In cipher: “So I think that if we build our relations in the vein of our yesterday’s meeting…”
[translation]: “If is the operative word – there’s no telling what will happen next because Trump is in charge of nothing, not even of his wife, and nothing he says can be relied on. Tillerson is as impotent as his boss.”

In cipher: “there are good reasons to believe that we will be able to revive, at least partially, the level of interaction that we need.”
[translation]: “The best that can be hoped for is that Tillerson can control the working groups to which he’s persuaded Trump to delegate everything of substance. So everything with the Americans is partial. I have gained nothing I need.”

It would work like this: Like the FATCA legislation in the US, the premise is:

An individual is required to provide a detailed report of his wealth (however small).

The regulatory body chooses to regard the report as “in error,” or “incomplete.”

The law then allows all the assets to be confiscated, including those portions that were correctly reported.

Of course, we’d like to think that no reasonable government would abuse power in this way. Unfortunately, history shows that any government that issues a license to itself to rob its citizenry, invariably uses (and abuses) that license.

The beauty of such a system is that it need not be enforced often. Once people understand that, at any moment, they could lose everything and have no recourse whatsoever, they learn to keep their heads down and be compliant.

From that point on, fear of government is a constant, and the population is effectively under house arrest.