Has China Won? | Kishore Mahbubani | John Mearsheimer | Tom Switzer

hello there and welcome to the Center for independent studies my name is Tom Switzer and I'm the executive director here at CIS now for those of you tuning in who aren't familiar with CIS where a public policy research organization we've been around since 1976 we're primarily focused on domestic affairs and in coming months we're especially interested in promoting what we think is a sound productivity-enhancing economic reform agenda that will help Australia emerge stronger from the coronavirus crisis this will be our first recession in nearly three decades so we want to put in place sound policies that sharpen incentives to create wealth and invest in our country's future growth and prosperity but foreign policy is also a big issue for CIS and Cova 19 has affected our place in the world insofar as it has drastically raised tensions between China and the West of course China is our largest trade partner it accounts for about 36 percent of our export wealth which when you think about it is more than Japan South Korea and the United States combined Chinese students also studying in Australian universities they contribute as much as 12 billion dollars a year in fees at the same time the United States has been our most important security Ally since the end of World War two and the onset of the Cold War Australia has important values and interests in common with the u.s. reflected especially in intelligence sharing and favorable access to US defense and technology on many issues in the world Americans and Australians find ourselves on the same side which brings us to the coronavirus crisis now the United States and its allies have expressed outrage at the way the communist regime in Beijing has dealt with the outbreak of the virus Beijing has accused the United States of trying to smear and shift blame according to Beijing Washington should focus on controlling the outbreak at home meanwhile a diplomatic spat is raging between Beijing and Ambra China's ambassador here recently threatened economic retaliation over cambers call for an independent investigation into China's handling of the Cova 19 outbreak so to discuss these issues and to put them in a broader historical context of the us-china relationship this increasingly intense strategic and economic competition between our largest trade partner and our most important security ally we have a great debate between two distinguished intellectual heavyweights Kishore marble Barney in Singapore and John Mearsheimer in Chicago now I'll introduce and call on both Kishore and John to make a two minute introductory statement before we address questions now for their introductory remarks I will call on Kishore and John to address two key questions the first can China rise peacefully which is the subject of the final chapter in John Mearsheimer z-- the tragedy of great power politics and the second question is is China winning which is a subject of key shores new book well let's get started Kishore marble Barney is author of has the West lost it a provocation that was published two years ago and just out available in all good bookstores in Australia has China won the Chinese challenge to American primacy which the distinguished military historian Sir max Hastings and the leading CNN commentator Fareed Zakaria have recently praised a former ambassador to the United Nations twice in the Reagan era and the post 9/11 era kishore marble Barney was the founding dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at National University of Singapore now Kishore was a guest at CIS both in 2004 and two years ago in 2018 and it's a great pleasure to welcome him back to see is Kishore over to you thank you very much such a pleasure to be back with joining you this discussion when you quickly answer your no two questions the first one is can China rise peacefully and the simple answer is yes because one point I emphasized my book as China one he said we are entering a new era of world history 200 years of Western domination the world streets coming to an end and we're returning in a norm of the first eighteen hundred years from the year one three or eighty twenty two largest economies were always those of China and India so we going back to a different world and remember that when China was dominant the number one power for most of 1800 years China didn't conquer the world China didn't go out like the British the French the Dutch and Spanish conquering colonies all over the world deep in the I believe in the 15th century they had the largest most powerful navy under Emperor Ching hai they went around the world didn't conquer any countries so I think that's a very critical point to bear in mind with just one minor qualification and this is an important one Australian audience as China is rising and returning it's important that we try to work with China rather than try to provoke China and that's why managing the rise of China is very critical the second question is can China win and the question is will what so clearly if you mean in terms of can China become the world's largest economy I can confidently say yes and you know all that the Chinese have to do is achieve half the per capita income of United States and they won't have an economy twice the size noticed it's simple mathematics but of course if I can China and we will do mean that China will step in and take over the role of the United States and try and dominate the world I don't think China wants to live and as John Mearsheimer who's gonna speak Nix has brilliantly documented in his book the great delusion America fought a lot of unnecessary wars in the Middle East and elsewhere this is something that China and reasonably confident is not interested in doing he wants to focus on making China a great power but not taking over America's role in terms of managing with Kishore thank you and over to John Mearsheimer now John is the author of the great delusion liberal dreams and international realities it was published last year by Yale University Press John's also the author of the tragedy of great power politics which foreign affairs magazine rated as one of the three most influential theses of the post Cold War era the others being Frank Fukuyama's the end of history and Samuel Huntington's the clash of civilizations John Mearsheimer is also a professor of political science at the University of Chicago John was a guest of cis just last August 2019 and he can watch these events including a debate with Australia's leading strategic thinker Hugh white in Canberra in front of more than 500 people John welcome back to see is and over to you thank you Tom for inviting me to be on the show it's great to be back with you and also with my old friend Kishore ah I have very different views on these two questions than Kishore does with regard to the question whether can whether it can rise peacefully I think the answer is no my basic view is that what China is going to do as it continues to rise economically is that it's going to translate that economic might into military might and it's going to try to dominate Asia the way the United States dominates the Western Hemisphere it's going to try to become a regional hegemon the way the United States is a regional hegemon here in the Western Hemisphere my view is that China would be crazy not to try to dominate Asia because in a world where there is no policeman no Nightwatchman it makes eminently good sense for a state to want to completely dominate its region so I think that China will set out to do that of course the United States does not tolerate pure competitors the United States wants to remain the only regional hegemon in the world and if therefore will go to great lengths to prevent China from dominating Asia and the end result will be you'll get this intense security competition with a serious chance of war with regard to the second question we're very early in this competition so it is hard to predict who's ultimately going to prevail I think when you read t-shirts excellent book and you listen to him over the years he thinks that the Chinese have the wind behind their back and that the United States is kind of like a dinosaur I would not bet on that Kishore if I had to bet I'd bet on the United States the United States has taken on for potential care competitors in its history Imperial Germany Imperial Japan Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union the United States played a key role in putting all four countries all four of those countries on the scrap heap of history the United States will go to great lengths to compete with China and to prevent it from dominating Adah and when you look at the demographics of China and the United States and you look at the economies of the two countries I think the United States is in better shape than China is and for that reason if I had to bet I'd bet on the United States well John thank you so much for that and as you can tell here John Mearsheimer and Kishore marble Banach clearly take different views on this question about whether China can rise peacefully and whether it's on the process in the process of replacing America in terms of primacy in East Asia I want to deal with these issues and remember if you'd like to ask any questions just chat and we'll get the questions to our special guests towards the end of the show but I'd like to talk about what's really the big issue in in international affairs in the last week or so and that is the question of an international inquiry into the Chinese government's handling of the outbreak of the corona virus in Wuhan a Kishore marbled Barney surely calls for that inquiry our reasonable afterall the virus was made in China it's infected more than 3.5 million people it's killed more than a quarter of a million people and it's triggered a global recession perhaps even a depression what's so wrong with an inquiry Kishore marble Barney where is my correction the virus was not made in China it exploded in China as you know viruses can break out anywhere it was a natural phenomenon and I think that China in my view will not be opposed to any objective impartial scientific inquiry into what happened because they are as eager as anybody else to find out what's happened but what the bundle and understand that the calls for the inquiry apart the politicization of this virus debate and attempt to blame China an attempt to put all the focus on China so that countries especially I would say United States and some Western European countries can hide the fact that they were actually incompetent in their response to this virus and this is not sure maboob Ani speaking Li you know Richard Houghton is the editor ah one of the most influential journals in the world a lot itself and this is this is he said this is what he says he says the reason why be very particularly UK government the US administration and many European countries is because The Lancet published five papers five in the last week of January telling exactly what was happening in China and describing how the virus was deadly it was killing people number of deaths were rising patients being admitted to ICU there was no treatment for the virus and he was going person-to-person transmission he said all this information had been put up by the end of January and guess what US and many European countries did nothing in February did nothing in March the Chinese were puzzled and then and after having failed to respond they want to try and hide the fact they they responded incompetently by trying to blame China and even Fareed Zakaria said a few days ago I saw I didn't say on CNN this is clearly a political move so you if you went deep politicize the scientific inquiry and just keep it to the scientists I'm sure China will cooperate with the scientists okay now the Trump administration of course claims that the virus leaked from some lab in Wuhan and and so far it's failed to produce the the relevant evidence but John I want to bring you in here one Australian government security official has told The Sydney Morning Herald this week quote we can't repeat the mistakes of the past the WMDs Fiasco was not that long ago this is referring to the incorrect intelligence reports in the United States and Britain that Saddam Hussein's Iraq was developing WMD and of course that's formed the basis of the Iraq invasion in 2003 is there a danger here that the Trump administration has mishandled these calls for an international inquiry into Wuhan John Mearsheimer well I think what the Trump administration is doing it's mainly at this point Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in saying that it's quite clear that this virus escaped from laboratory in Wuhan he is a major mistake there is no evidence to support that line of argument at this point and in fact the intelligence community in the United States is saying quite explicitly we have no evidence to support what Pompeo is saying there is no evidence to support what he's saying therefore we the United States are going to end up with and all over our face if we continue to make this argument that the virus actually started in the laboratory move on an escape when in fact there's no evidence to support it and the fact that we have this important precedent which your thought which you talked about which is the Iraq WMD case it makes it all the more dangerous to the United States the fact is the United States when it comes to foreign policy in this day and age oftentimes behaves in an inept way and this is a really good example of the United States doing something that makes no sense something that's not in its strategic interest well what is all this put Australia because in the last two weeks our Prime Minister and foreign minister have been vocal in leading international efforts to call for an inquiry and shortly after I think the Prime Minister made a call for an international inquiry the Chinese ambassador in Canberra he hinted that Beijing might boycott Australia he said persists with the inquiry essentially this is what he warned quote ordinary people in China might ask why should we drink Australian wine why eat Australian beef now far from killing the inquiry all it's done is just infuriated both sides of federal politics is one of the few areas where the coalition government and the Labour opposition agree they're both United against China on this a quiche or marble barn is surely China's so-called wolf warrior diplomacy that's no way to win allies to its cause Kishore well you know tom I'm trying I'll try to speak to you as a friend of Australia at the same time aware of how politically charged the atmosphere in Australia is how strong the feelings against China and so it's very difficult now to speak out frankly on these things but as a friend of Australia I think it's important for Australians to grasp a few critical points number one as I said the the era of Western domination of world history is over and you're going to see the return of Asia now Australia is not in Canada Australia is in Asia now as in all your neighbors have begun to carefully gradually adjust to this new world that is emerging now you insist or not changing or adapting to your new geopolitical environment you will be creating problems for yourself and you know there's some high-end loss of geopolitics in fact many of them are spelled out in John Mearsheimer spoke the great dilution and I would say what the iron loss of job politics is to never pull the tail of a tiger and edit I am when the tiger is already angry and lots of people are throwing stones at this tiger you decide at that point in time to pull the tail of the tiger so there there's some geopolitical wisdom in handling great powers carefully this is by the way equally true of the United States to if you are a neighbor of the United States you just got to be careful in how you manage the United States and and as I think I read somewhere recently John Mearsheimer saying in the book how the United States feel if suddenly Russians came in and established bases in Mexico and Canada and then John wisely said that of course the United States will get very upset so every country and I agree with John here that every country we worry about what's happening is neighborhood so so Australia has got to be away it's in the neighborhood and I start of developers degree of geopolitical sensitivity to this new environment and so that it's all to put it very simply and very suddenly Australia's got a reboot its entire strategic thinking and decide how its gonna adapt to a new world well following on from that Kishore John Mearsheimer arm it doesn't Kishore have a point that we need to be geopolitically sensitive to the rising power of China it is our largest trading partner it accounts for nearly 40 percent of our export wealth we are in Australia probably heading into our worst recession since certainly the Great Depression in the 1930s aren't we vulnerable to China's economic coercion I mean what can we do to push back against these kind of Chinese threats should we become more diplomatic and move slowly but surely into the Chinese sphere of influence well I have a different view of what's happening in Asia and in the world more generally than kishore kishore tends to see the situation that without it of course civilizational terms he sounds a lot like Sam Huntington great he talks about Asia rising and the West declining and it's as if Asia with this unified entity and that's just not the case at all the Japanese live in mortal fear of the Chinese in both the Japanese and the Chinese the last time I checked are in Asia the Indians are worried silly about the rise of China so within Asia you have all these cleavages and you have a large number of countries in Asia that are economically tied to China and all sorts of ways as you described to Australia but they also are strategically tied to the United States and they're very fearful of China I would say for those states and this of course includes Australia yes you have economic interests that will push you to side with China but you also have strategic interests that will push you to side with the United States and the $64,000 question is which way are you gonna go and the answer is you're gonna go with the United States you're gonna go with the Japanese and you're gonna do everything you can to contain China because it is big and it is powerful and it is strictly well in other words security Trump's prosperity K so how would you respond to John Mishima security Trump's prosperity John will be very surprised to discover that I agree with him quite a lot and I certainly agree with you John that Asia is this large and diverse place and I agree with you John that countries like Japan and India South Korea are all very worried about China's rights it's a fact I mean certainly I'd be very of course it was a small cat next to me that suddenly became a tiger I'd be very worried too you know natural so but at the same time III would encourage Australia to watch how other Asians deal with China first a simple example which I think George Kennan would have been does the first thing you do is to insult a great power right the Japanese are very concerned but at the same time you notice how the Japanese are trying to make sure that their relations with China remain on the even keel Modi and Xi Jinping have spent more time with each other talking face to face than any two leaders have in recent times so there everybody yes we have to deal with the new China and Australia unfortunately has not accepted the fact that this is a different China that you have to deal with and a bit since every and these adjustments by the way in Asia are very subtle very very subtle changes going on and I also want to emphasize I agree with John that most of the countries in this region one the u.s. to stay off this region they would like to see us from US presence but they would like to see a very tactful diplomatic US presence that doesn't force countries to choose so it is possible actually to work out arrangements whereby China can rise peacefully and we can all live in a relatively secure and stable environment and doesn't the Trump administration John complicate matters as you well know the United States have five security allies in the region Australia Japan South Korea the Philippines and Thailand it has security networks based throughout the Asia Pacific and the u.s. Alliance has been very much the centerpiece of Australian foreign policy but John Mearsheimer how does Australia respond to an ally in the words of a mutual friend of all three of ours Owen Harry's the distinguished foreign policy thinker who used to be a senior fellow here at sea is how does Australia respond to an ally that is quote inconsistent chaotic and championing insularity join me Shana oh let's take those words one by one champion championing insularity that sort of implies isolationism like the United States wants to leave the region and I know from when I was in Australia in August of last year this is August 2019 there are a number of Australian strategists who think the United States is not going to be there for Australia that we're going home that is not happening there is absolutely no evidence that the United States is leaving East Asia we're building up our military capabilities in northern Australia were inclusive increasing our patrols in the South China Sea were deploying more military forces to the region we're not going away the United States is bent on containing China so on that dimension there's no problem at all the United States does behave in a quite ham-fisted way in foreign policy these days and when you look at how the United States manages its relations you look at the micro-level and how the United States operates in East Asia today it's quite clear that we're not doing a very good job and I blame this mainly on the Trump administration I think that will change as time goes by for two reasons one I think the Trump will not be President forever and number two I think is the Chinese threat becomes greater and greater it will be give the United States more and more incentives to behave in strategically smart ways the problem we face top and key sure is that during the unipolar moment we were so powerful compared to all the other states in the system that we could afford to behave in reckless ways because there were no real consequences because we were by far the most powerful great power in modern history well that world has gone away I think this is a point that Kishore and I agree on with the rise of China the United States is facing a potential peer competitor and that will cause us Tom I think the focus our mind and will begin to behave better or smarter at the micro level my guest John Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago he's the author of among other books the history of great power politic the tragedy of great power politics published in 2001 revised issue came out in 2014 and Kishore marble Bonnie who joins us from Singapore he's the author of is China winning or has China won and that is available at all goods bookstores are later in the month Kishore let me follow on from John and his point there about American preeminence in the region I think there's a consensus here between the two of you that the United States has barely mishandled relations with Russia and Europe more generally in the post Cold War era a dito the Middle East in the post 9/11 era it's badly damaged American credibility and prestige but you both agree that America will remain a very powerful presence in East Asia Kishore how do you respond to the those folks and they're not just the Hawks in Chintan Oren camber it's increasingly felt across Japan and South Korea even in Europe that China increasingly represents the number one strategic danger to the world and moreover the rest of the world must be less dependent on China for supply chains Kishore oh yes I think it's it's very reasonable to say you know old proverb don't put your all your eggs in one basket and I would say yes you have to certainly maybe reduce your reliance on China for the economic production nothing better that's quite reasonable but I want to emphasize let's say for example think Japan Japan is is you know the Prime Minister are they spending some money to move Japanese investments outside China to issue away where will the investment move to to ASEAN countries to Indonesia and Malaysia Singapore Thailand but guess what this Japanese investment will lose osteons growth and as osteons economy grows they will trade more with China so it's not a zero-sum game that we are playing at the end of the day on this economic sphere and yeah I just want to come back to a critical friend that Don was making earlier but how you banished China in this transition process and I actually want to recommend a book that John wrote called American diplomacy with a new forward and you know Josh can and give very very good advice in John correct me if I got the advice writer for how to manage China so okay so I'll just explain for everyone George can and the intellectual architect of the Cold War doctrine of containment yep that's right so you know just very quickly four pieces of advice number one your success will depend on your domestic spiritual writer what you do at home number two cultivate friends and allies number three don't insult the Soviet Union because you got to deal with the Soviet number four be humble so you know frankly either you United States of America applying George canon's advice at the beginning of the Cold War in the management of China we would have a very different world and we could manage the rise of China in such a way that our interest whatever what we call your interests are not necessarily jeopardize you can actually find ways and means of working with each other and that's what we should be striving to do I'm not saying you should count out China or jump at china's behest but what you need to do is find intelligent ways and means of dealing with a new rising power well John Mearsheimer I mean all the available public opinion polling evidence indicates that the Americans are increasingly anxious about China anti-china cinnamons are rising this is bipartisan both Democrats and Republicans why go I can't America take kishore as advice and be humble and be more sensitive about china's enhancing regional profile john because the united states could not tolerate a situation where any great power dominates all of asia where any great power dominates all of europe the united states has a rich history of contesting any country that tries to dominate its region of the world and become a peer competitor of the United States from a realist point of view and as you both know I'm a realist par excellence in an anarchic system where there's no higher authority it's very important to be powerful it's very important to be more powerful than the other states in the system because that's the best way to survive the Chinese understand this intuitively they understand that explicitly they understand that during the century of a national humiliation where the biggest problem was that they were we they didn't have much power they intend to have lots of power they want to dominate Asia but we don't want them to dominate Asia one thing that I think that Kishore and I disagree on is I think international politics is very much a zero-sum game as China gains we lose as we gain China loses and this is one of the reasons I think the competition is so intense now if I can just make one more point Kishore you keep talking about George Kennan George Kennan was the father of containment he was interested in containing the Soviet Union I'm interested in containing China George Kennan Azad is at odds with you and George the only way to show mama Bonnie well III III don't know I'm sure you know him better than I do knowing his writings he was also very shrewd and very realistic as you know he opposed the Iraq war that the u.s. blundered into and I think he was a give us a life today he's maybe sorry Alice and if you are realice you got to consider the first question is it realistic to think that you can contain China in the same way that you can contain the Soviet Union because the China is an exact opposite of the Soviet Union because China actually in and to say you're absolutely right the Chinese one through one to become strong and dominant they anticipated this containment strategy even 20-30 years ago and therefore made sure that all of your neighbors traded more with China than they did with the United States so you mentioned the five allies of United States in in East Asia South Korea Japan Thailand Philippines Australia unless I'm wrong all five do more trade with China than they do with the United States so it is it is an absolute mistake the thing that you can take some of the assumptions of the Soviet Union and apply them to to China because China is in many ways and this is of course a John will completely disagree me on this it's a much more careful strategic player so for example I agree that China will try to become the dominant power but China will try to become the dominant power without using she means it tried to China and Henry Kissinger in his book on China describes how the Chinese believe that the best way to win a war a sunset is without fighting it so the Chinese will become more assertive their influence will grow but the thing to note about China is that as it is rising as a great power it hasn't fought a major war in 40 years it hasn't fired a bullet across this border in 30 years so it's a very different animal that you're competing with then when you're dealing with the Soviet Union so it's important to discuss some of the previous methods if you want to deal with the assertive China if you just change in you're at the Center for independent studies with me Tom Switzer and are my guests occasional marble bunny in Singapore and John Mearsheimer in Chicago and remember if you'd like to ask a question to our esteemed guest simply type your questions into the chat section speaking of which we have a question here from Jennifer Lind in Illinois in the United States thanks Jennifer for tuning in question for John Mearsheimer what spark would likely provoke hostilities with China can you please address the issue of Taiwan will China and the u.s. go to war over Taiwan one glance at the map would favor China and that question John Mearsheimer I think there are three main hotspots in East Asia one is the South China Sea where the Chinese are engaging in building islets and turning those small mounds of territory in the South China Sea into military bases the second is Taiwan and the third is the East China Sea where there these rocks that are contested between Japan on one side and China on together those are the three hot spots in East Asia I think the most likely place where you would get a war between the United States and China where you would actually have shooting is over the South China Sea I think that it's also possible that you could have a war over those other two contingencies one being Taiwan to being East China Sea with regard to Taiwan there's no question as Jennifer's said in her question that Taiwan is physically very close to the Chinese mainland and it is roughly six thousand miles from the California coast so as time goes by it becomes more and more difficult for the United States to defend Taiwan it's a very tough contingency I think that if you look at the military balance in Asia Tom it favors the United States now and this is true with regard to defending Taiwan but as time goes by and China becomes economically and militarily more powerful it becomes increasingly difficult for the United States to defend Taiwan to fight a conflict in the South China Sea or the East China Sea Kishore on that note in Taiwan last January the pro-independence leaning Democratic Progressive Party of President sighing when it was returned overwhelming landslide election 58 percent of the vote which is just astonishing and most people believe that was widely seen as a repudiation of Beijing Beijing take into accounts the widespread views of the Taiwanese people when they address this question of Taiwan formerly known as Formosa Kishore to answer that question you have to know the history of how Taiwan became separated from China and earlier on John referred to the century of humiliation that China suffered and as you know during the 8th century emulation from 1840 to the 1949 the British came for China to accept opium seized Hong Kong seized territories and in China had settlements and sack the summer palace and then of course the Japanese came and defeated the Chinese in 1895 and seized Taiwan so Taiwan the most important thing as far as the Chinese are concerned is the last symbol of the century of humiliation that China has suffered so I can tell you that any you talk all the people sentiments any Chinese leader who appears in the eyes of 1.4 billion people to be weak on Taiwan East Coast because it's seen as the last symbol or what's that mean so you want to factor in the sentiments of people be careful what you are doing to the sentiments of 1.4 billion people but having said that I also believe that there can be a peaceful solution to the Taiwan issue and it's a simple case of live and let pick and as you know paradoxically the geopolitical space of Taiwan under present my intuitive allowed to participate in World Health Organization increase when the Taiwanese team you didn't have a government that was a push for any kind of independence but the minute if I won is dumb and tries to push for independence is geopolitical space shrinks so if you really want to help the people of Taiwan and I want to help the people of Taiwan and the energy the Taiwanese have got to be realistic and realize that there are you know 193 countries in the world right apart from a few mini states recognized Taiwan none of the major states are going to recognize Taiwan and you know Taiwan Strait was sealed in 1979 when the United States D recognized by one and recognized China as the government so once that happened that's when history turned a corner so it's a difficult issue but the the best way we can help the people of Taiwan is trying not to politicize the issue and that will give them more space in the geopolitical environment let's turn to the broader issue of containment the strategy that John Muir Sharma recommends we have a question here from Mitch in Sydney question should we revive and expand the quadrilateral security dialogue this of course includes the United States Australia Japan and India should we revive and and and actually expand it after covert 19 I'm assuming he means to expand it to say Vietnam and South Korea this might be the best counterbalance strategy to China but how willing would these nations be in containing China and I should stress John the United States has been very keen for allies to support its freedom of navigation patrols through that 12 nautical mile zone in the South China Sea how would you respond to Mitch John Mearsheimer well I think that the United States has a deep-seated interest in creating an alliance structure or a balancing coalition against China this is what containment is all about just as we created NATO in Europe during the Cold War and we created an alliance structure in East Asia mainly involving Japan and South Korea what we have to do now in the face of the rise of China is create a balancing coalition that includes those four countries for sure but includes other countries as well as well and the United States has to operate on the assumption that all of those countries although they have close economic ties with China will privilege security concerns over economic concerns they will be fearful of China to the point where they will be willing to ally with the United States this does not mean that all of the economic intercourse that takes place between these countries in China will come to an end you want to remember that in Europe before World War one you had a great deal of economic intercourse between the countries that ended up fighting each other in World War one so you can have security competition and significant economic cooperation at the same time but the key question is whether or not the United States can put together this balancing coalition this alliance structure in East Asia to contain China and when you look at the Trump administration and how well or poorly its performed in the realm of foreign policy over the past three years you begin to worry because the Trump administration has not done a good job of cobbling together this alliance and in the future the Trump administration or the Biden administration who is ever in the White House is going to have to do a much better job and I think it is due in large part because I think almost all countries in East Asia are very scared of the Chinese okay so you and John Ness although you express yourselves in different ways you are acknowledging that all rising great powers as I rise the definition of national interests grows as their power increases and they seek a sphere of influence in areas on which their future stability and prosperity rely there's nothing odd about that all great powers have done it look at the United States in the 19th century and of course the Chinese and internal discussions with the Americans say you did this in the 19th century with your Monroe Doctrine why can't we in China do it in East Asia but when I put this question to Paula de Brienne ski from Washington she's a former senior official in the Bush administration the second Bush administration as she said that well we tolerated slavery in the early 19th century that doesn't mean you you allow great powers spheres of influence in the 21st century how would you respond to those Conner concerns because there's their concerns you'll hear on both left and right in public discourse destined for war she says you know many Americans often say why can't China be like us and grant Madison says be careful what you wish for because China today in his point of emergence is exactly where United States was at the end of 19th century and then Teddy Roosevelt came along and started wars territories and that was normal emerging great power behavior so and and the remarkable thing about China today is that there is no Teddy Roosevelt in China who is trying to go around declare war seize territories and so on so forth so China's emergence in that sense so far has been very different from the way that America has behaved and there is absolutely no question that as China becomes strong and more muscular it will become more assertive I mean like if this is what this is how all great powers behave in that sense I agree Mearsheimer as a realist we must understand the great powerless one more space for themselves but it's also important to understand how China will as its power and I think the fundamental difference I think within the way the United States has behaved and indeed join yes I must bullets got this amazing number of Statistics the number of wars the United States is fought in the last 30 years he's been at war for almost every other year every two years or three years over the last appears now that that's that's the American impulse the Chinese impulse and this goes back a long time is to try and win the war without fighting it and I think this is where Kissinger spoke on China is worth reading because he does point out how patiently they will try to accumulate assets and influence and second they can so they can expand their space who don't necessarily have any to go to more and and the other side of the coin I also must emphasize that since we are talking of Japan South Korea India I would say that when things happen in Asia is never black and white okay you can see very subtle changes in the shades of grey and you must be able to wear Asian glasses to see how the shades of grey are changing and to give you something which I hope is undeniable in theory today Thailand Philippines in theory our allies of the United States yes they have a defense treaty but you know honestly do you think seriously the current governments in Philippines and the current government is Thailand is closer to Washington DC than it is to Beijing something has changed on paper that he made treaty allies functionally they're far more sensitive to what Beijing is doing and these are the subtle changes we have to understand it's a very different game he's not a game being played with aircraft carriers missiles and so on and so forth China is you know still only has 300 nuclear missiles compared to 6,000 for the over 6,000 for the u.s. it's a different game and so dealing with China you cannot use the same 90 yeah well on that note John Mearsheimer Australia like many of the countries in the region just sorry Kishore we're losing you there many countries in the region most notably Australia and Japan of this rock bedrock security alliance with the United States of course we don't want to say we're choosing between going with China or going with America but as a supporter of a containment strategy led by the United States and East Asia how worried are you John Mearsheimer by kishore marble barney's point that US allies like the Philippines and Thailand are getting very cozy with Beijing so much so that Thailand I understand is even buying Chinese submarines John Mearsheimer well I think what's happening with the Philippines is worrisome and I think the United States has not done a good job of wooing the Filipinos away from China and from forming closer relations with the Chinese I think with regard to countries like Australia Japan South Korea India there's no major problem I think there are a number of cases Thailand is another one where the United States is gonna have to get much more sophisticated in dealing with those countries to keep those countries in America's orbit and outside of China's orbit I could just say one thing just on Kishore in his notion of putting on Asian glasses and this idea that Asians are part of this culture that thinks about the world differently than we Westerners do it's a view that I don't share at all and I would just note to you Kishore that when I go to China which I do quite frequently I feel intellectually much more at home in China than I do in the United States the court so I don't sense that the Chinese reject realism and have this Confucian or very esoteric Asian way doing business they seem to me talk and act just like the great powers that I think about and write about and before queijo deals with that we got a question here from a Phil Batman in Victoria and he says for Kishore you're thinking seems more subtle concealed Ettore realistic than that of many Westerners is that reflective of your culture or of your personal character and I should stress that one of your books Kishore that's published in the 1990s ken Asians think oh and Harry said it was that you are the most forceful combative insightful spokesman for the new Asia how would you respond to John Mearsheimer there Kishore no actually I'm not surprised at all that John seems very much at home in in China because the Chinese a Chinese think very strategically and think very long term and actually would actually agree with John quite a bit but I also have to emphasize that they the means by which China is flexing his muscles and growing is influence is using predominantly non-military means well let me say by the way so far so that's that's that comes a point in time where if you provoke a Chinese at a certain point and of course they able to react military that's that's that's my goal my goal is to see whether or not we can create the world where the fundamental interests of the United States in taking care of the well-being of 330 million people and the fundamental interest of China the in taking care 1.4 billion Chinese people does not come to a clash and that they can actually live with each other and that that I think is the key point of difference that I have with John John assumes that there has to be a crash III believe there can be a live and that live policy and frankly most of the countries in the region I think would be happier if yes there can be no political competition between US and China which you cannot stop but do it in such a way that you don't force other countries to choose and I have a whole chapter about the six billion people who live outside the US and China and most of them actually are now wishing especially with 19 that both US and China will press the pause button on the strategic competition and fight Kogut 19 together so it is therefore a different world on the world that we grew up in the past that's the key point of emphasized okay now we I have a few minutes left but we've got time for a few more questions I joined me Sharma let's look at the internal makeup of the United States and Kaine asks how will job ID and then the Democrats handle China if he wins in November and Lydia from Melbourne asks the question should allies like Australia be concerned about staying power in one of your earlier answers you said America will remain very much engaged in East Asia East Asia that's also key Shores view but Lydia points to an article in the Atlantic magazine George Parker argues America is a failed state quote a corrupt political class a sclerotic bureaucracy a heartless economy a divided and distracted public the coronavirus he argues did not break America it revealed what was already broken now John Lydia asked a question to the extent that packer is right and the trends continue do they contradict the notion of American regional preeminence for the foreseeable future John well there are certain choose to the Packer piece which we don't have time to get into here but the idea that the United States is a broken state and it's gonna have to come crawling back across or swimming back across the Pacific Ocean to the California shores because it doesn't have the staying power to remain in East Asia is not a serious argument we are an incredibly rich country we have incredibly ambitious foreign policy goals and as I said earlier Tom there is no evidence whatsoever that we are leaving East Asia and if you look at the historical record there's no reason to think that we're going to lead the more important mission which i think is captured by the Packer article to some extent and captured by the other question is the one of whether or not the United States can actually manage its relations with its allies in East Asia and the reason I hope that Biden wins from a foreign policy view is I think that Joseph Biden would do a much better job managing our alliance relations in East Asia and indeed managing relations with the Chinese than the Trump administration has done so it's the actual management of containment how we're putting together the balancing coalition that I find the unsatisfactory and I blame that largely on the Trump administration which tends to treat allies poorly like I file a case you're we have someone Sally from Perth that she's asking are you overstating China's rise and overlooking it's very real weaknesses and limitations and she points out that the economy has gone into its first recession since its transition to a market economy its population is aging fast it has various internal ethnic tensions and has become embroiled in this trade war with China so I use sugarcoating China's problems casual marble bunny crumble and in the face but you know at the end of the day if you are a serious strategic planner and you're looking after the interests of your country do you plan for the best case outcome that China disappears or do you plan for the worst case outcome in which China becomes really really strong and powerful and I must emphasize one small thing the Chinese are no less smart than their East Asian neighbors they can achieve the per capita income of South Korea Japan and Singapore someday and when they do so the Chinese GNP will be phenomenal and that's a different world and so let us ask ourselves what happens in China succeeds how do we deal with that world and what kind of China do we want to see that's why this is great we're in a moment of great transition what an advocating is a wiser way of managing China that avoids pulling its tail and saying hey we now have to do the new reality let's try to make sure we can preserve our interest and keep enough space and also by the race has emphasized keep the United States in the region not throw it out so let's work together to create a peaceful and stable outcome and I am that and that's an optimist we can be done okay so Marvel Barney in Singapore and John Mearsheimer in Chicago on behalf of my colleagues and all of us listening thank you so much for this really stimulating discussion and it seems to me it's a good way to conclude with some remarks by my colleague and fellow board member here at CIS James Phillips he says that conceit that Australia's and America's belief that their values and system would prevail in the medium term made Australia naive in its engagement with China now it's woken up but it's not being careful in picking the issues on which it pokes the tiger thank you egg star and Kisha thanks John thanks case you're great work guys that was terrific you

Channel: Centre for Independent Studies

Views: 407,550

Rating: 4.5990391 out of 5

Keywords: Centre for Independent Studies, CIS, The CIS, The Centre for Independent Studies, AusPol, Australian politics, Tom Switzer, On Liberty, Classical Liberalism, China, Covid, mearsheimer, mahbubani, debate, singapore, chicago, uncle sam, has the west lost it?, has china won?, the great delusion, professor, conflict, what is china, mabubani, chins, measheimer, coronavirus, covid-19, china power, Vs, America, West, Won, pandemic, prosperity, WHO, free trade, globilization, foreign, policy, australia, australian

Id: ZnkC7GXmLdo

Length: 58min 34sec (3514 seconds)

Published: Mon May 11 2020

Reddit Comments

[u/BitterMelonX]

• This debate is a good example of the difference in Asian holistic vs Western reductionist thinking. Kishore has a much better understanding of interconnectivity and how international competition is much less zero-sum than what Americans tend to believe.

• A main error with Mearsheimer's thinking is his consistent belief that a strong China will try to dominate Eurasia. This is rather unlikely. Europe, Russia, India are too strong for this to happen. Due to geographic constraints (bordering too many significant nations), China will mostly be a natural hegemon in East Asia, but Europe, Russia and India will still remain regionally powerful in their own spheres. It's laughable to think that China will have enough power and reach to dominate Europe (which would be necessary to dominate the Eurasia landmass in the way that Americans fear).

• Kishore also does a good job of explaining why Taiwan's international space is shrinking. Taiwan is not blameless in this development.

• Mearsheimer is right that China is very realist, but that realism also means that China has an excellent assessment of its power relative to others. This realism means that China has a much better understanding of how to play the power game without triggering military conflict.

• It's always worthwhile to listen to Mearsheimer if you want to really understand how imperialism works and views the world.

[u/occupatio]

Mearsheimer was talking about the US confronting China even in the early 2000s, way before Obama's pivot to Asia. In that way he was prescient. But he's just channeling the same concerns as the US deep state, and its related think tanks which are much influenced by him.

The main point of his work is very simple: he says that nations care most about power instead of ideology. The fundamental problem with this theory is that power can also be an ideology since the US understanding of power and dominance is actually peculiar in its aggressiveness and bullying of others. US power is not the only form of hegemonic power so it too is ideological in nature.

Eg the US state department has no ability to negotiate or conduct diplomacy without resorting to threats. Meirshemier's view makes no distinction between different styles of diplomacy and different kinds of foreign policy to advance power. Pompeo is not some universal standard that China's foreign ministry aspires to.

Mearsheimer, in a CGTN interview, was asked what the weakness is in his theory. Mearsheimer smartly replied that it's 'interdependence,' recognizing that his theory doesn't account for this properly. Indeed China understands interdependence. That's what BRI is all about. Interconnectivity and interdependence. That's why the BRI is so attractive to many in the global south. It's a different view of power.

[u/fieryrictus]

comments are worth reading too.

[u/fieryrictus]

the moderator is biased

[u/cthulhupikachu]

Both have long been (if not always) pop-thinkers. Their reknown is due to the simplicity of their theories, rather than the quality.

[u/[deleted]]

From what I've read of Mearsheimer I'd think he would agree with Mahbubani

[u/Skibbadadeebop]

Going to watch this when I have the chance, but Mahbubani is way more qualified in terms of experience - he's been a diplomat, UN security council head and SG's representative to the UN.

Mearsheimer, as important as his work is to the field of IR, is a mere scholar with nowhere near the same amount of experience as Mahbubhani.

I don't know who's saying what here, but I can say that I would probably take Mahbuhani's argument more seriously compared to Mearsheimer.