[MUSIC]

Well, if you're still with us that's terrific.

Well, hopefully this debate, this discussion has kept your attention.

Now we're going to come to the last question.

And the last question is really, can China rise peacefully?

The reason people would think that that may not happen

is what's known as the power transition theory.

It's actually a concept raised by my professor Ken Organski at

the University of Michigan.

And the theory largely argues that when a rising challenger comes up, when

a challenger rises against a hegemonic dominant power that there comes a time

where both of them look at each other and they think seriously about going to war.

The rising power in part can be dissatisfied.

If he's dissatisfied, he may want to change the rules.

He may want to confront the dominant power.

He may look for allies to be able to confront that dominant power, and

so we get a real risk to the system.

The alternative argument though is, and there are several,

one is in the post-World War II era, it has become much less likely that states

will fight over territory and much more likely that they will fight over talent,

trade rules, the values of their currency.

These kinds of things and so the land war, the military war is less likely.

Second, we have nuclear weapons now and we can see that the US and USSR,

even though there was a cold war going on, they never resorted to nuclear weapons.

So, that could suggest that the United States and

China may not ever resort to that kind of problems.

So, as I said, Richard, you're going to take this one first.

Is the power transition under way?

Can China rise peacefully?

>> I think power transitions theories,

it's a historical lessons we learn from the past.

History will repeat, but not exactly same way.

And, in the past, we see there's a moment of truth.

The rising power go to war with a existing power, or visa versa.

The existing power take preventive war to stop the new power,

get keep rising, challenging himself.

So in the history, we also see some peaceful power transitions,

when the United States rising up it did not go to war with Britain

to take number one position in the world.

And after World War II, Japan's rise,

Germany's rise also peaceful, did not go to war.

So now come to the China case, I think there's also good chance

China's rise could be peaceful, right.

US and China does not necessarily have to go to the moment of truth,

the fight to decide who is number one, number two.

And then there is actually both sides now leaders have very good sense how

to avoid the trap and the other things- >> Trap

being going back to the historical side example of Sparta and Athens, and

that's where people talk about [CROSSTALK] >> Gren Allison,

a professor at Harvard, did a very good studies on [CROSSTALK] trap.

>> Right, 15 cases or something like that.

>> 15 cases, only four of five case is peaceful transition and

the rest will be war.

And so- >> But you're optimistic.

>> I'm optimistic.

Look at the 21st centuries.

Both China and United States are nuclear powers.

So nuclear deterrents work, secondly both countries are highly

interdependent on each other in terms of economics and security and

also societal relations there- >> But they often point out for

War World One [CROSSTALK] heavy interdependence,

you even had the monarchs of Britain and Germany [CROSSTALK] were relative cousins.

>> Baohui, what do you, what's your view?

>> I think that- >> You believe there will be a war.

>> I think that timewise.

No I don't.

>> I think a power transition could be peaceful,

mainly because China is firmly committed to a peaceful rise.

China has spent more time than other countries studying cultural rise.

It is called an industry in China, because they want to rise smartly.

And what is there biggest conclusion?

That if you want to rise by war your going to self destruct.

Because they observe history, they look at Japan's imperial past.

Imperial Germany's failed bid for high Germany.

They learned lesson, that's why China leadership,

Chinese security leads, they are united by one idea.

China must rise peacefully.

And indeed China has reached where it is today by peaceful means,

by developing it's economy.

Chinese leads understand in the 21st century, dominance means

economic dominance, financial dominance, and influence global institutions.

So, China is revising the global architecture,

to mainly influence the federal system.

Nobody said we should fight the United States to wrap global from the Americans.

[CROSSTALK] So, these are people not deciding China's future.

So I think a Chinese commitment to peaceful rights is the best guarantee that

we're now going to see a titanic war between China and states in the future.

>> Well, I will challenge his idea.

Because he assumes that states are irrational actors.

Sometimes they do irrational things.

First of all, I think your question is a double question,

a question of power transition.

A principle that China's ambition is to replace the United States and

to some degree it's true,

I think China wants to become the first economic power in the world.

It wants, I think, also to become the first diplomatic and

political power to reduce the United States influence.

Now whether China wants to become the first military power with a set of

alliances shapen on the model of the United States remains to be seen.

>> Well they don't like alliances.

>> First of all, some people in China like you said,

like to see China embracing that concept, but that's a minority.

And I don't think that China wants to become the first military

power in the world.

[CROSSTALK] Having said that,

China wants to become the first military power in Asia.

The Asians, so China, I think China wants to kick out the United States from

East Asia and do it from the old Asian continent in the foreseeable future.

>> South China sea.

>> The South China sea.

But, so there are arguments pro and con.

Because in the South China sea today, up to now, China has used non-military means.

Putting the fishing boats, the Coast Guard in the first place,

keeping the Navy in the back.

So China's being cautious, but the same time, what we'll see,

that we have a PLA, People's Liberation Army which is getting more and

more meaningful, more powerful, and China has not fought a war since 1979.

And if you you have a military which hasn't fought a war,

how can you become a great power?

So there's a temptation among quite a number of Chinese elites to

test the military in some limited wars.

So I don't question the idea of

having a full fledged confrontation with the United States, or even a nuclear war.

I think it's pretty unlikely and hopefully unlikely.

But at the same time I think that people in China would like to hit the water,

so to speak, and put a bit more pressure or teach a lesson to countries like

the Philippines or Vietnam, if they would push back too much.

[CROSSTALK] so that's where I see the danger.

[CROSSTALK].

>> I think we have to be careful because there is a lot of nationalism also pushing

the Chinese leaders, not only from the society but from the elite themselves.

From the PLA, from the idealogues, from people who want to keep the regime in

place, but I agree with the idea that it will be the less logical and self serving

adventure, to launch a war against other country, because that will weaken China.

And maybe compromise, its stake,

its objective of, becoming the first economically employed part.

>> I would ask a different set of questions.

Now is 21st century's.

And then, China's rise taking place in the context of 21st century,

highly institutionalized world order.

Now, we have to ask ourself, in the last 40 years,

China's rise in this context, within the current world order,

is China satisfied with the current order or dissatisfied?

>> That's why I raised at the beginning the question that dissatisfied-

>> Yeah, if China is satisfied there's no

sense to destroy the order, destroy the house to make a new one.

Second, if China's largely satisfied just want to reform just change

some aspects of the order China would be largely status quo power,

not necessary revisionist power.

>> But [CROSSTALK] still.

>> I have to say- >> But China also want to have its own

vision of order put in place, like the Just World Order,

like Multi-Polar World.

Not US dominant hedging money order.

So, these are the things China wants to change.

But, that not necessary lead to overall war to destroy the current order.

>> Yeah, basically China is a dissatisfied power.

Every rising power is dissatisfied.

That's why China is reshaping the world order.

It's reforming the global architecture, but

these kind of revisions- >> Parts of the global architecture.

>> Yeah, part of it.

But the point is, these kind of revision efforts do not involve war and

peace issues.

If China set up AIB, it's not a war and peace issue.

So China is revising the order, but it's not a war and peace issue.

And then- >> Still trying to see-

>> There's that kind of issue, yeah,

if China decides with the order, that could trigger war.

And then if the- >> A large military?

>> If JP's right in saying that at least some people in China are saying

at least we detest our military in limiting war.

I'm not, I don't believe that

there's a majority of people in China that think like that, but

if there is a minority of people who think like that it's still dangerous.

In that context, how do we maintain peace?

Balance of power is always the recipe for peace.

I don't think that will happen precisely, because the United States in

the forseeable future will remain a superior power militarily.

>> You're stealing my thunder because I would say I agree with you.

>> No, United States are committed to peace and stability in the region.

And therefore, that will constrain or dampen China's religious impulse.

>> Well, the president said,

President Obama said at his last speech that he would, every president,

just like every president, we have to keep out spending China or the challengers.

And, in fact, the United States way out spends.

The students may not know, but it's six to one.

The United States spends more on defense than the top five or

six countries, including, eight countries, including Russia.

But they're outspending them.

So that should lead it and make it much more difficult for

China militarily to challenge.

Let's go around one more time quickly, J.D.?

>> Yeah, first of all, I think you can agree with that.

You can be a revisions power.

And I think China, to some degree,

is a revisions power without leading to any kind of war.

What- >> That also

means that the United States has to live with some of that revision,

which is one of the points that the Australians say.

And maybe the Americans don't want to live with that revisionism.

>> Yes, and it maybe won't prevail, because China is walking on two legs,

on the one hand trying to empower itself in the existing international

organization, at the same time creating it's own organization.

Where it calls the shot, I mean,

the IB, the ACUs Shanghai Corporation Organization,

China's much more, in Central Asia China is much more

influential in those organizations than the other one, the existing ones.

Now I would like to combat these ideas transition maybe to finish.

Because there are a number of obstacles on the way to China's empowerment and

becoming a real full fledged great power.

First of all, the risk of middle income trap.

The economic slowdown in China we need to bear in

mind the economic future of China is well- >> We'll see.

>> We'll see.

But I mean there's a degree of uncertainty.

The second thing,

we mentioned that China might be behind the US clearly in the longer term.

And finally the political system.

Is the political system of China an asset or liability?

I would argue to the liability for China's empowerment.

If China wants to become a really great power

it will need to move to another kind of political system.

Maybe a multiparty democracy, a liberal democracy.

But really moving away from the one party system and the way the party operates and

the political system operates both domestically and

on the outside, the international stage.

It operates in such an opaque way.

>> So here we have domestic politics,

going back to the second question- >> And we're coming back to the domestic

politics [CROSSTALK] and that's I think a weakness of China's empowerment.

>> Okay, last word for you?

>> Overall, I think China will rise peacefully

because fundamentally that's China's gun strategy,

rise peacefully because of the learned lesson's from history.

They know, rise by war, you will be self destructive and so

they will try everything they can to overt a major power war.

>> Okay, Richard?

>> I agree.

China's intent to rise up peacefully.

And also this is in the best interest of China as well as the world for

a peaceful rising China.

Now secondly, as we discussed here, if China is a revisionist power but

is in a sense not overturning the whole world order.

Just want to reform some aspects of the existing order.

But whether this process of rising up will be peaceful or

not depends on how other countries respond to the China rise.

So in international relations as we said, everything is consequential.

>> Okay, well hopefully this discussion has been consequential for

you and that you've learned a lot.

That's the purpose, the reason we put this together and

I want to thank our three guests for their lucid,

to the point and very informative discussions and

I'll come back in a few minutes and summarize this for you.

And just thank them again.

Thank you very much for your insights and your help.

5.7: Can China Rise Peacefully?

Chinese Politics Part 2 – China and the World

与讲师见面