NICK SCHIFRIN:

Yeah three or four main disagreements you mentioned one of them climate change. Basically there is a G 20 and a G 19 G 19 is the reference to the 19 countries that are either in the Paris climate accord or support the Paris climate accord and the United States. And this communique got over that difference by just acknowledging that theU.S. is not going to support the plight of the Paris climate accord. And that is language Harik that we've seen in the past as well on migration. This was a real red line. According to multiple diplomats that I've spoken to from theU.S. side theU.S. sherpa as he's known the diplomat who negotiated this deal basically said that he cannot have a in-depth discussion of migration or global migration crisis requiring a global migration response because I didn't want the president to read that and get angry and so the language that everyone decided on is very basic. All it does is say that the G 20 will study migration into the future. And the other big one was trade and steel on steel they didn't really accomplish very much frankly. They said again that will study this issue and on trade. This was the most difficult. The U.S. objected to any kind of use of the word protectionism. China was on the other side pushing for language that endorsed free trade and the compromise was this. A recognition of the contribution of multilateral trading. That doesn't sound like much but that took days according to diplomats to get just that one sentence and that meant they could get to this sentence system is falling short of the objectives meaning the multilateral trading system is falling short of the objectives that allowed China and the U.S. to agree on one thing they never have agreed on before which is reforming the World Trade Organization.