welcome to our uk viewers. you are watching french president macron as he gives his final press conference at george washington university in dc. he is talking about the relationship between france and the united states. translation: and together with a member of the house of representatives i went to the mall today, i also went to arlington yesterday and paid my tributes to the unknown soldier and to the kennedy family. lastly, i had a number of meetings including at george washington university today. i had george washington university today. ihada george washington university today. i had a town hall meeting with students, and all of this gave me an opportunity to talk about a number of international issues, many topics which i am sure you have been following. in the course of this state visit, we discussed a number of bilateral meetings, and as a

matter of fact, a number of business agreements have been signed that bear witness to the industrial and tactical bonds, there were also a number of agreements signed in the cultural sector. and, as you have seen, this state visit gave us an opportunity to better know each other, but also to work on our bilateral agenda, which is very lively, like i said yesterday. the us, the united states, is the first foreign investor in france. it is also the country whose investments have picked up over the past few months, and on the occasion of my visit, a number of american companies including walt disney and others have confirmed they will invest a couple of billion dollars in france very soon. we also covered a number of major international topics, which are very important given the role played by both our

countries. on climate, we decided to concentrate on the positive franco—american agenda, including the protection of the oceans. indeed, i would like this to be on the agenda of the g7, and i had a longer discussion with prime minister trudeau in paris a couple of weeks ago. he will work along these lines, and agreements, and i think it is a topic on which we can work together with the united states of america. president trump confirmed it. we have in mind, of course, the decision taken by the united states regarding the paris accord, and like i said, i very much hope that at some point in time the united states will in factjoin again the paris accord. but still, in the meantime, we will continue to move forward. therefore we are taking a number of initiatives, including on the occasion of the g7. we are also working on the financing

of environmental initiatives, and financial institutions, and investors, a re directly financial institutions, and investors, are directly working between france and the united states. and in particular it is launched on the occasion of the one planet summit in paris. on trade, i very much launched an appeal for the need to avoid any escalation between allies. i set it at congress today. once again, i call for a european exemption. we agreed to improve global regulations, and we decided to work together on a number of topics. intellectual property, subsidies, transfer of properties in the control of strategic investments. and we will work on that with our partners in order to improve the existing regulations. next, while i myself are very attached to the rules of the wto, like i said, there can be no trade

war between allies. therefore we would like us to find the means for this exemption, but also we would like us to work on calming things down at a global level. we have one topic in particular, and it is due topic in particular, and it is due to the chinese situation, and it has been acknowledged, and china itself made some commitments at the g20, so we should concentrate on that in the coming months. lastly, we spend a lot of time discussing ourjoint commitment to the fight against terror, against the use of chemical weapons. we have a very efficient joint action, and we have seen evidence and results very recently, andi evidence and results very recently, and i would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to our forces, and commend the efficiency

of the work done, and in this respect the cooperation between france and the united states is absolutely outstanding. i said i very much approve of what is being done between north korea and the united states. this goes on the right direction, and france will do whatever it can to contribute to the denuclearisation which is the only possible way. next, we talked a lot about the levant and the situation in iran. in this respect i said once again what france's position is. it is in co—ordination with our european partners. just like the united states of america, we have signed the nuclear agreement which provides a framework on 14 signed the nuclear agreement which provides a framework on ilijuly 2015. we provides a framework on 14july 2015. we are defending this agreement, we consider it a useful basis, and it will be complied with

because this is our word. that being said, i very much heard what president trump said on a number of occasions, and his willingness not to support this agreement. i do not know what president trump will decide on 12 may. as a matter of fa ct, decide on 12 may. as a matter of fact, there is the whole process that will follow suit. but that being said, i wanted us to acknowledge and agree upon a positive agenda. it means first of all that the jcpla, the positive agenda. it means first of all that thejcpla, the nuclear deal with iran, will be complied with and defended by france and the european union. second, like i did in september in new york at the un general assembly, we shall acknowledge that the agreement does not enable us to address all of the issues of the region. we therefore shall, together with the regional powers and iran, and in the context

ofa powers and iran, and in the context of a demanding dialogue with iran, we shall cover all issues. first of all, the post 2025 situation of iran in the nuclear sector. second, dealing with the ballistic activities of iran in the region. next, containing the influence of iran in the region, in yemen, lebanon, iraq and syria. and these three subjects would add to the existing jcpla. and yesterday at the press c0 nfe re nce , existing jcpla. and yesterday at the press conference, as you existing jcpla. and yesterday at the press conference, as you have existing jcpla. and yesterday at the press conference, as you have seen, press conference, as you have seen, no matter the decision to be taken by the united states on 12 may, we shall act jointly by the united states on 12 may, we shall actjointly in the region in order to find a broader agreement and ajoint order to find a broader agreement and a joint strategic framework to talk to iran, to coverfour topics. the three i just talk to iran, to coverfour topics. the three ijust mentioned, and the existing jcpla. president trump was

open to that prospect, and to the idea of having a more comprehensive agreement, and more enduring one, that would enable us to cover and ensure the concerns that exist regarding iran's activities. this will not happen overnight, but i think it is an important step. given that so far the american president only took to the floor to express his rejection of thejcpla, without discussing any possibility of building an alternative. so the fact that we are going in that direction, i think, is a good thing for the stability of the region, which remains our main objective. and like i say, france's responsibility is to do everything in order to eradicate, to defeat, the terrorist groups in the region, but also to guarantee the region, but also to guarantee the stability of the region and make

sure that there is no hegemony or any regional strategy or escalation that could destabilise the entire region. it is against this framework that we talked about syria. in this respect, we committed together to fight against terrorists, jihadist scholar and we will continue that warand scholar and we will continue that war and wage this walk until the end ——jihadists,, and we war and wage this walk until the end —— jihadists,, and we will continue this war and wage that war until the end. we will ensure that international agreements are complied with, including the one guarding against the use of chemical weapons, and this is very much what weapons, and this is very much what we have done in the operations late in the night between 13 and 1a april. we also together, to make sure that they can be humanitarian access, sure that they can be humanitarian access , we sure that they can be humanitarian access, we are working together in the context of this small group to build the syria of tomorrow, and guarantee its stability. and in this

respect i believe we have also moved in the right direction. and beyond our military action, which is meant to ta ke our military action, which is meant to take an end when we have defeated daesh, we also have a political goal, which is to contribute to building a free syria, which is not under the influence of another country, and which is not a place that contributes to destabilising the region. i think this was a very important point to me. so very briefly, this is a summary of what we have done, and then i can answer your questions and cover any topic that i did not yet mentioned. so this is the end of this state visit, a three—day state visit. i am extremely pleased about it. i consider that the bilateral

relationship, both at a personal level and also at a national level, is excellent, and i believe that today, in addition to the bilateral relationship, we have a multilateral agenda to build upon. and all the moves that we have made, everything that we have done, and it will step forward over the next few weeks, because it is notjust what happened over the past three days, all of thatis over the past three days, all of that is about strong multilateralism that is about strong multilateralism that we need to build. and i said it in front of the congress today. the united states is now facing a major choice, which is almost a choice of civilisation. it is either about transforming multilateralism, in order to make it stronger and to protect it. the other way round would be to walk away from it. i

believe the first solution is the right one. it is the only one that would enable us to respect and comply with the values of france, the values of europe, and i think including in the field of trade. and i very much have trust in this strong multilateralism. i believe we can work on that, and with the united states of america, and i think some positive signals were expressed about that direction, and you can count on me to work to that effect over the coming weeks and months. some other european leaders will be coming to the united states, and we will continue to work together, co—ordinate, so that we can together, co—ordinate, so that we ca n ex press together, co—ordinate, so that we can express the point of view of the european union in a coherent way. you now have the floor. the question from bloomberg. you said you thought president trump will indeed leave the jcpla

president trump will indeed leave thejcpla on president trump will indeed leave the jcpla on 12 president trump will indeed leave thejcpla on 12 may. can you confirm it here, and would that we failure, given how much you invested in this personal relationship, and what would happen? you also said that you we re would happen? you also said that you were rather optimistic as to an exemption on steel and aluminium. can you confirm it, and do you think it is going to be a permanent one, and do you think the decision will be announced on the first of may? well, i have no inside information as to what president trump might be deciding regarding the iranian nuclear deal. that being said, just like you do, i listen, to what president trump is saying, and it seems to me that he is not very much

eager to defend it. do i take it personally? no. i believe that it is...i personally? no. i believe that it is... i have in mind that it is a campaign commitment that he took a long time ago, so i do not know what the american decision will be, but if you take a rational look at the announcements so far, the comments made by president trump, it seems to me that he will not do much to preserve the jcpla. me that he will not do much to preserve thejcpla. i do not think this is very much big news. i think this is very much big news. i think this is very much big news. i think this is just an analysis, and this is very much big news. i think this isjust an analysis, and i believe a number of you were somehow shocked by what president trump said in the oval office. well, if you listen to him, i think you can reach the same conclusions as myself. so my commitment, my action, is not to try to convince president trump to walk away from his campaign commitments, or to change his mind

is. iam commitments, or to change his mind is. i am not commitments, or to change his mind is. iam not... i commitments, or to change his mind is. iam not i believe what commitments, or to change his mind is. i am not i believe what we should be doing is to try to find an efficient way in order to try and build this genuine multilateralism. so what i am working upon his first of all i am advocating. i am trying to prove that this agreement makes sense, and that it is a way of controlling the current nuclear activities of iran, and we have a disagreement, but it is also about putting together a diplomatic framework so that no matter that the decision taken by president trump, we can act usefully. i think this is what our responsibility is. we cannot consider that we would fall into a vacuum if the united states

was to decide to walk away from the jcpla, so what we are working upon, and on which we have an agreement in principle, is that, and i think this is new, we agree to work upon a comprehensive deal with the four pillars are mentioned in the introduction. so if we can move forward , introduction. so if we can move forward, and given that the first pillar is the content of thejcpla, i think this is useful. but you know, i never took diplomatic work for something to be a matter of pride, who has been winning this event. it has been so long and so difficult to solve the issue of iran, idon't difficult to solve the issue of iran, i don't think it will happen overnight. but i think that it is about combining individual efforts. this is what makes us stronger. and

it will be a common joint goal, and again, where we have found some leeway is that i explained that we cannot say i have these concerns about iran and say, well, once we are done with daesh, asus, we will walk away from syria and withdraw the troops. because if that were to be the case, we would be back to square one. so we need this multilateralist framework. as to trade issues, it is not for me to announce an american decision, which is not even taken yet. but here againi is not even taken yet. but here again i rely on simple principles. today our alliance is the most possible strategic alliance. we are allies. we cannot have a trade war between allies. this is a simple principle. second principle, we have malta doormat —— we have

multilateralism, multilateral trade. this is the wto rules. the regulations that were set, major powers by the rules that were set. third, i wanted us to have a positive agenda to deal with the real issues, including our capacities in china for aluminium and steel, and then something we agreed upon is that we would like to be working with mr mnuchin, who will be working with mr mnuchin, who will be travelling to paris tomorrow to deal with a number of topics, intellectual properties, subsidies, tra nsfer of intellectual properties, subsidies, transfer of properties and the control of strategic investments, in order to deal with the existing issues. for over 40 years, run has

been mentioned in terms of hope or lack thereof. but as you know, in iran there is the guide, the president, elected by the people but wa nted president, elected by the people but wanted by the guide — both gifts from above. —— iran. and there is also the iranian people. as a matter of fa ct, also the iranian people. as a matter of fact, once a week i am on air in paris. so when you negotiate with iran, who do you negotiate with? negotiating with iran is about negotiating with its current leaders, in particular its president. but again it is a matter of principle for me in terms of diplomatic rules. there is a situation that you describe, but no power whatsoever — no foreign power has to replace a rainy and

sovereignty. —— iranians sovereignty. —— iranians sovereignty. in paris and london, we need to think what is good for the iranians. —— iranian sovereignty. france in some occasions prevented itself from that kind of intervention. every time they were led they were wrong. but we can contribute to setting the right conditions for the people to decide of its own fate. this is what we are doing in syria. and for iran what i would like is a dialogue. this is the reason why i suggested a broader framework, because i believe we shall continue to speak to the iranian authorities. to me, it is important that we continue at the cultural and scientific level that we continue our exchanges. the worst

is thing we could do is separate from iran. the rainy and people are amazing. it is a unique country. a great country and a country that is going through a specific regime since the iranian revolution. —— iranian people. but should we walk away from the iranian people? no. we look to put ourselves in the shoes of all of two replace the iranian leaders? absolutely not. —— do we look to put ourselves. but there is a lot happening in iran. the research is, the movie industry, literature, mathematicians... —— the

research shows. we continue to have exchanges, but we need a broader dialogue with the iranian leaders. —— researchers. and this is the framework that we are offering. so i would like to be able to maintain the jcpla and to would like to be able to maintain thejcpla and to add the other three pillars to it. we need to work on these fall pillars because we need to contain the expansionist policy of iran, and we also need even demanding framework, but we shall of course also deal with the official and acknowledged leaders. there is no alternative to that. mr president, if i might do, my question in english: the fourth pillarfor question in english: the fourth pillar for the question in english: the fourth pillarfor the middle question in english: the fourth pillar for the middle east included a settlement in syria. the geneva

process , a settlement in syria. the geneva process, as you know, is close to dead. it appears the president assad has won the war or nearly won the war. what other specific steps you are taking to get the press is running to lead syria to an inclusive peace that stems the iranian influence you are talking about, and what role, specifically, do you think the united states can play? and if i might, you talked about, and obviously you and donald trump shared a warm relationship, and you talk about the strategic alliance, but to date, in your speech, you seemed to criticise a lot of the grounding of donald trump's nationalist movement. you said we can choose isolationism, withdrawal, and nationalism, which would — and spoke of the dangers of that. and it seemed as if you struck a contrast with donald trump. i wa nted a contrast with donald trump. i wanted to know how you can reconcile

your warm relationship with the president and your strategic alliance with the us when you seem to have a problem with everything that this president represents. thank you. look, on syria, we working together. very closely. in the small group we created a few weeks ago. it is a small group encompassing the us, france, the uk, jordan, saudi arabia, and we work with the turks. they are co—ordinated by germany. we want to have a discussion with some permanent members of the security council of the united nations. and somehow form an alliance in the region. this new initiative is very important as a complement to the two existing initiatives we have to take into consideration. on the one side, you have the three big powers and

iran, russia, and turkey. in this process is not satisfactory to us because it is not the right way to deliver a good result, according to me. it is a great partition in syria. but on the other side, the geneva process, which is legitimate, but with a lack of momentum, today. our willingness with this new small group is to create a bridge between the geneva process and the other process. to have a decision encompassing all the allies of the region and to open lines with russia and turkey. that is the only way to fix the situation in syria in the long run. that is why, at the same time, we have a constant dialogue with the opposition forces in syria, because it is important with the

different parties and groups, and thatis different parties and groups, and that is why as russia has this relationship with the regime, that it is important to have this discussion with russia to fix the situation. in all that process, we are setting up and we are working on. in the coming weeks or months, we will try to gather these people together under the umbrella of the united nations and by providing a new momentum of the new geneva process , new momentum of the new geneva process, the aim is precisely do have some lines of the regime, some of the key countries of the region, especially those welcoming millions of refugees, and key countries of the regime and the united nations. that is our philosophy and our process. i think, funny, this is the only way to move forward, because

they don't see another process to deliver. and i don't see a process without some of the key countries, some of the key neighbours of russia, to be involved. so that is the perspective of this small group. and that is the philosophy of this contact group established a few month ago. as for the relationship with donald trump and how to reconcile some disarmament and the war approach, we have a strong relationship based on this very strong and long—standing relationship. it is important to establish this relationship in our long—term history. that is our debts and our duty. we have a good personal relationship. we are good cooperation and strong alignment on security issues. and we have — i

don't see honestly my interests, the french interests, just to say that they disagree, i do want to speak with you. the best way to proceed is to say that we partnered for the long—term. we are allies. we have to work together. this is the only way to build and affable trans—atlantic relationship. and let's push our concepts and that multilateralism will allow donald trump to reaches —— reach his objectives. i endorse that. but i don't see any contradiction or anything in this way to proceed. i see a potential in my approach. mr president, you said

you have a joint vision for the future of syria, that you share the same vision with donald trump. donald trump said there were wealthy countries in the region, referring, i believe, to arab countries, that we re i believe, to arab countries, that were not paying enough, and did not provide sufficient military contribution. do you share these views, and you are the relevant countries? i did hear what he said. it is clear that donald trump is convinced that we are both contributing to the security of the region. and the main countries in the region benefit from that. i think if we did not do it at the same time, we would also suffer from

the consequences of coming destabilisation. next, the fact that these countries could be more involved would be a good thing, and i think that he has in mind all the releva nt i think that he has in mind all the relevant countries in the region. turkey is involved within nato and could also be doing more and turkey has been asking — they have said that they were willing to do more within nato. saudi arabia is also interested in the security of the region. then it is for donald trump to say which country he had in mind. the issue is not very much to say how we are going to finance all about, but about preventing any escalation of tension