Feng Da Hsuan and Zhu Zhiqun in Dialogue with Wang Huiyao on US-China Relations
January 14 , 2022
In recent years, relations between China and the United States have deteriorated. A positive change is urgently needed from both sides to mitigate bilateral tensions. High-level official meetings, despite being virtual, between China and the US in late 2021 were considered a relatively positive signal. However, the future relationship of these great powers remains uncertain.
How will China-US relations influence the world? In which areas can China and the US cooperate? What are the current trends in globalization? What about Xinjiang and Taiwan? Can more journalists bridge the communication gap?
On Jan 14, Dr. Henry Huiyao Wang, founder and president of CCG, was invited to the “China and the World Forum” held by World Scientific to discuss his views on these issues as well as the present and future of China-US relations with Prof. Feng Da Hsuan ( former Vice President for Research at the University of Texas at Dallas) and Prof. Zhu Zhiqun (Professor and Chair of the International Relations Departments at Bucknell University).
Feng Da Hsuan: Good Morning or good evening, ladies and gentlemen from all corners of the world. Welcome to this webinar, on a subject that I think that we have to agree that it’s almost changing daily, as the relationship between the United States and China continues to evolve, as some would say, deteriorate. The journal (China and the World: Ancient and Modern Silk Road) started about five or four years ago, and this particular journal came out of Asia, especially at the time where we wanted to have an opportunity, a platform, for people to voice their opinions, concerns, and ideas about China in the 21st century, and we wanted to do it especially in English language so that it’s communicable to nearly everyone on earth. I am very excited that my two colleagues today, Professor Henry (Huiyao) Wang and Professor Zhu, are also co-editors of this journal. We welcome people to send in your articles for consideration. This is a fast-growing journal. At this point, let me hand over the screen to Henry, who will begin the discussion of today’s topic. Henry, the screen is yours.
Long-term re-adjustment of the US-China relationship
Wang Huiyao: Thank you Professor Feng and also Professor Zhu and all the distinguished guests and audiences. Good evening or good morning, depending on where you are. So this is really fascinating. We’re talking about China and the US in the 21st century: opportunities and challenges. I’d like to maybe to start with sharing some of the observations I have, to kick off this dialogue. The first is that China and US are under a period of re-adjustment. So next month marks the 50 years of an anniversary for Nixon’s historic visit to China and the signing of Shanghai Communiqué, which was a significant step towards normalization of Sino-American relations and that actually paved the way for the diplomatic ties between China and US since 1979. Since then, arguably since the end of the Clinton administration, the US-China relations have been actually deteriorating and reached its lowest point during the Trump years. Although many have argued no significant changes in the US-China relations have been seen since the Biden took office, there are clear signs that the relationship has entered a period of re-adjustment. I talked to Joseph Nye actually not long ago. He was talking about cooperative rivalry. It is very difficult for President Biden to make any drastic moves on China as he is locked in this situation with a Democrats’ thin house majority.
So I think that the US Secretary of State Blinken famously used the notion of “ 3C” (compete, collaborate, confront), to describe US policies on China, and said that the relationships will be competitive, collaborative, and adversarial. The phone call in November between the American and Chinese leaders, which actually could be seen as an attempt to stabilize the relationship but it hasn’t reached the satisfaction many had expected. President Biden still underscored that the US remains committed to the One China policy, but we still see that there is a lot of activities going on Taiwan and South China Sea. And, the US-China trade phase one deal also is coming to an end, but we still haven’t seen the tariff being lifted. So this period of adjustment that we’re seeing is going to be going on for some time.
We are getting into the phase of co-opetition – cooperative competition. That’s probably something we need to also pay attention to because we have a lot of things to cooperate, climate change, pandemic, cyber security and all those things that we really have to work together. About climate change, the US and China are two largest CO2 emitters, we really have to work together and so that we could avoid the catastrophe. We also see that the pandemic is really ramping still and it’s unfortunate that we haven’t really worked together. Cooperation is really the cornerstone for US and China. And China is also now equipped with clean energy technology and is the largest producer of solar power, largest producer of hydropower, and of course, all the clean vehicles as well. So there’s many things that I think US and China can work together. And there’s infrastructure too, which is an area that US and China can really cooperate. President Biden’s proposed B3W and the EU has proposed the EU Gateway, and China has launched the Belt and Road Initiative 8 years ago. So I think this is the biggest common denominator of US-China relations and we can really work on that. And also we see that as China wants to join the CPTPP, which is designed by the US. Maybe we should work together on those trade issues. And, of course, there’s the RCEP, which is already in effect since January 1st this year. So I think there are a lot of areas we should work together on, particularly I think the biggest cooperating area probably is the infrastructure – that is the least controversial one. Everybody is working on that. Everybody realized that. And also I think the world needs actually infrastructure to drive the world for the next half a century. Right now China has AIIB, so AIIB, World Bank, Asian development Bank, African Development Bank, Latin American Development Bank, all these development banks should collaborate.
What I also would like to talk about is the way that we have to really recognize both countries in terms of the values and the system. I was quite pleased to see when President Biden announced the troops’ retreat from Afghanistan, he was saying that basically the US does not seek nation building anymore. Maybe the US will not impose its model to other countries. So we see China, with its long history of Confucius Society with Asian values such as peace, China has its on meritocracy and now with modern technology that suits for technology democracy and also market democracy – where to go, what to buy are really the choices of the people.
Our civilization are rich and diverse and so is democracy. Democracy is not mass produced within a uniform model or configuration of countries around the world. We have to really recognize the existence of different cultures, different systems. And I think Chinese historical tradition and the status quo has actually paved the way for how democracy itself works actually in China in its own system of selections.
Finally, I’d like to say that US and China are at a crossroads. They are big countries. We should avoid Thucydides’ trap, but also we should avoid the Kindleberger Trap. We cannot leave the world awakened without any basically responsible states ready to really to safeguard multilateralism, the system that we’ve been used to over the last 7 and a half decades. But I think we need really improve on that. We need to really upgrade on that, we need to work on that. We already living in a very challenging world. There are enormous opportunities. Of course, there’s obstacles, but there’s also enormous opportunities for us to really work on – fighting pandemic, climate change, “build back better world” through infrastructure and also a safer cyber security and also ensuring that there’s no Cold War and there’s no decoupling. And those are very, very important. So I think that the topic today is very relevant – we really have to work together and I can’t imagine the two largest economies and also with other important countries in the world like EU and many countries in developing world, they cannot afford to see US and China going into a bipolar world, basically decoupling. It’s hard to imagine that. I will leave it there and with all the experts here today, let’s continue the dialogue.
Feng Da Hsuan: Thank you very much, Henry. You certainly painted us a comprehensive development of US and China, at least for the last five or six years, most comprehensively. Zhiqun, do you want to follow up with the questions now?
US-China divergence a result of fundamental cultural and systemic differences
Zhu Zhiqun: First of all, it’s really a great pleasure to be a co-moderator. First of all, I want to commend you Dr. Wang for founding and leading the Center for China and Globalization, and promoting exchanges and dialogue among scholars, former government officials, diplomats, business people and entrepreneurs and others, from China and other countries. I think CCG has also been involved in Track II diplomacy. At a time when government-to-government relations are having problems, I think it’s extremely important to maintain people-to-people exchanges and keep the communication channels open. So thank you Dr. Wang for helping promote mutual understanding between China and the world.
In your opening remarks, you highlighted the difficulties between China and United States and also actually listed a few areas where the two countries can cooperate. Perhaps if you can perhaps you can elaborate on the causes that have led to the current situation, the current status of the relationship between China United States. What are the main causes? You highlighted a few but maybe if you can elaborate a bit on both sides. But also, as a follow-up , on those areas that you think the two countries can cooperate – what is preventing them from cooperating with each other? Thank you.
Wang Huiyao: Thank you, Professor Zhu, for your great questions. As I said, this year is the 50th year since Nixon visited China. The US-China relations was starting to warm up and then for the last five decades, there have been enormous exchanges and dialogues and the trade and people-to-people exchanges going on between the two largest economies in the world, particularly in the last decade. What I see what went wrong was that, first of all, for example, 20 years ago when China joined the WTO, US was thinking, “OK, we can turn China into US or western-style model or democracy,” but gradually they didn’t see that happening. I think that is one problem, and the main reason for today’s re-adjustment. They were hoping that China can converge and then it turned out China stands on his own and actually develops quite well. So that’s something I think, is going to take years for people to change because that kind of ideological differences has been embedded in people’s mind, particularly in the American elite, for some time, so that is the reason number one.
Number two is that China has been developing so fast, so effectively, and actually lifted 800 million people out of poverty, representing 70% of the global poverty reduction. That’s enormous. There could be admiration or it could be envy or it could be jealousy, and that’s human nature, that can happen. So because China is doing well and also different, there are then people who felt that you are not right. And thirdly it is also difficult because China has a different culture. China has a different language. It’s not a western country. China has 5,000-year history and the civilization was never interrupted for many years throughout the history. So that is also hard to understand, too. It’s difficult to understand China sometimes.
I think the last reason I could attribute is that probably it is also that China needs to do more on its narrative. China has done so well, but we still yet to come up with a theoretical framework to explain the success behind that and also ring a bell to the people outside China. China has done quite a lot of that, but still not enough. Those are probably the reasons that I think were leading us into this kind of divergence, or maybe potential conflict as well. If I have been given another reason, finally, is the value. For example, people view democracy, ideology, development model, governance style, also human right differently. There’s a variety of different views on that. So that has led to a lot of potential disagreement, argument, even conflict.
The area I think that that we can collaborate in the future. I mean, we have to. People know that we will have to collaborate on the pandemic, climate change. And recently, also, five countries have signed a non-nuclear weapon deal to restrict the use of that. That is good sign that they can collaborate. On issues like North Korea, Iran – they can also collaborate. Of course, there is infrastructure they can collaborate with the developing countries. There’s quite a few areas that still we need each other. We cannot really continue to separate.
Foreign countries shouldn’t interfere in Cross-Straits relations
Feng Da Hsuan: Thank you very much. I think again, you have zeroed in some of the critical reasons why the two major economic powers of the world today are showing more and more animosity, which I hope in this today’s discussion we can elaborate on some of the ways to alleviate that. Let’s get to the heart, one of the heart problems, and the hardest problem right now between the US and China. I think everyone would agree that it is the issue of Taiwan. And undoubtedly in the last month, two or three. Taiwan has emerged or re-emerged as a potentially most explosive issue between the two countries. As we know, the United States Congress has passed several new bills and also the administration, even under Biden now, has significantly upgraded the so-called unofficial relations with Taiwan. In sort of playing around with the words of one China Policy, making people there uncomfortable. So, in your view, Henry, how dangerous is the Taiwan Strait today? Why are the tensions so high there from the US point of view and from the Chinese point of view? And what do you think are the prospect of peaceful unifications or reunifications between Taiwan and the mainland and quite recently China’s leader once again in his recent comment, made it very clear that reunification is a definite goal for all Chinese people. Thank you.
Wang Huiyao: Thank you, Professor Feng. You are right that Taiwan is probably the hottest spot, the most sensitive spot also, in the Sino-American relations. I think that if this Taiwan issue is not handled properly or carefully, it could ruin everything. So it’s very, very dangerous, and very, very explosive if we are not careful. What has led to the situation is that because the Taiwan Democratic Progressive Party, actually want to seek independence somehow. There is a tendency for that. I see actually during the KMT time, Ma Ying-jeou, and Lian Zhan – when they were running the Taiwan, there were already a lot of convergences with mainland of China. Mainland of China was the most important trading partner with Taiwan in terms of the trade surplus. And the people-to-people movement across the strait is enormous, with millions of mainlanders traveled to Taiwan and thousands of students from mainland to study in Taiwan, and vice versa – there were over two million Taiwanese people working in mainland. So I see the natural integration. But I think the problem is now, since Biden administration coming to power, it really started making things to change.
And of course, we also had the Hong Kong unrest. Basically, you know that also stirred up the situation in Taiwan as well. For example, during the first term of President Tsai there, in the midterm election there, the KMT has won many seats and Tsai almost would lose her presidency in the next presidential election, if not for the Hong Kong unrest. So I think this Hong Kong situation had something to do with Taiwan as well. But now actually, Hong Kong is stabilized. How Kong is back to normal and prosperity. So I think that will help the situation in Taiwan to see the “One Country, Two Systems” actually works with some modifications, actually, continuing to work. I think that is the reason. But again, the US is surprisingly sending the officials to visit Taiwan during the Trump era, there were officials and now we have Congressmen visiting Taiwan for several times now and we have a military navy warships gone through Taiwan hundreds of times. So this situation is getting worse, even Tsai said, there’s US military personnel based in Taiwan. That’s a strong violation of the three communiqués – no official contact and no military base in Taiwan. So China has to react, to some extent, with all those air flights and things like that. I think this situation basically was largely caused by probably the Taiwanese authorities and also the US intention to keep this situation tense. This is really dangerous. I think the issues can really be solve among the people across the strait. They are from the same culture, same ethnicity, same tradition and same language. Why cannot the problem be solved by themselves? We don’t need foreign interference. I think that’s probably the mistake we should avoid. That is really a dangerous spot in the world, probably.
“Genocide” in Xinjiang is unsubstantiated and untrue
Zhu Zhiqun: Thank you Henry. So I agree with you that the problem between the mainland and Taiwan should be resolved by themselves without the foreign intervention. Let me ask another perhaps also very sensitive, even controversial issue that is Xinjiang. We all know that US Congress and the White House are making policies and passing laws regarding Xinjiang based on what they claim to be genocide and crimes against humanity. And Western media also cover the Xinjiang situation as if genocide is the fact on the ground. And, of course, the Chinese side has a totally different version of the story. So what exactly is going on in Xinjiang, what exactly the situation in Xinjiang? And what can China and Chinese government do to make its voices heard in the West?
Wang Huiyao: Thank you, Professor Zhu. I think that is also one of the hard issues as well. I’m quite certain the Hong Kong situation will be stabilized. Now they have a new legislative council elected. And the Chief Executive would be elected in the coming March. So the situations in Hong Kong will be stabilized. I think now the hardest issue people are talking probably still is Xinjiang, but they’re talking about there are 1 million, or 2 million Uighurs in the camps, which is not true. There are only about 9 or 10 million Uighurs. If you’re talking about 2 million Uighurs in the camp, there must be Uighurs from every family, which is totally impossible. That’s number one. Number two, I’ve been to Xinjiang a number of times, and everywhere you go now is very safe. Everything is very peaceful. Everywhere is prosperous. The economic growth is higher than the average of other provinces in China. And also the tourism, actually, if not heated by the pandemic, was also quite good. The other thing is that people talking about genocide, but that’s not really substantiate, there could be anecdotes, but you don’t really see systematic anything that has happened in Xinjiang. So I think it was greatly exaggerated and it’s actually not true at all, and what actually is happening is that if some people come out of Xinjiang and then talk about individual situation there, there could be something happened to that particular individual but it’s not really, as I said, to the mass population there. That’s not happened. Then you know, people say by looking from a satellite, there’re a lot of buildings, but buildings are empty buildings, there’s nothing there.
Xinjiang is actually open for any anybody going there to see, it is open to foreigners and foreign journalist, too. I know there are a lot of foreigners actually went there. I know there are a lot of embassy officials went there. I’m sure they sent the report back as well. They couldn’t find anything to substantiate the claims that there’s a genocide in Xinjiang. And it’s not really possible to see that. You can grab a flight and go to Xinjiang to see personally, as a matter of fact. And now also we have a new party secretary now for Xinjiang and he is actually seeking the comments on the internet to see, what recommendation can be made to build a better Xinjiang and what are the suggestions and recommendations, calling for proposals to help do better. So I think they are very open, and people are safe. Anywhere you go in Xinjiang you don’t worry. It’s a really a great situation. I think this pandemic is really bad, preventing many people to come to see it. I really hope there will be more foreign visitors to come to Xinjiang and see it. So that we can get this kind of unsubstantiated claims out of the hot attention of the media.
Feng Da Hsuan: OK. You want to follow up, Professor Zhu?
Zhu Zhiqun: No, we have a lot of other questions. I think the audience may also have questions. But I was going to ask you, are you going to ask another question, maybe about BRI or …?
Feng Da Hsuan: Maybe later. I’d like to invite a very distinguished participant today. His name is Norman Pearlstine. Norman was the former editor-in-chief of Wall Street Journal as well as Los Angeles Times. He has taken the time to actually join into the discussion. Norman, would you like to ask a follow-up question or a question in general?
China’s transformation proof of the efficiency and effectiveness of its system
Norman Pearlstine: Thank you very much for the opportunity to join the conversation and to learn from you and your colleagues on the panel whose perspectives are not often well publicized or understood within the US, certainly in recent years. I think that a number of questions have come to mind, but for many Americans, I think it is difficult to fully appreciate the role of the Chinese leader in China. What we’ve observed over the last years since his coming-to-power at the end of 2013, beginning of 2014 . And I would be curious as to whether Dr. Wang feels that his years are a logical and natural extension of his three predecessors or whether he is really either a throwback to prior times or creating a new set of beliefs and values that are in many ways different from what at least many people outside of China thought they were observing in the two decades, say, prior to his coming-to-power.
Wang Huiyao: Thank you for the question. China has just celebrated the Centennial – last year – the 100-year anniversary of founding of the Communist Party of China. So I think you know there is a logic, there is a tradition, there is a continuity of that CPC Movement. Actually they have founded the People’s Republic of China, they have built up the infrastructure, built up the industrial system, built up the social system. So I think overall, you have to see it’s quite successful, particularly in the last 4 decades, since China opened up. So I think the leader of China actually carried tradition of the CPC since Mao, from which has been passed on continuously to Chinese leaders, and him, now. And I think he has carried that tradition very well, of course, with upgrade, with a lot of improvement, with a lot of creation and innovation.
So I think, basically for the last 10 years for example, since the leader of China is taking over, you see in China now, there are tremendous changes and transformations. For example, the infrastructure. We now have much better infrastructure. China has become more active. China proposed the Belt and Road Initiative, which is a new master plan for the developing countries to really undertake development. Also China is forming some new concept, for example, “building the community with a shared future”. China is more supportive. China becomes the second largest donor to the United Nations, and provides 10% of the budget for the WTO. During the pandemic fighting, China already donated 2 billion doses of vaccines to over 120 countries. In the last 10 years, China has become the largest automobile market in the world, with 25 million auto production a year. It’s the largest clean energy vehicle producer in the world, largest solar power energy producer in the world, and it’s the largest producer of wind power, hydro power. You know the list goes on. The reason they can do that is that they have one strong party leadership also with the Chinese leader at the core, but also that there’s a system, the continuity of the CPC. It’s one Five-Year Plan after another Five-Year Plan, after another Five-Year Plan, one centennial plan for CPC and another centennial plan for the People’s Republic. So I think there’s a logic and with 5,000-year history, uninterrupted civilization until today, there must be some logic, there must be some internal rhythm. They must have done something right. So I think how we can really be interpreted by the Western countries is quite interesting as well, because China has a different system.
I think now, the whole world is paying attention to the infrastructure. President Biden announced $1.2 trillion infrastructure plan. The EU chair announced €300 billion Global Gateway. China has already been working on infrastructure 8 years ago – the BRI. We can have different systems, but we should work together.
China has always had a very strong central government, a very strong leadership and the continuity is there. There’s no lame duck and there’s no changing of the government every three or four years, no opposition for the opposition’s sake, veto for the veto’s sake. We see some problem with the Western system, too. China, of course, is not perfect. China is still improving, but China is gradually finding its own way. For example, China already has 1 billion Social Security beneficiaries, 1.3 billion people under some kind of a medical care. It’s the largest medical care system in the world now and every year with 10 million people graduating from college, it’s the largest college producers in the world and also has lifted 800 million people out of poverty. There must be something done right for China – if you compare the KPI, China is probably doing everything OK. Of course, Western countries like US has its own advantages: innovation, talents, many good things. But I think we should supplement to each other rather than becoming a rivalry. So I think there’s a lot of things we can learn from each other.
Norman Pearlstine: If I could just follow up quickly on that? How should we interpret the presumed decision that will enable the Chinese leader to stay in power for more than two terms? That certainly seems like a deviation from his three predecessors to an outsider. And I would be grateful for any guidance you might be able to provide.
Wang Huiyao: Just a personal observation – for example, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel who has just retired, she served for 16 years. And many other countries’ leaders have longer terms. Putin has been serving many years, many terms. So I think for China, in the history of China there is always a strong leadership, we need a really strong leadership. We can’t have a lame duck. We need a lot of things to really be implemented. That’s why China is so efficient and highly effective because we have a strong central leadership. And also I think historically China always has had very strong and centralized government and with strong leadership. So I think this is really good for the country, because even actually for Deng, he reserved the central military position for more than two terms. And Jiang also maintained military commission chair for more than two terms. So I think if things are going well, if the leader is really doing great in terms of producing economic benefit, producing social benefit, producing the great rejuvenation for the country, he deserves more time to do that, and, people really look forward also for futute better times to come. .
Norman Pearlstine: Well I guess it’s worth noting that in New York City, Mayor Bloomberg also wanted more than two terms and got a third one, too.
China-ASEAN trade and rail connections of great significance
Feng Da Hsuan: OK. I’d like to turn the question as suggested by Professor Zhu on the Belt and Road Initiative of China, particularly about the Belt and Road Initiative with respect to Southeast Asia. As you know, Henry, I grew up in Singapore. So Southeast Asia meant something to me. As I always tell my friends, you can take me out of Singapore but you cannot take Singapore out of me. As you have mentioned earlier that January 1st of this year, something incredible has happened, and that’s called the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership or RCEP. And RCEP primarily is run and driven by the ASEAN 10 nations, with China, of course, being a very, very important component. And the other thing that has happened within ASEAN is that the high-speed rail between Kunming and Vientiane of Laos has been completed. This is the first time for a pour Southeast Asian nation like Laos suddenly jump from almost no train to high-speed rail within 5 years. This is going to extend, of course, beyond just Vientiane, because very soon it will go to Bangkok and it will go into Malaysia, and Malaysia into Singapore. And so the relationship between ASEAN and China is going to transform rather significantly, if not spectacularly, in the coming 5 to 10 years. How do you see this has an impact on the Belt and Road initiative vis-à-vis Southeast Asia is playing this important role?
Wang Huiyao: Yes. Thank you professor Feng. Actually I see these enormous progress as you rightly said, on January, 1st, we have RCEP actually becoming effective, the largest free trade agreement in the world. And Asia is really taking a new shape and a new direction because that really symbolized the rise of the Asia as one of the future of the 21st century of the world center because that’s where all the gravity will come. That’s where all the economy will be focused on. Asia would become the largest economy in foreseeable future, not that too distant – I mean, we can see that happen. It’s already almost 40 or 50% of the global economy and will suddenly become 60 or 70% probably as time goes on. So what I see is, not only the China and ASEAN cooperation is important and RCEP has also actually enabled the free trade agreement between China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand because they are all connected through RCEP. So this is really significant. More than that, China is really a leading country now in terms of the infrastructure. For example, China has 2/3 of global speed railway. The total length of that is equal to the next 10 countries combined whereas US military budget is equal to the next 10 countries combined. You see China is busy building economic alliance – RCEP, applying to join the CPTPP, also applying for DEPA, a digital agreement of some kind, and also the Belt and Road, whereas the US is building up AUKUS, and then Quad or Indo-Pacific security alliances, so you see actually there are a lot of differences there. I see a very great significance in China building – first, the railway between Kunming and Laos, which is the first time China has the railway reconnecting with ASEAN countries which can connect to Thailand, Myanmar and many other ASEAN countries, even to Singapore and Malaysia. So that really is a huge symbol. I had a talk with David Lampton just not too long ago. He wrote a book called Rivers of Iron, in which he described the railway as an iron river. So I think that’s going to become a supply line, a pipeline for China as they connect to each other. So I think it’s very significant. And it shows how future – whether it’s US, EU and China, or vast number of developing countries, they all really need infrastructure and that’s where the boom and prosperity come from for next half a century. The Belt and Road needs to be further enhanced, and we probably could multilateralize the Belt and Road. AIIB could become a part of that, World Bank could be part of that, Asian Development Bank could be part of that. Let’s really work together – for BRI, B3W, and EU’s Global Gateway, to combine, for the benefit of developing countries. And I think this channel allows railway services, which is a good example.
Feng Da Hsuan: Very good. Professor Zhu?
Despite a complex history, the China-Russia relationship remains strong
Zhu Zhiqun: I have a question about Russia. As US relations with both China and Russia continue to deteriorate, China-Russia relations have significantly deepened recently, in particular, the leaders of China and Russia have established sort of a close personal bond. Now, how do you view Russia’s role in great power politics today and what does the future hold for China-Russia-US trilateral relationship?
Wang Huiyao: Thank you Professor Zhu for this question. China and Russia, historically, have had many problems, a lot of disputes, and they also have quite different culture as well. But somehow they now share something in common, which is that they are all actually pressed, squeezed or opposed by Western countries. For example, Russia has an issue of Ukraine and NATO’s expansion to Russian neighboring countries. And China has this problem of US having a security treaty with Taiwan and then US is actually getting closer to the Chinese mainland – all those geopolitical hotspots. So I think China and Russia actually share the same concerns, which is the worry that the US, or Western countries’ expansion into their own territory or their own neighborhood. That’s something really made them get together, too. Because they felt, for example, what that has happened in Kazakhstan just recently, shows that, again, there’s always some foreign interference somehow. So I think, for that reason, of course, they probably has to unite, to really counter off this common threat.
Ties between China and Russia are also getting better economically. Russia this year has done so well in terms of trade with China, and China vice versa. There’s a trade increase, there’s an energy increase – natural gas supply, there are many economic benefits. China just celebrates the centennial of the founding of the CPC. Looking back, in the old days, China actually learned many things from Russia and during the founding of the fPeople’s Republic, 150 key projects was aided by former Soviet Union to help China to build the first generation of its infrastructure capacity. So there’s a lot of good feelings there, too. Even though they had a territorial dispute in the 1960s, somehow I think they share a lot of similarity, and I think the most important is that they share a common threat, similar situations – their neighborhood has been intrigued by other countries. So they are forced to work together. Russia and China, if they really work together, they can be also quite significant in opposing to any threat that they may face. So it’s actually mutually assured safety, I would say. Also, Furthermore, this Shanghai Cooperation Organization as well, and Russia and China and many other Asian countries are in it – there’s a strong tie and bond there as well.
Enormous opportunities in cooperation between China and India
Feng Da Hsuan: To talk about Russia and China is a great sideway into the question that’s on my mind, and that is China in India. Quite recently, Russia had worked with the India to agree that India will also participate in the Olympics. I don’t know how many people that actually will come from India as a sportsman, but India has said “we are coming to the Olympics”.
The relationship between China and India is always an intriguing one if not a questionable one. India is the second largest in population in the world. If you add China and India together, there almost 40% of humanity. And throughout history, China and India never had any conflict until 1962, and that conflict, by comparison to all the wars we have in the Second World War and so on, is relatively small. Some people might even call it a skirmish but from 1962 onwards, until today, India and China somehow have difficulty coming together to work for humanity’s sake. After all, there are 40% of human population. One of the things that always surprises me is that even though India is just next to China with 1.3 billion people, the number of Chinese universities that actually spend having real interest in studying India’s ways and means and histories and so on is very few. And I also know that among India with 1.3 billion people, the number of people that actually speak Chinese is measured in the thousands, so essentially that’s zero. How do you see India and China progress onwards? I think this is quite important, no?
Wang Huiyao: I agree with you, Professor Feng, on that point. Both India and China are great civilizations. They are really great countries and the two largest most populous countries in the world. And as you said, the two countries combined accounts 40% – even more than 40% of the global population. I think the relationship between China and India goes back a long way. The Western returnees are called “Haigui” in China – the term goes back to Xuan Zang going to India. India has had a huge influence on China in regard to Buddhism.
There are many reasons for the two countries to work together. Before the pandemic, I’ve been to India almost every year and I saw the transformation going on in India and opportunities on how China and India can work together. For example, urbanization, environment, elevation of poverty, infrastructure and transportation, all things that China has gone through can be really beautifully reproduced in India. It’s a huge opportunity in the market for 1.3 or even 1.4 billion people there. A Chinese company like Xiaomi, became the largest mobile phone seller after 3 years, now accounts about 50% of the market, which is an enormous opportunity. There are hundreds of apps of internet companies working in India. So it’s really unfortunate to see the situation deteriorate and has gone sour in the last few years. From time to time, we see the border disputes and things like that. But I’m glad to see Prime Minister Modi announced that India is going to join the Olympics. I hope that we can go back to the days when Modi visited Wuhan in China, and the Chinese leader visited India. I really hope these two big countries can really work together. India always traditionally pursues and leads non-aligned movement and not joining any big camps, they are the leader for that movement. Even though for the Quad – the Indian Ambassador told me that is more an economic purpose rather than a military purpose. I hope that China and India can really work together and not be occupied by those border dispute. Let’s all cool down and separate from that area. Let’s concentrate on peaceful cooperation. Maybe that’s the way to go. I really see there are enormous opportunities for both China and India.
Great economic benefits remain in working with China
Zhu Zhiqun: You mentioned India as a leader in the Non-Aligned Movement. So many countries are stuck in the competition between China and the United States. They found themselves between a rock and a hard place. Some countries, apparently, have decided to follow the US leadership in taking a more confrontational approach towards China, let’s say Australia and Canada. And others, such as Singapore, Israel, South Korea, seem to be trying to maintain good relations with both powers. Many more other countries are facing the same dilemma. So what should they do? What are in their best interest? As the US-China competition continues to intensify, do you think they can perhaps do some mediation between China and the United States? What can these other countries do, basically?
Wang Huiyao: Great question, Professor Zhu. We’re living in a really complicated era, a quite different era now than the last century when the Cold War happened. There’s a Soviet Union camp – the Eastern bloc countries and there’s Warsaw Pact and there is the NATO Pact. The economy was not that intertwined and we don’t really need each other. We only need the capacity of gun power at that time.
Nowadays, it’s totally different. China is the largest trading nation with 130 countries. And China has signed the Belt and Road agreement with almost 100 countries and another 50 international organizations. China has just had FOCAC with more than 50 heads of African states. China is pledging another billion vaccines, including 400 million produced locally, for African countries. Also China is committed to many developing projects there, and China has forgiven many loans and debt on that. Also, in terms of ASEAN countries – China has built this fabulous railway between China and Laos. I think nowadays, it’s OK that countries are ideologically aligned with US, but then economically aligned with China. What really turns the world around is the economy and the real benefits. So I think we’re totally different from last century – the Soviet Union era when countries can only survive if you have to team up with one camp or another. But now they can economically benefit from China. China would be the largest economy in the world. The attraction from China will only goes up as days go by. So I don’t really worry about that, because in the end, when so many developing countries, ASEAN countries, or neighboring countries see the benefit of working with China, they will stay with China. If they failed, there is no threat. China has never colonized any places. China never sent troops to occupy any countries and there’s no military base station outside China. So why worry about China? I think that even on the issue of South China Sea – China can really solve it between China and ASEAN countries with South China Sea Code of Conduct and joint explorations joint developments. So I think there’s no foreign interference from China. US used to say we don’t take sides on the South China Sea, now they are not only taking side, but they are also actually the main confronter now inside the South China Sea. If countries see the benefit of working with China, I don’t think they’ll really pick a side or try to side with US or whatever. I think the economic common sense will prevail.
BRI “debt trap” largely a myth
Feng Da Hsuan: Generally in the West, when it talks about the Belt and Road Initiative. Quite often the term called, debt trap, that essentially, China is using this to set up debt trap. Recently there is a very extensive article written by Professor Brautigam in The Atlantic, which says that this concept that the West is proposing is really a myth. What do you think of that? Because certainly in the Western media, you still hear this quite a bit. How does China think about this issue?
Wang Huiyao: That’s really the disadvantage that China has. China doesn’t speak English, but 90% of the prominent media in the world is in English and is dominated by Western countries. Talking about the debt trap, I don’t know how many reporters have really gone up to see the situations in different countries. For example, they probably haven’t really reported much on all those good stories. I think in the US, there’s this Rhodium consulting group that published their investigation in the US and China. They actually done a study on the so-called debt trap. They studied 40% of the project of China in the Belt and Road countries and there were very few on debt trap. There are probably some, 20%, countries with the debt issues. But most of that was forgiven. And then there’s also maybe rescheduling of the debt payment. If you’re talking about real debt issues, it’s only very tiny percentage. So I think that really confirms what you said about another professor’s writing, it’s really a myth, if not a bias. I think largely it’s quite good for many countries. There are many presidents of African countries who spoke out on the benefit from China. I’ve been talking to the ambassadors here in Beijing quite a lot. For example, last year, we held this big roundtable at CCG with 64 African Union ambassadors. They were talking about the African Union free trade agreement, and how they can work with China. I haven’t heard any African ambassador complain to me about the so-called debt trap. So this is really a myth and we need to try to get that myth out of scene. I’m not saying the Belt and Road is perfect. I’m sure there could be problems here and there, but it was not intended and deliberate. It has been largely beneficial to all those countries in this project.
China and the West have different democratic systems
Zhu Zhiqun: I think the label, debt trap diplomacy, has a lot to do with how China’s diplomacy or foreign policy in general is perceived outside China, which leads me to another question for you, that is, China’s international image. We all know that China’s international image is very mixed. Generally speaking in developing countries, you mentioned Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia, China’s image is more positive. But in the developed world, in the West, China’s image is pretty negative. I just wondered, why is that? And how can China do a better job in improving its international image, especially in the West, and perhaps change people’s perception of China’s policies?
Wang Huiyao: You’re right. China’s relations with developing countries are really great. Last month, we had four Pacific Alliance ambassadors from Latin American countries come to CCG’s office. We had ambassadors from Columbia, Chile, Peru, and also from Mexico. Three of them are CPTPP member countries. They all felt now that their larger trading partner is China, except for Mexico. Brazil sees China as larger trading partner, too. China does have really a good image in Central Asia, Latin American, African, and ASEAN countries. ASEAN became the largest trading partner with China last year too. China is the largest trading partner with EU as well.
I think fundamentally there is an issue of value. That’s why we have President Biden, for his democracy summit, he was picking the countries that he determines to be democratic or not. But the democracy concept came from Athens over 2,000 years ago, and has been gradually evolving. Now we are in the contemporary times of modern technology. So I think democracy has to be upgraded as well. For example, in the old-days, when the mountain was high and the king or emperor was far away, it was very autocratic, and you need people to vote to throw him out. But now, with modern technology, media watching, social media, all the feasibility studies and think tanks, leaders in contemporary world know what’s going on. And they hardly make any bad decisions, instead, they make all the good decision because of the decision-making system supporting them. So I think democracy as a concept has to change somewhat. Does this one-man-one-vote really solve all the problems? For example, in the US, everybody comes out to vote, but after you voted, many promises are broken. All the bipartisan fight comes again. January 6th last year is a really good example of that. And every several years, whenever there’s a government election, it always votes down the previous government’s policies. But in China, they have come out with the experiment of this meritocracy system with thousands of years of history. For example, there are 15 million people who go to exams every year for applying university, and quite a few million people applied to be public servants. It’s a kind of selection and election, too. If you don’t have the talent, you won’t be able to serve as a public servant. Also, all the officials in China have to serve from the county level, then to the city level, provincial level, then to the top. You have to work your ways through with your performance. So they have their own logical system. I think that’s the problem. Because Western countries have its own system, China had its own system, so they felt the other’s system is not good. Like Fukuyama said almost 30 years ago, when the Cold War finished, it’s the end of the history. But it’s not. I think that’s where Western suspicion, dissatisfaction, dislike and some resentment come from. Because you have a different system. And yet, our system has done well, on whatever measurement you can measure, on the social benefit of the people, on the infrastructure building, on the fast growth of the economy that the world has never seen. With such a magnitude of a 1.4 billion people, China is thriving so fast and now Beijing is the only city to host two Olympics.
China is not an English speaking country, so it can’t explain too well in the international scene. There is a lot of suspicion and jealousy, and maybe there is some misunderstanding. So I think this is going to take a long time for countries to really understand each other. Of course, Western countries such as US, have many advantages. For example, US is the talent-attracting country, most talents go to the United States. Even during the pandemic time last year there were 200,000 Chinese students went to the United States. I just read something from the Science Council of US, 80% of the PhD students from China want to stay in the US. China has become the largest talent supply country to the US because of its innovation and attractiveness. There are many things that we can work together, rather than viewing each other as a totally different system. Because after all, I think we should learn from each other. Also, we have a multipolar world, we should let different system try. We should really measure by KPI. China has its style of democracy, we have a whole process democracy, consultative democracy, meritocracy, market democracy, and of course, technology democracy, it’s all combined, whereas US has its own system, too, so we all need to improve and we need to work together.
Zhu Zhiqun: Thank you, Henry, I totally agree. I think there’s no one size that fits all solutions to our problems in the world today. And I think the key here is to continue our dialogue and communication to better understand each other. I think all these countries should approach each other with a sense of humility, understanding that maybe other countries have done better jobs in certain ways. We should not approach each other in this condescending way and try to preach others what to do.
I know it’s getting late, and I appreciate you staying with us so late in the evening. I think the relationship between China and the United States is so important and so consequential that the narrative about this relationship should not be just dominated by hoax. Different voices and rational opinions like yours should be heard more frequently and more widely. I appreciate that and appreciate the opportunity to engage with you. We have a few minutes to pick up some questions from the chat room.
Increased numbers of journalists in US and China a positive sign
Max Lu: First of all, Dr. Wang, thank you for giving us the opportunity to chat with you and to hear your insights. This is Max Lu. I came from Bloomberg New Economy, I think you came to our forum in Beijing and probably also in Singapore before. Today I’m here with an interesting question that’s actually from your response earlier. You mentioned that the international media is dominated by company in the West, but in your view, do you think China has the right political and social environment to have its own international media platform? And in what way do you think that will be developed? Thank you.
Wang Huiyao: I think it’s really important for China to have international news and reporters and the media as well. China is trying to develop these itself. China has English media like China Daily, and CGTN, and things like that. But I think what’s more important, I’m very glad to see actually is after and the Virtual Summit between leaders of China and the US, both countries agreed that they are going to invite more journalists to come to each other’s country. I think that’s really important, we need to welcome more international journalists come to China, to Beijing. For example, this time at the Winter Olympics, we welcome more international journalists come to China, even though they have to be sealed in terms of quarantine situation. But I really hope there will be more Chinese journalists going abroad and more foreign journalists coming to China, so that can really promote understanding.
What I’m seeing just now in terms of the English media – all those big media has been dominated by Western country and that is a fact. So China still has a long way to go. But China realized the importance of international media and social media. So I think we probably should find a way to work together, at least we should open the restrictions on journalists to travel to both countries and give them multiple entry visas, let them have more relaxed terms, so that we can have better stories on both sides. So I hope that answers your question.
Feng Da Hsuan: There’s no doubt that what was discussed in the last couple of years between US and China is the concept of the decoupling. Decoupling, I think, either is not possible, or if possible – very, very dangerous for the world. What is China’s view about decoupling between the East and the West? We often hear the views from the West. But I would like to hear how the Chinese feel about the possibility of decoupling?
Wang Huiyao: I think decoupling is an old concept. During the Soviet Union era, the Cold War really made US and Soviet Union decouple from each other, at least economically. That’s why the Soviet Union was so backward in economy and eventually collapsed out of that. But now with globalization, we are really intertwined so much. For example, for the last four decades, all these US companies have been coming to China. We have 70,000 US companies set up in China and then they generated about $700 Billion revenues in China. And now you see, all the Fortune 500 US companies are operating in China. During the national holiday last year – I went to the Universal Studio that was newly opened in Beijing, which was flooded and packed with tourists, and that’s the largest universal studio out of the five Universal Studio in the world.
Furthermore, I think it’s impossible to decouple. For example, US now keeps sanctioning China, first HUAWEI, and then ZTE and many other companies. Now the total number of companies they put on the entity list is over 600 now from China. And yet China hasn’t actually sanctioned any companies from US. As far as I can remember, I haven’t seen anything yet. China, even though published this new Anti-foreign sanctions law, hasn’t really practiced anything in that regard yet. So the US is doing a lot of damage not only to the Chinese economy, but also to the US economy. For example, the sanction on computer chips and on the semiconductor sector created a crisis – there’s a shortage of chips and there are several million cars that have been less produced in the world because of this shortage of the computer chips that can be used for the automobiles, also telephones too.
Two nights ago, I just had a conversation with Edwin Feulner, the founder of the Heritage Foundation and also Terry Branstad, former US ambassador to China. Terry Branstad told me they had the record number of the agriculture sales to China last year. And the agricultural land becomes more expensive to acquire in the middle states, Iowa and those places. I think that agriculturally, China has many deserts, mountain areas. US has a lot of fertile land, they can supply a lot of agriculture food products to China. Technology companies like Apple makes 90 to 95% of computers and phones in China, Qualcomm sells 60% products in China and Intel sells 60% in China. So how can they decouple? They are hurting themselves. So I think this kind of re-orientation process, adjustment period, will take a few years. But gradually, like US-China Business Council, American Chamber of Commerce, they’ve done surveys again and again, most American companies want to stay in China, want to expand in China and want to invest in China. Nobody wants to return. So how can you decouple on that? And also there’s people to people exchanges. I was told by charge d’affaires of US Embassy here in Beijing that they issued over 200,000 visas for the Chinese students to go to the United States during the pandemic last year. So how do you decouple? We are totally in a different intertwined era. If you’re hurting China, you are hurting yourself too, and vice versa, so I think it makes no sense to do that.
So my advice would be, we have a lot of differences, we’re getting into a new phase of the relations, a new realistic approach to the bilateral relation is needed. There will be adjustment on both sides. I was talking to Joseph Nye, he was saying maybe by 2035, people come to realize that we have to sit down and work together and peacefully co-exist. Graham Allison was saying China and the US are twins that we cannot separate. Also, if we really do damage to one, the other will suffer as well. My feeling is that we’re probably getting a co-petition – a cooperation and competition era. But let’s have a peaceful competition, an Olympic style competition. For the motto for Olympics this year, they extended from three words to t charge d’affaires here words now: faster, higher stronger – and together. So, we can’t separate, we have to be together.
Zhu Zhiqun: I think we can’t thank you enough Henry for join us, and providing such insightful, fruitful thoughts. And we wish you and CCG continue the success in the future, and we hope to do this again in the future. I also want to thank our audience members who have stayed here online till the end. Thank you for your support, for our program. Enjoy the weekend and happy Chinese new year.
Wang Huiyao: Thank you Professor Zhu and Professor Feng, and thank you all very much.
Note: The above text is the output of transcribing from an audio recording. It is posted as a reference for the discussion.
