, BUT OTHER MEMBERS OF THE CUBAN COMMUNITY SAY, NO, WE'VE GOT TO TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING ISN'T WORKING.

SO IT'S NOT AN EASY ISSUE BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF DIVISION.

I DO THINK IT'S SOMEWHAT TIED TO WHAT HAPPENS IN VENEZUELA AND VENEZUELA TO ME IS ANOTHER TRAGEDY.

AND YOU CAN GO BACK PROBABLY 40, 50 YEARS TO TRACE THE ROOTS OF SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE SEE IN VENEZUELA, BUT THE TRUTH IS THAT YOU'VE HAD BACK TO BACK VENEZUELAN LEADERS WHO ARE ESSENTIALLY DICTATORS AND HAVE DONE, IN MY VIEW, PRETTY HORRENDOUS THINGS TO CAUSE A LOT OF PAIN AND SUFFERING FOR THE VENEZUELAN PEOPLE.

SO I WOULD SAY THAT IF THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MOVE THE NEEDLE IN VENEZUELA IN A WAY THAT REALLY BENEFITS THE VENEZUELAN PEOPLE IT WILL BE EASIER TO LOOK AT NEW AND INNOVATIVE WAYS OF DEALING WITH CUBA.

SO I THINK YOU CAN'T KIND OF LOOK AT CUBA AND VENEZUELA IN ISOLATION, THEY'RE SOMEHOW TIED TOGETHER IN TERMS OF HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

>>THANK YOU FOR THAT FRANCISCO.

TRANSITIONING FROM CUBA VENEZUELA SANCTIONS INTO SOMETHING THAT I SAW WHEN I TAUGHT JOURNALISM IN CUBA A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO ON A SPECIAL PROJECT.

I SAW A LOT OF BUSES AND A LOT OF CHINESE INFLUENCES.

SO THE BUSES WERE CHINESE, A LOT OF THAT INFLUENCE ON THAT ISLAND.

AND I KNOW THAT THAT'S THE CASE FOR MANY LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES.

CAN YOU TALK TO US ABOUT THE INFLUENCE OF CHINA IN LATIN AMERICA AND HOW YOU SEE THAT?

>>WELL LET ME START BY JUST SIMPLY SAYING IT'S BIG AND IT'S REAL.

I WOULD SAY UP TO NOW THE PRIMARY INTEREST OF CHINA IN LATIN AMERICA HAS BEEN ECONOMIC.

AND IT'S BEEN ECONOMIC IN TWO WAYS.

CHINA NEEDS A LOT OF RESOURCES TO DRIVE ITS ECONOMY SO IT HAS PURCHASED A LOT OF NATURAL RESOURCES OUT OF LATIN AMERICA.

BUT IN ADDITION TO PURCHASING RESOURCES THEY ALSO HAVE PLATED AS A NATIONAL GOAL TO BECOME A WORLD LEADER IN INFRASTRUCTURE AND THEY HAVE SOME PRETTY BIG COMPANIES THAT PROVIDE INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES.

AND SO THEY AGGRESSIVELY GO AFTER PROJECTS IN LATIN AMERICA TO BUILD POWER PLANTS, BRIDGES, HIGHWAYS, YOU NAME AN INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT, CHINA IS ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN TRYING TO DO THAT.

AND THEN THE THIRD IS THEY PROVIDE ALL KINDS OF INCENTIVES FOR LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES TO DO BUSINESS WITH CUBA.

I MENTIONED THE EXIM BANK OF THE UNITED STATES.

WELL THE UNITED STATES IS NOT THE ONLY COUNTRY WITH AN EXIM BANK.

EUROPE HAS AN EXIM BANK.

CANADA HAS AN EXIM BANK.

AND CHINA AS AN EXIM BANK.

TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW MUCH MONEY THEY'RE PUTTING INTO SUPPORTING THEIR EXPORT, WE SOME YEARS BACK HAD A LINE OF CREDIT FOR THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY IN BRAZIL.

IT WAS A $2 BILLION LINE OF CREDIT, MEANING AMERICAN COMPANIES THAT SELL PRODUCTS TO THE OIL INDUSTRY OF BRAZIL AND THERE WAS ABOUT $2 BILLION IN A LINE OF CREDIT THAT COULD BE DRAWN ON TO FACILITATE THOSE SALES.

CHINA, THIS IS GOING BACK EIGHT YEARS, HAD A $20 BILLION LINE OF CREDIT.

SO A MASSIVE AMOUNT MORE SUPPORTED.

I HOPE THAT WE CONTINUE AS A COUNTRY TO ENGAGE MORE VIGOROUSLY WITH OUR NEIGHBORS.

I DON'T SEE CHINA REDUCING ITS INTEREST AND INFLUENCE IN THE REGION.

AND I THINK FOR NOW, AS I SAID, IT'S LARGELY BEEN ECONOMIC, BUT THAT COULD CHANGE AND EXPAND TO HAVE POLITICAL GOALS AS WELL.

BUT I THINK IT'S IN THE US INTEREST TO PAY ATTENTION TO CHINA'S ROLE IN LATIN AMERICA AND ALSO BE PROACTIVE AND BE MORE ENGAGED ECONOMICALLY AND POLITICALLY IN THE REGION.

>>SO FRANCISCO SANCHEZ, YOU ARE IN CHARGE OF THE TRADE AGENDA FOR THE US.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHINA.

I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE WRINGING THEIR HANDS BECAUSE THE CHINESE ACTUALLY HAVE A PRETTY ROBUST POLICY.

BUT IF YOU WERE DESIGNING THE US TRADE POLICY, WHAT ARE SAY THREE OF THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVES YOU'D GO FOR?

>>WE CANNOT GO IT ALONE.

VIS-A-VIS CHINA.

THERE ARE OTHER COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD THAT SHARE OUR INTERESTS, SHARE OUR POLICY OBJECTIVES, AND WE NEED TO WORK IN CONCERT WITH THEM.

THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE WITH TECHNOLOGY.

SOUTH KOREA, JAPAN, COUNTRIES IN EUROPE, THEY'RE ALL TECHNOLOGY GIANTS IF YOU WILL AND THERE'S STRENGTH IN NUMBERS IN WORKING TOGETHER VIS-A-VIS.

SOME OF THE POLICIES THAT CHINA HAS PUT FORWARD THAT REALLY PUTS ALL OF US AT AN UNFAIR DISADVANTAGE VIS-A-VIS CHINA.

SO NUMBER ONE IS LET'S SPEAK AS ONE VOICE ON A LOT OF THESE ISSUES, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO TECHNOLOGY.

THAT'S NUMBER ONE.

NUMBER TWO, THE THING THAT MADE AMERICA ECONOMICALLY POWERFUL OVER THE LAST 80, 90 YEARS IS THAT WE'VE INVESTED IN EDUCATION AND WE'VE INVESTED IN INNOVATION.

AND MY FEAR IS THAT OUR INVESTMENT IN BOTH OF THOSE CATEGORIES HAS BEEN CONSISTENTLY DECLINING.

AND WE HAVE TO REVERSE THAT.

THE CHINESE ARE SPENDING BILLIONS AND BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN BOTH EDUCATION AND IN INNOVATION.

AND THAT INVESTMENT NEEDS TO COME FROM THE US GOVERNMENT AND FROM BUSINESS BOTH.

THE INTERNET WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT INVESTMENTS BY THE US GOVERNMENT.

JUST WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED.

SO WE DO HAVE A ROLE IN INVESTING IN INNOVATION.

BUT WE ALSO NEED TO HAVE THE TALENT HERE THAT CAN ONLY COME FROM INVESTING IN EDUCATION.

SO THE SECOND THING I WOULD DO IS INVEST IN THOSE TWO AREAS SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO BE THE INNOVATORS, THE NUMBER ONE INNOVATORS IN THE WORLD.

AND THEN NUMBER THREE, WHILE I'VE NOT BEEN A BIG SUPPORTER OF A LOT OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S TRADE POLICIES, I THINK HE DID HAVE THE OVERALL IDEA RIGHT, IS THAT WE NEEDED TO BE TOUGHER WITH CHINA.

I DIDN'T LIKE SOME OF HIS TACTICS BECAUSE I THINK THEY ENDED UP HURTING AMERICAN CONSUMERS AND AMERICAN FARMERS IN PARTICULAR, BUT I THINK WE DO NEED TO RETHINK WHETHER OR NOT, IF CHINA IS IMPOSING TARIFFS ON US, DO WE COUNTER THAT WITH THE SAME TYPE OF ACTION?

I DO BELIEVE WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT IN WAYS THAT THAT'S NOT BEEN OUR APPROACH SINCE WE'VE BEEN THE GUIDING LIGHT IF YOU WILL OF FREE TRADE.

BUT IT MAY BE TIME TO REEVALUATE THAT AND BE TOUGH, BUT SELECTIVELY, NOT WITH THIS BROAD BRUSH OF JUST THROWING TARIFFS ON EVERYTHING THAT COMES OUT OF CHINA.

WHEN YOU FIND CHINESE OR ANY COMPANIES THAT ARE VIOLATING OUR LAWS, WHETHER IT'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, GO AFTER THEM AGGRESSIVELY THROUGH OUR CRIMINAL CODE.

>>FRANCISCO SANCHEZ, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US TODAY.

WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

>>IT WAS A REAL PLEASURE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR LETTING ME JOIN YOU.

>>AND THANK YOU.

WE'LL SEE YOU AGAIN NEXT WEEK ON ANOTHER EPISODE OF GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES.