Oxford Debate: Should Europe Side With the U.S. on China?

so as you're all aware of course today's motion is Europe should side with the US on China and I will start the first poll on slido now and you can vote uh by scanning the QR code or going to slider.com and entering the code to China um on where you stand while you vote let me outline a little bit more what we are debating today as the relationship between China and the US grows more adversarial the question on how Europe should position itself has become hotly debated there's no doubt that Europe as a whole and that does include Switzerland has become more critical of China in recent years but while the war in Ukraine has revived the transatlantic partnership euros does not seem ready to Simply align itself with the US on China EU commission president Ursula Funderland called for de-risking instead of decoupling from China immediately before heading to Beijing with French president Emmanuel macron who for his part then loudly called for European strategic autonomy and suggested that the Taiwan issue was not really Europe's problem and just last week Chinese Premier League was welcomed in Berlin and Paris while at the same time notably at the same time Brussels presented its Economic Security strategy a document that does not mention China at all but very clearly is aimed at it Premier League also called the suggested measures discriminatory so should Europe heat Washington's call for closer alignment on China and increase securitization on the economic relationship or can the continent find a path to strategic autonomy separating doing business from security concerns and could it in light of increasingly combative rhetoric from both Beijing and Washington even act as a mediator in the coming super power conflict these are the questions we are going to be discussing tonight thank you very much for your votes um it looks like you have all voted and I will close the poll now now let me introduce the teams that will argue tonight arguing for the motion that Europe should side with the US on China on this side is Noah Barkin a senior advisor in rhodium groups China practice based in Berlin where he focuses on Europe China relations and transatlantic China policy he's also a visiting senior fellow in the Asia program at the German martial fund of the United States and creator of the very popular watching China in Europe newsletter joining him is simonagrano a senior lecturer at the University of Zurich and director of the Taiwan studies project at the same institution she completed her PhD in Chinese studies at Cafe University in Venice Italy in 2008 and since then has held research positions and taught China studies and Taiwan studies at her Alma mother the University of Zurich in Switzerland and the National changchi University in Taiwan arguing against emotion and thus saying that Europe should not side with the US on China is uh right next to me here Philip Lugar who is a senior fellow at the Asia Society policy institute's Center for China analysis yes that is quite a mouthful um and a senior advisor on geopolitics to our sister organization Asia Society France based in Paris he's also a visiting professor at essec business school and a lecturer at the French military academy and joining him is Marina rudiak an assistant professor at The Institute of Chinese studies at Heidelberg University and currently an interim Professor for Chinese society and economy at the University of grettingen her research focuses on China's International Development Corporation China's relations with Russia and Central Asia and the international discourse system of the Chinese Communist party and you will find more on all of our speakers on our website if you so desire thank you so much everybody for joining us tonight we're very excited to have you with us before we start a quick reminder the arguments from our panelists in this debate may not entirely correspond to their actual personal views on the subject matter we are asking them here to argue for one side because we've believed that there are a range of valid Arguments for any of the sites and that to hear them all in a structured debate helps you the audience and frankly helps us helps me understand the issue better and form an opinion on it will have the opportunity and the debriefing to hear more of their insights and discuss a little bit uh where they stand and so with that without further Ado let us move into opening statements on the motion on whether Europe should side with the US on China and it will hand over to Noah Barkin to deliver the opening remarks for the team arguing in favor of the motion Noah you have five minutes on the clock ladies and gentlemen my dominant hand uh I'd like to start by making clear what we are not arguing in favor of which is for Europe to blindly follow the U.S regardless of what its China policy looks like the argument that we're making tonight is that Europe must work hand in hand with the U.S and with other like-minded partners to develop a collective joined up approach to China this by the way is what Japan is doing it's what Australia is doing even India which has been non-aligned since the 1960s is moving in this direction the Indian Prime Minister just spent three days in Washington last week he talk to a joint session of Congress he signed technology deals he signed defense deals why are all these countries siding with the U.S or leaning towards the U.S well it's because they are deeply worried about what is going on in China why is this under Xi Jinping China's president China has built up a massive surveillance State unprecedented that gives the government control and the ability to monitor the entire population um undersea China has waged a campaign of repression against the uyghurs the ethnic minority in the western province of xinjiang the UN has said this it could constitute crimes against humanity under XI China has continued to deepen its relationship with Russia even as it wages a war on the European continent under SI China has weaponized dependencies uh to try to force other countries to conform or comply with its political vision Simona will talk about Taiwan a democratic island of 24 million people three times the size of Switzerland uh that she has vowed to bring under China's fold and he has not ruled out the use of force to do so they call this together and she's China represents a formidable challenge to our freedoms to our security to our economic well-being there is a reason that the EU has described China as a systemic rival for the past four years what about the U.S the U.S is an imperfect partner I'm American grew up in the U.S I've lived in Europe for 25 years when I look across the Atlantic I am concerned about some of the things I see but the U.S is a democracy it's been a democracy for almost 250 years uh the U.S provides security for Europe Russia would have overrun Ukraine by now if it wasn't for U.S support and even with a sharp increase in defense spending uh Europe is probably decades away from being able to defend itself last year let's talk about the economy last year the eu's biggest trading partner was the United States not China and Switzerland's biggest trading partner was the U.S 50 percent more trade with the U.S than with China in 2022 what about China policy transatlantic China policy we've heard some very hawkish rhetoric from Washington over the years but the Biden Administration has made clear that it is not out to contain to isolate or to suppress China it does not support a decoupling from China in fact it has embraced European language on de-risking so when you think about it there are only two alternatives to siding with the US on China the first is siding with China and I'm not sure too many people in this room think that's a good idea the second resting on the idea that Europe can be non-aligned that it can pursue a policy of equidistance between the U.S and China even in a country like Switzerland we should see this for what it is a fantasy thank you very much Noah Barkin for your opening statement well within your time well done um so let's just move it right along without any further Ado to Philippe Le Carr who will deliver the opening remarks also for five minutes maximum for the team arguing against the motion Philip please you should the U.S side with Europe on China that's that's a joke um I'm here as part of the French German couple with my colleague Marina and just to tell you that having lived myself in the U.S for a number of years Europe has tried to no avail to discuss China's issue China issues with U.S administrations two of them in fact the Obama Administration and the Trump Administration without much success so in the past 18 months of course the Biden Administration has been pretending to you know interact with the other side of the Atlantic but we don't really know who's going to come to power in 2024 and it's quite possible that we'll go back to America first again it's quite possible that um you know we're going to take huge risks in getting tied to Washington uh as as Europeans surely the Ukraine war has changed the situation and many Eastern European countries are now in the arms of the NATO and U.S camp at the same time Europe needs to build its own defense capabilities procurement and foreign policies so that it can face offensives from authoritarian States like Russia China others and issued therefore invest in defense and enhance EU procurement mechanisms as opposed to acquire massive U.S weapon systems China should also not be excluded from the conversation because it will become one or two or three polls of the multipolar word in in which we we we we we are living Xi Jinping will get a second term a third term maybe a fourth term who knows the CCP will remain in charge there is no obvious challenge to its leadership therefore the EU in particular has to manage the rise of China dearest King is one way that's what Mrs founder Leon has explained in her March 30 speech and in fact that argument has been followed through by Jake Sullivan the National Security advisor of the United States so it's like the Americans that's that's what I was making this joke at the beginning but the Americans are now following the eua de-risking rather than decoupling still China is interested in Europe we have to grab this opportunity we have to focus on this relationship and make sure that China Europe relations become more balanced which is not the case at the moment it's a chance a Moment of Truth for Europeans last week's visit by Premier Lee Chong in in in Berlin and Paris is a good case in points for example China got more visibility but at the same time Germany got progress in technology standards for example and in France he attended the international Summit for responsible finance and and China committed on that restructuring for a country like Zambia including four billion dollar owned by the Chinese exim Bank so this is good news and at least you know something has been delivered climate change biodiversity diversity these are subjects that we need to engage with let me just conclude with one major point I think um if you look at I mean Noah was referring to um India and Asian countries if you look at each Asian country I mean the major ones India Vietnam um Indonesia Korea they're all in favor of peace they don't want to the region to go at war with each other they certainly don't want the Americans fighting the Chinese we need to listen to them uh trade is going on economic relations are going on they all have political relations as well um I mean in Vietnam the Vietnamese the Vietnamese public may not be in favor of China but the CCP is talking to the Chinese Communists to the Vietnamese Communist Party so we should support Taiwan democracy but also on our own terms European terms and we should uh support peace and the rule of law and and certainly the international law of the sea in the South Pacific and in uh in the South China Sea but by sending a European uh Navy ships and uh and not following uh what the U.S Navy is is telling us to to do so to conclude I think the word is evolving rapidly in a multi-polar fashion uh this is no longer a word of two big powers and and we need to to play our cards and the 27 nations in in addition to France like Switzerland needs to enhance European autonomy vis-a-vis China and vis-a-vis the rest of the world thank you very much Philippe Luke and I want to commend you on that wonderful Point Landing at exactly five minutes thank you so much for your opening statement we'll pass it right along back to the team arguing in favor of the motion to Simona Grana who will deliver her rebuttal in five minutes please is it working yeah okay great so ladies and gentlemen let me start by pointing out and emphasizing the obvious opposing team statement that Europe should maintain strategic autonomy is also the preferred scenario of the CCP and hence you should take it as what it is pure propaganda now French president Emmanuel macron recently emphasized the importance of actually maintaining and keeping economy ties with a newly reopened China while at the same time of course he cautioned about blindly following the U.S and being dragged into crisis that are not ours now I don't know if that's what you meant when you talked about Europe should defend Taiwan in its own way turning the other way but that's not how I interpret it so in my opinion carving out our own path as competing team has argued cannot mean that Europe can opportunistically and parochially pick issues where it's more convenient to meddle from others that it's not convenient for us to get involved in because ladies and gentlemen some of these issues are really bigger than us they are really bigger in the sense that the whole well-being of the planet depends on them let me give you an example let me come to the issue that already now seems to be dividing actually the EU from the US namely a potential Taiwan contingency so according to a recent report by the European Council on Foreign Relations I'm sure you're aware of that it conducted polls on 11 EU member states and a majority of European respondents 62 percent on average are actually in favor of maintaining a neutral stance rather than supporting the United States now I am really convinced that in many cases the polls results are really generated by a lack of awareness regarding the specific outcomes surrounding a potential cross-straight conflict right and the impact really in terms of economic damage and issue a procurement that you have mentioned that would really be coming out of it for all of us so let me address that a conflict over Taiwan would actually trigger a global economic shock with the potential to completely disrupt the worldwide economy as we know it a report by the roading group that came out in December 22 actually estimates that not a war a simple blockade of the island of Taiwan would actually spark 2.5 trillion dollars in annual economic losses no country could actually be spared from that and that's even in the case that the war does not become a fully fledged War but just a blockade now the same report also found that Taiwan would suffer of course the biggest economic hit but that the blow to China would also be in men's and the Fallout would reverberate throughout the whole world now you can imagine due to China's importance as an economic partner for developing countries such a shock could also push more than a dozen developing markets into a crisis now in terms of Industries Supply chains dependent on semiconductors such as Electronics Automotive or the computer industry would of course suffer the biggest disruption but many other Industries for example in the service sector would likewise are dependent on the availability of equipment containing Taiwanese chips and these include for example e-commerce Logistics entertainment industries that collectively employ actually tens of millions of on peoples that would have an impact on your life because it means the spare parts and components for critical public infrastructure such as telecommunications such as medical devices could really become scarce the full social and economic impacts of a chip shortage of that scale are really incalculable but you can imagine that they would likely be catastrophic especially in comparison to what we're now living through because of the war in Ukraine now it is therefore if you hear all of these unfeasible to remain neutral or carve our own path in such a scenario and the US and EU should really devise a clear strategy for advocating deterrence together with other like-minded countries and de-escalation of course in order to avoid a military confrontation neutral bystanding cannot be an option for Europe since the Taiwan conflict as I have said would have huge implications for European countries and many other countries as well I believe that our policy makers are actually realizing that and in fact while in the past European politicians focused mostly on issues of economic dependence and competitiveness and Market access when it came to China now we see more and more discussions about strategic issues human rights violations and security issues so finally I believe that within their own China policies the US and Europe are finding new and broader ways to deal with Wars of aggression and new geopolitical challenges and it is therefore clear that Europe should be prioritizing the transatlantic Alliance and its political economic and cultural ties siding with the US and China only this way we can prevent a war of aggression and defend the multilateral order as it is thank you very much Simone agrano and that already brings us to the final rebuttal from the team arguing against emotion after this rebuttal will move into q a where we welcome your questions so if you have them already a quick reminder to please submit them through slido the sooner you submit them the sooner they will show up here and the higher the chance that we can answer them with that five minutes for the final rebuttal from Marina hudyak arguing against the motion that the Europe should side with the US on China or in a place thank you very much you may argue against the motion because honestly I completely agree with you on your assessment of China China under Xi Jinping has changed fundamentally I completely agree with you that any military action in the Taiwan Strait will be a disaster especially for us as Europe who depend on trade and I would love nothing more than to walk hand in hand with the United States so you're convinced me almost hahaha we talked you talked a lot about China and Taiwan we haven't talked much yet about the Europe U.S relationship and let's do some reality check here yes Europe and the United States have a lot of common interests but they are not identical can summarize the relationship in a formula it's the Europe equals U.S minus a minus B plus c EU shares or not only you but Europe shares most of the U.S concerns about China minus concerns of predominance for the United States it's the fight about who is going to say the number one minus geopolitical interests plus concerns on trade because let's be honest we need a multilateral stable world we need to trade this is what our wealth depends on and our trade concerns not concerned only China and Taiwan they also concern the United States I'm just saying the IRA the inflation reduction act and plus I'm going to use the evil t word I was told recently in Washington don't mention the t word because you know we don't even mention it in our families 2024 election what happens if Donald Trump is back in office and then we'll have to reassess the relationship so if we talk about walking hand in hand if we talk about a lining aligning to what if you take a sober look at us China strategy it's currently a piecemeal strategy we agricultural dating site Taiwan semiconductors approaches in all these three areas are not connected to each other the European approach is actually much much more holistic and the U.S strategy at the moment seems to consist only of deterrence credible assurances have fallen under the table so before we talk about alignment and walking hand in hand and by the way I don't think that the US should align could align with Europe as a joke this there is some truth in that and we have to take into account that actually the European voice is needed to balance the un's tendency to ideologically overreach China has become a domestic issue China is the new Taliban There is almost a sense of inevitability of return to a Fractured world for Europe the costs of a fractured world are too high we can't solve climate change migration and other major geopolitical issues without China there are some voices who say we can but that's pretty naive or what Hans Morgen already in the 1970s describe a strategic narcissism which he saw as the biggest danger to U.S foreign policy so it is a responsibility of the Europe of Europe to put the brakes on intense competition requires intense diplomacy so what do we need to do instead I think a key issue to solve is how to accommodate China in the international rules-based order for China the most important objective is regime security for the European Union is the continued functioning of the international rules-based order might be different than for the United States for the United States the rule space orders are also important but there are tendencies in the government who say it's about staying the number one so Europe needs to be the adult in the room and pushing for dialogue how to fine tune the rule rules-based order that can accommodate China and how we as the West perceive the values and principles and one final point the world doesn't consist of China Europe and the United States there is also the global South and we need to make sure that when we talk about alignment when we talk about common policy that we don't lose them and with that I come back to my colleague's point the U.S should side with Europe thank you very much Marina rudyak thank you everybody for your fantastic opening statements and rebuttals and that does bring us to the Q a and again if you do have questions I see many of you have submitted them if you cannot think of a question right now but you're just generally interested what other people are asking you can still go on slido and see other people's questions you can even upvote a question that you particularly like it will sort of change the order of the question on my screen and increase the chances that we that we can ask that question I want to um get it for a few questions from my set out of the way very quickly Noah the US is increasingly weaponizing its Economic Policy we've heard it's the securitization of everything it's using export controls and similar measures to try to hamper China's technological advance why should Europe follow along instead you know of using this opportunity uh which might present itself here to increase its own trade its own economic relationship with China especially Marina has mentioned this especially when the US is clearly trying to use the inflation reduction at the IRA to use similar methods against Europe so it does not seem that the US has Europe's our best economics interests at heart why should we play along here instead of leveraging this opportunity well first I think it's important to make clear that uh well dispel a myth that the U.S is the one that began this whole decoupling this decoupling has been underway by China it was underway well before the U.S started to restrict certain economic interactions that it believes are a threat to its National Security the U.S welcomed China into the WTO in 20 in 2001 over 20 years ago and it's because of the way China has developed that the U.S has responded to this and Europe is also responding as we saw with Ursula fonder Lion's speech as we've seen with restrictions that Europe has put in place on Chinese Acquisitions Etc so uh this is this is a response to China this is not the U.S suddenly deciding that it wants to turn the economic landscape on its head and and and get more protectionists [Music] um Europe depends on the US I made that point in my earlier conversation uh maybe that isn't felt uh quite as much here in Switzerland it certainly felt where I live in Berlin which is one country away from a war that's going on so if if the U.S is pushing back against certain Chinese policies that it seized as a threat to its National Security and Europe goes in the other direction how long do you think it will be before the U.S says Europe is not working with us uh we're going to leave Europe to its own devices uh how long would it take before uh Vladimir Putin if he's still in office uh decided to march on beyond beyond Ukraine so that that's just an example Europe is heavily dependent on the U.S and Europe is also heavily dependent on the U.S economically I think we tend to uh Trump China up and talk about how we're all uh dependent on China China has had a very impressive economic rise uh but the eu's uh economic relationship with with the US is even deeper and as I mentioned Swiss trade uh with the US last year was 50 percent higher uh than it was with China so uh going in a completely opposite direction and doubling down on business with China uh is not is not a solution for Europe thank you Philippe I want to ask you strategic autonomy which uh of course many people in Europe want none more so than French president Emmanuel macron I would argue would require first strategic Clarity and there seems to be little to be had of that currently in Europe every country has its own interests every country makes its own statements every leader of a European country travels to China on their own there's preciously little coordination so how could we even talk about strategic autonomy when it looks like Europe as a group of Nations is not getting its act together how can Europe even find an agreement of what it wants out of China wouldn't that be a precondition to have what you say we should have nikoi I beg to disagree um I I do believe first of all let me just say a word about what uh what um um Noah said uh Russia doesn't equal China and the reason why we should have more autonomy and this is linking to your question is because uh there is something called the Asian pivot which was invented by President Obama which has been strengthened by President Biden and the very same people in charge of the of the um in Asian Affairs in the in the state department at the and at the White House are actually pushing for a move towards the indo-pacific in fact the the new word in town is indo-pacific not Asia Pacific therefore we Europeans have no choice but finding our own ways to defend ourselves because one day big Uncle Uncle Jack will be leaving town and we will be on our own and we need to find our ways to arm ourselves because we live in a very unsafe word and there authoritarian states there are terrorist groups in France was a victim of them just in passing and therefore a strategic autonomy is just one way to answer the question now France does not argue that that for example we should leave the NATO the argument that's been made for the past 20 years by the various presidents have has been that France should be part of NATO and at the same time we should strengthen European Defense what does it mean having common procurement having a Defense Agency having a joint action forces having military transport planes these kind of concrete things that have been in the work for some time eventually we will have to handle our borders we'll have to handle you know immigration problems terrorism problems and possibly you know Wars we're having one uh not not so far away and in fact you know the response by Europe has been very strong and it's a good sign that you know Europe is is putting its act together just like it did during the covet pandemic and this is sort of a rebirth of Europe unlike uh what what people in Washington would rather have which is a kind of puddle you know which we're not let's say with uh with strategic autonomy for a little bit Marina um I think Simona has pointed out in in her statement after French president Emmanuel macron the person who most is in favor for strategic autonomy in Europe is Chinese president Xi Jinping um and another day goes by when I'm not reading an article in Chinese State media on how Europe should finally find strategic autonomy and reduce its dependent on the U.S student that make us the tiniest bit skeptical that as great a strategic autonomy would be in theory that pursuing it would inevitably divide us would weaken the transatlantic stance and that would only play into China's hands who should what European policy is to the United States that can blackmail Europe into following it stands on China by threatening to withdrew forces is it China that uses strategic autonomy and then Europe should say no we're not going to do strategic autonomy because Xi Jinping is using this word which other words should we drop then cooperation multilateralism democracy now that China is saying that it's the biggest and best democracy in the world thank you European policy should be decided by Europe and in the European interest certainly in dialogue with the partners across the Atlantic because you know coming from Germany maybe the position is slightly different than from France the transatlantic Alliance has never stood to disposal and Germany is very committed to transatlantic Alliance but at the same time let's think to the end that in coming back to the piecemeal China policy in the United States just following that would in many cases mean weakening economically of Europe weakening of Germany and in economically weak Europe will weaken the alliance so it is in fact in the interest of the alliance that Europe maintains strategic autonomy defined by us not by China thank you Simona let us bring this back to Switzerland um Switzerland is a small country Noah has pointed out we rely on trade we rely on Experts including with China many Swiss firms have done very well in China see China as an important Market as an important place to do business why should we align with the US the superpower too in the past has you know watched out for its own interest and not necessarily ours and which in recent years again this has been pointed out the t word from the other side hasn't really been politically reliable is it smart for a small country with no big geopolitical stake except to Hitch our destiny our future to this unreliable superpower across the Atlantic well first of all I would describe the other superpowers and trusty and unreliable but coming to Switzerland I mean we have a free trade agreement of course in place in 2014 and I would like to draw your attention to the fact that because of that we are actually susceptible to economic blackmail in coercion by China not by the United States as we have heard before this is something that no offense I know there are some people from Ada here in the audience so no offense to you for what I'm about to say but it seems to me that we're overly cautious I totally understand the point we are both not arguing and we have said that especially Noah very clearly that we should be following blindly the U.S each of these countries whether it is Switzerland and its neutrality policy would complicates things even further or each single European member states that also have different and management trade and management and political situations vis-a-vis China we're not actually arguing we should be following blindly what we are arguing for is that there are things that are bigger than us on which we should be allowed buying not just with the us but with a coalition of like-minded countries and by the way I think that this is very clear in the case of Switzerland going back to it because actually in every foreign policy document that has come out since at least the year 2019 the European Union gets mentioned as our key partner with whom we share like mind and values and orientations and the China strategy we came out in 2021 in Switzerland also quite clearly talks about that should it ever come to a point in which Switzerland would have to actually side with one or the other countries it would side with those countries with which it shares basic values and principles right so we talk about European interest I totally agree with that but ladies and gentlemen look at macron three months ago you argued in a way yesterday in an interview with Fareed Zakaria he argued in a complete turnabout much more pro-us are these the people that you are arguing we should actually be siding with and trusting I don't think so laughs back we'll we'll get back to the macaron thing um in a minute I do want to have many more questions to all of you but there's so many good questions coming already from the audience so um let's answer some of these no I'm going to put the very first one to you because you as I've mentioned at the beginning are writing a newsletter that you by the way should all subscribe to called watching China in Europe I'm not sure if there is a pond on newsletter which watching Europe in China newsletter I'd be very interested in reading that but still um the question here is what is China's what is cheating Ping's view about the EU does he accept the EU as a serious partner or is it for him just a collection of uncoordinated states that are easily divided well I think for Xi Jinping his focus is very much on the United States the United States is the uh the chief adversary the United States uh in his view wants to keep China down I think uh for Xi Jinping what he wants to ensure is that Europe doesn't end up in the U.S Camp I don't think he has expectations that Europe will end up in the Chinese Camp what he wants and Simona made this quite clear in her statement is exactly what those guys are arguing for some sort of neutrality uh some sort of non-aligned equidistant status for Europe the record shows that China has tried to divide Europe we saw that during the pandemic in the early days when China was sending masks to certain European countries that it liked and and not to others and this is the kind of the risk that all of Europe faces uh and and it's also a risk that countries in Asia face if you're not not on China's good side then you will be punished this idea that Philippe raised earlier that suggesting that the U.S is in Asia uh interfering all the other Asian countries they just want peace well it's these countries in Asia whether it's Japan uh whether it's South Korea they want the us there because they're worried about China very much Noah I'm going to turn to Marina next because there's a question on the Belton Road initiative which I know is one of the subjects that you that you are researching so it seems that when the Belton Road initiative was launched um and until a few years ago it was seen as a very successful concept many people were afraid of it but there were also many countries including in Europe that saw a lot of potential and that welcomed this form of Chinese engagement of Chinese infrastructure investment now it's become eerily quiet I'd say around the Belton Road haven't heard much of it many of these Investments I think have not come to pass so what can we learn from the Belt Road where do you see it right now in terms of whether it was a success or a failure specifically in Europe not not in another country parts of the world and what can we learn from that from how China is engaging with Europe and how Europe should engage with China thank you very much for this question Nico I think the failure of Belton Road in Europe is exactly the argument for European strategic autonomy why why was the Belton Road initiative initially successful in Europe and where in places where Europe was not taking care of its poorer regions and citizens China moved in into the space that Europe left by the way this applies globally as well so for Europe the homework would be to start taking care of its own weaker regions but just let me um at one point and that is that I think the other side is getting us wrong we do not argue for neutrality we argue for a strategic autonomy in light of what our opponents have been saying they have been saying that they are not in favor of following the U.S blindly but rather working in concert with Partners while at the same time warning us that if we don't follow the United States the United States may leave us here alone to defend ourselves against Russia so what better argument can they actually make for European strategic autonomy thank you timona we talked about Taiwan you're obviously the Taiwan specialist here so anytime one questions are coming your way um and we've talked about this you know uh hopefully an unlikely scenario of a war on sort of military kinetic conflict around Taiwan so if we take the Ukraine war as an example and you know if you take the European response and then um I think as we're here in Switzerland also the way Switzerland responded many would say had to respond kind of had to follow suit in Europe what are Europe's options really with such a conflict would happen does it even have options or would it would you argue that it had to follow um sort of in whatever response the US has um well I think it depends a bit I mean if we're talking about sanctions I believe that of course these would be implemented this has been discussed already at the European level and I think that even Switzerland actually would Implement sanctions if it came to a military attack I think we also need to be very clear it depends what we are talking about right if it comes to a full outright War aggression of the PRC over the island of Taiwan I believe there is no doubt that all the countries including Switzerland would Implement sanctions the problems surrounding the island of Taiwan is that you don't really know what could happen in case an accident Sparks a conflict right um there are many more provocations going on in the past few years for example by um Chinese jet flying over the median lines sometimes lately even more flying into um air identification Zone that belongs to Taiwan now very often the Taiwanese don't know how to react to that right and it's very dangerous what happened two weeks ago again in the strait with an American a cruise with an American ship and a Chinese ship cutting in front of it at a very high speed these kind of things could spark an accident now in that case of course it's a bit more difficult and not so black and white to really understand how the triggery moment of such a war would be in case of a fully uh right war of aggression I have no doubt that would be the case what options do we have at the moment very briefly to go back to your question I think that we can actually indicate deterrents indicate that we are united indicate that in case China would invade Taiwan that would be economic sanctions and a coalitions by Western countries that actually you know isolate Beijing it would be costly for all of us and it would be of course much more difficult than what has been done with the Russian case because of China's Global role but the consequences of not doing it as I have explained before during the opening statement or the rebuttal are actually even more costly for us what the European Parliament is doing is also useful they are talking about how to integrate Taiwan more in Supply chains that are more reliable as we have seen during covid-19 pandemic then sometimes products coming out of China that didn't come out because of kobit pandemic reasons and not only and so on and so forth we talked about uh Russia now a couple of times and again this is an audience question I'm slightly rephrasing here in a way the you know sort of the audience question here calls it a soft approach I'm not sure if I would agree with the characterization the idea of trying to integrate a country into the rules-based order of trying to maintain dialogue despite differences isn't that precisely the strategy you're advocating for vis-a-vis China that has failed for Russia and shouldn't that worry us um you know when we look towards China uh with that strategy I know you said China is in Russia I think that's that's clear but still that seems like a a lesson that we should heed look I I don't think there's a U.S or EU view on on the integration of China in in in in globalization in 2001 uh both the US and the EU allowed China to become a member of the World Trade Organization so it has become an actor and all our multinationals have played this game to to manufacture in China and to invest in China and and and and you know and there's been good stories and bad stories um what what I'm saying is that um you know this is not really uh uh a moment for for for changing China from what it is what I'm saying is that Europe should should should be behave like a an autonomous entity and should invest in both its security and and integrate China and continue to integrate China in the world economy through through um um you know means and through fields that where you know there can be a dialogue so I mentioned a few things like sustainable Finance the environment climate change and restructuring of debts so these are things where concrete things where we can we can talk to China we have to acknowledge that China has become this this giant uh country and there's no way to to sort of ignore it China wants recognition uh it doesn't mean we should agree with everything they they say but competing is probably not the right um the right approach and I don't think Europeans are in this are in this mood I do want to um and I think this is something that that all of you could come so I'll start with Noah but um I'm sure the other side may have some thoughts as well it's been a very quick moment talking about the economic security strategy that came out or it came out sort of as a draft I should say last week in the EU I thought the timing was notable it was on the same Tuesday that was presented in Brussels that the Chinese Prime Minister um was in Berlin but timing issues aside how would you interpret that strategy is this now kind of like the is this the kind of thing that you would expect from a Europe citing more with the US is this following along in the past that the U.S set out or is this a distinctly European approach how how or is it unclear yet because the strategy hasn't actually been finalized yet I think it's both Nico I I think it's uh Ursula Thunder line the European commission president gave a an important speech on China at the end of March where she uh advocated for Europe develop developing an economic security strategy and she used the term de-risking the relationship as opposed to decoupling which is a term that has haunted us ever since the Trump Administration the Biden Administration has never used this term decoupling um and I think fonderline what she was essentially saying was on the one hand uh Europe needs to do its homework in figuring out what the red lines are in the economic and technological relationship with China what uh trade investment from Europe to China could be fueling China's military um and so I think she is saying Europe needs to develop its own strategy on this she's not saying that Europe should blindly follow the U.S now the U.S has been thinking about this for a bit longer um it's been uh rolling out measures um such as export controls on certain semiconductor manufacturing equipment back in October the Dutch moved in unison with the U.S on this but I think funder what Funderland was doing was saying Europe needs to develop its own strategy but she's also building a bridge to Washington she's saying if we don't develop our own strategy we're going to be on the defensive the U.S is going to be rolling out measures export controls we're expecting an outbound investment screening mechanism to come out of the U.S soon so what funderline is saying is very is very smart I think she's saying look we don't want to be on the defensive reactive we have to develop our own strategy we have to develop our own red lines and then we can sit down with the Biden Administration and have a debate if Europe doesn't have its own strategy it can't even have that conversation it can't talk to the US at eye level so this is on the one hand saying Europe needs to develop its own strategy and on the other saying we need to build a bridge to Washington and have that conversation for one last question Marina I'll put it to you you very briefly at the end of your rebuttal mentioned the global South and while that reaction this as a broad term we're going to use it for the time being just to make the question somewhat more directed what is the role of the global South in European China policy why should the global South matter why should we think about the global South when we think about how Europe is positioned vis-a-vis China should be and what would the consequences be of a European siding with the US towards the European relationship with these countries this is a very important question and let me start with um a very unfortunate acknowledging a very unfortunate fact and that is that Europe and the United States I would say two didn't really care about the global South until China came along I see you agree with me um belt and Road initiative announced 2013 What followed is a number of acronyms b3w GG pgii global gateway Blue Dot Network built back better world uh I forgot what pgii is the beninis oxford-based scholar foreign um and the problem is that all these initiatives that the West has put on the table are much more about solving our China problem than addressing the challenges in the global South much less seeing them as common challenges um the former Liberian minister of Public Works Judy Moore said nobody is as close to Africa as Europe and yet until China came along there was no creativity whatsoever in dealing with Africa there was no Euro African infrastructure plan everybody started moving only when China came along by the way he also says even if the Belden Road initiative fails it is a genius idea because For the First Time somebody came up with a plan to link the poorest countries of the world with the richest countries of the world he also makes an interesting comparison namely he compared the Belton Road initiative with the U.S war on terror saying that the estimates for the belt and Road initiative are 1 6. I looked up the numbers it's actually probably even 1 8 of what the war on terror costed so he says if the United States had wanted they could have had six Global infrastructure initiatives and this is how things are seen in the global South now why should we care because of demographic change because in 10 20 30 years time the world will be to a large extent populated by Yang African people and this is where the game is going to play so if we as Europe or Europe and the United States now go to Africa and say well we are competing with China and you know downside with China side with us the Africans are saying what's your problem the Chinese provide us with hard infrastructure you provide us with soft infrastructure and by the way two-thirds of countries of the world have more trade with China than with the United States so if we continue to debate us this as a West versus China problem and you are with us or against us we are gonna lose a substantial part of the world which we need to solve Global problems and again coming back to my point it's actually our problems thank you very very much and thank you to all of you sorry we couldn't answer all of your questions there will be more time after the debate is wrapped up for some more questions start debater so please save them for later now it's time for closing statement where each debater gets two more minutes to try to convince you to vote when it's time to vote for their site closing statements are two minutes each and they will be delivered in the exact same order than at the beginning which means we'll start with Noah Barkin who has two minutes to try to convince you that you vote in favor of the motion which is Europe should side with the US on China I'd like to start off with a quote from China's president Xi Jinping and it goes like this quote right now there are changes the likes of which we have not seen for a hundred years and we are the ones driving these changes together that this in March after two days of talks in Moscow with uh Vladimir Putin he was talking to Putin this was his goodbye message uh we are the ones driving these changes together how should we interpret this what she is saying is that China is intent on reshaping the international order that has existed for much of the past Century and it is intent on doing so together with Russia this is about the freedoms we enjoy in our Democratic societies it's about our security it's about our economic well-being there is nothing more important than all of this now this does not mean as I think Simone and I have made clear that we should be seeking to isolate or contain China it doesn't mean that we should be cutting off dialogue with China it doesn't mean that we should stop looking for ways to cooperate with China and it doesn't mean that we should decouple from China the by demonstration has been very clear that the vast majority of trade and investment ties with China will continue and we would be the damage to our economic Prosperity if those were cut off would be huge uh but it does mean that we should be using the leverage that we have together in Europe in North America and across Asia to defend our values both political and economic in this systemic competition it is in our own vital interest to do so and Europe cannot do that alone thank you very very much slightly over two minutes but still okay thank you so much for the closing statement and we'll pass it right along to the team arguing against emotion Philip Licor you have two minutes thank you well I think you know this statement by President XI and Putin that was before what happened over the past weekend really and and the Wagner group has shown that uh that's shown to China among others that Russia is not necessarily uh uh a stable nation and and there are lots of questions being asked and my colleague Marina was an expert on this we'll we'll I'm sure reinforce that point at the same time what's happening you know in Washington we have a toxic debate about China on Capitol Hill we have a Republican party that has invested millions in in in in China bashing and that is now preparing the next election of President Trump in 2024 so the The Binding Administration which by the way just managed to uh to get a an interview an audience with with the Emperor of China um you know he's he is is basically on its last year or six months I should say in power and has not convinced many of its uh partners that the uh that the China bashing and that the decoupling was a good thing so we again I'm reinforcing my own point I'm sorry about this but we have to go our own way and in in this multipolar environment the only way is to enhance defense enhance security enhance European foreign policy and by the way the French you know have been sending ships you know into Taiwan Straits and and have like 10 000 troops in Asia Pacific this is a European way to approach the the security risks in um in Asia and it's not about following a some some kind of Big Brother which we respect and we we like very much but the word has changed and let's think about multiple actors and not just two of them thank you very very much Simone agrano your closing statement for two minutes please thank you I see the counterpart has learned a lot from China also in terms of this information ladies and gentlemen ask yourself this could we have avoided a current war in Ukraine if we had acted more forcefully for example in 2014 when Putin invaded Crimea we simply don't know but that's why we need to actually Express deterrence very clearly if you don't care about 24 million people living on an island in a democratic way people that know what means to be living under an authoritarian regime at loose do it for your own port Monet because we will all feel the brunt of it right so to effectively overcome all of these challenges we're talking about in the future we need there is no way around that to establish solidarity with other democracies the US in Primus to deter any authoritarian regime that seeks to do three things actually threatens the multilateral order establish democracy like Taiwan but also as I said before the global economy now let me come to the closing remark really a country's foreign policy and this also has to do with Switzerland is really an expression of the times and in times of change High volatility and geopolitical tensions Switzerland but must also adapt its approach going forward instead of Vandal to handle change through trade Switzerland together with other Western Partners should actually have to adopt a peace through cooperation approach when dealing with Russia and China only with close cooperation with like-minded democracy like the US can we actually hope to defend the rules-based order critical by the way for small countries like Switzerland thank you thank you very much Simone agrano and that already brings us to the final closing statement delivered against Emotion by Marina rudyak please again I on many many points agree with our opponents and close cooperation is what makes the transatlantic Alliance strong it's very reassuring that the Biden Administration reiterates to speak with China whenever possible but let me bring in the t word what happens after 2024 if Donald Trump is re-elected what happens to the alliance then and I said before that I think and not only I some people in Washington are saying this the the Europe needs to be the adult in the room also for the time out after 2024 and the best way to strengthen the alliance is European strategic autonomy which can keep the alliance together if things come Wars in 2024 this means also continuing to speak to China now because again let's be honest it was the first visit of a U.S foreign minister in China after five years and Europe can talk to China in many areas where the US cannot there is a lot of technical cooperation going on between European countries in China with access to technical level thinking with access that gives Europe the opportunity to develop strategic empathy to understand how China thinks in a way the U.S cannot and this are all access channels we should not give up because it's not going to strengthen the transatlantic Alliance the only thing that strengthens it transatlantic Alliance is an economically and politically strong Europe and the way there is strategic autonomy thank you very much Marina rudyak thank you to all of you for your closing statements and now it's time for you all to cast your vote for a second and final time you know how this works you can scan the QR code behind me or you can go to slido.com and enter the code China the question is exactly the same um you're asked whether you agree or disagree with today's motion which is Europe should side with the US on China let's see the results I haven't seen this now so I'm looking at them in the first poll we had uh 62 percent disagreeing with the motion and 25 percent agreeing and then in the second poll 52 disagreeing um and 41 agreeing with the motion so this is a change in plus 16 for the team arguing in favor of the motion Noah barking and Simona Grano who have won this debate congratulations to both of you congratulations also filipore and Marina rudiak

Channel: Asia Society

Views: 151,294

Keywords: asia society switzerland, program, current affairs, oxford debate, geopolitics, us-china relations, eu-us relations, eu-china relations, noah barkin, simona grano, philippe le corre, marina rudyak, nico luchsinger

Id: ePrXNlx8I3Y

Length: 64min 39sec (3879 seconds)

Published: Tue Jun 27 2023