0:00:15.542,0:00:17.584
(Korean) Hello, I am Jae Ho Chung.

0:00:17.584,0:00:21.793
Hi everyone, I'd like to start[br]by thanking the organizers

0:00:21.793,0:00:27.648
for this excellent venue,[br]for a very important discussion.

0:00:27.649,0:00:31.410
It is my great pleasure[br]to share with all of you

0:00:31.411,0:00:34.493
some of my thoughts[br]on the future of China.

0:00:34.501,0:00:40.113
I wish I could say the same thing[br]as what Kevin Rudd said,

0:00:40.114,0:00:42.048
"I'm here to help."

0:00:42.049,0:00:46.836
But somehow, predicting the future[br]is a very difficult task.

0:00:46.837,0:00:52.767
First, social scientists are not[br]very well equipped to predict the future,

0:00:52.768,0:00:57.621
as we've seen[br]in the collapse of the Soviet Union,

0:00:57.622,0:01:02.386
the financial crisis in East Asia,[br]and so on and so forth.

0:01:02.387,0:01:09.124
Another reason is that black swans[br]actually show up, so it's very difficult.

0:01:09.125,0:01:14.161
Particularly, when it comes down[br]to China, the future of China,

0:01:14.162,0:01:16.704
the challenge is much more daunting,

0:01:16.705,0:01:19.746
and I have to talk about it[br]in just 15 minutes.

0:01:19.747,0:01:24.659
So I'll try my best to give some answers.

0:01:27.430,0:01:30.166
These are the two cartoons that I adopted

0:01:30.167,0:01:33.323
from South China Morning Post[br]early this year.

0:01:33.324,0:01:37.058
As you can see,[br]in the cartoon on the right side,

0:01:37.059,0:01:39.498
Chinese officials are trying very hard

0:01:39.499,0:01:43.149
to maintain the growth rate[br]of 7% or higher.

0:01:44.224,0:01:47.098
And then, on the left side,[br]this cartoon says

0:01:47.099,0:01:50.868
there are three new think tanks[br]starting up in China.

0:01:50.869,0:01:54.529
And then the guy sitting at the desk says[br]we don't need any more think tanks,

0:01:54.530,0:01:58.464
we need "know" tanks[br]because they give me some answers.

0:01:58.465,0:02:03.800
I hope I can give you answers[br]by the end of this 15-minute presentation

0:02:03.801,0:02:06.740
but even if I cannot,[br]please bear with me.

0:02:06.741,0:02:10.102
Let me first introduce one book.

0:02:11.709,0:02:14.903
This book came out in 2006

0:02:14.918,0:02:18.862
from a publisher[br]called Rowman & Littlefield,

0:02:18.863,0:02:21.862
and this book grew out[br]of an international conference

0:02:21.863,0:02:23.938
that took place in 2004.

0:02:24.511,0:02:29.246
In this book, I put together[br]eight internationally renowned experts

0:02:29.247,0:02:35.317
to chart China's future[br]from what we had back in 2004.

0:02:36.297,0:02:42.102
In that book, we laid out[br]eight possible scenarios for future China.

0:02:45.623,0:02:50.184
If you look at the column on the left,[br]these are the three scenarios

0:02:50.185,0:02:53.910
that I'd like to take off[br]from the list at this point.

0:02:53.911,0:02:57.960
Although we considered[br]these three possibilities back in 2006,

0:02:57.961,0:03:03.252
but I think these three scenarios[br]are no longer plausible or applicable

0:03:03.253,0:03:04.682
to the future of China

0:03:04.683,0:03:08.212
from the vantage point[br]of 2015 which is now.

0:03:08.213,0:03:13.067
Yugoslavia doesn't exist anymore,[br]it's completely disintegrated;

0:03:14.350,0:03:16.502
you cannot find it on the map.

0:03:16.503,0:03:21.712
Now you can refer to Serbia,[br]Bosnia, Herzegovina, and so on.

0:03:21.713,0:03:23.195
It's gone.

0:03:23.196,0:03:26.542
So I don't think[br]this will be the future for China.

0:03:26.543,0:03:32.606
Indonesia, back in 2004, when we were[br]actually doing research for this book,

0:03:32.607,0:03:36.342
Indonesia was economically very backward,

0:03:36.343,0:03:40.322
politically it was not[br]a democratic system,

0:03:40.323,0:03:42.156
and it didn't really have

0:03:42.157,0:03:46.296
a very strong diplomatic[br]or strategic presence at all.

0:03:46.297,0:03:51.743
So we didn't think China's future[br]will go down the path of Indonesia,

0:03:51.744,0:03:53.628
so it's off the list as well.

0:03:53.629,0:03:57.085
Latin America: a lot of people[br]compare high Gini coefficient,

0:03:57.087,0:04:01.241
that means income inequalities,[br]in China to those of Latin America.

0:04:01.242,0:04:02.614
That might be true.

0:04:02.615,0:04:07.546
But Latin America's diplomatic[br]strategic presence is not felt.

0:04:07.547,0:04:13.994
Differently, China is now rising[br]and is making its imprints everywhere

0:04:13.995,0:04:18.567
so I think the Latin America model[br]is also off the list.

0:04:18.567,0:04:23.136
If you look at the column in the middle,[br]there are three models.

0:04:23.137,0:04:27.355
Indian model, back in 2004,[br]India's economy was not that great.

0:04:27.356,0:04:29.937
Of course it's doing a great job now.

0:04:29.938,0:04:32.287
But even so, India's presence,

0:04:32.288,0:04:35.017
particularly from the viewpoint[br]of Northeast Asia,

0:04:35.018,0:04:37.768
is not being felt very strongly.

0:04:37.769,0:04:39.779
Of course, there is still a possibility

0:04:39.780,0:04:44.172
that China's path might actually resemble[br]that of India in the future.

0:04:44.173,0:04:48.625
So there is a possibility[br]for these three models in the middle,

0:04:48.626,0:04:52.648
but not really high, I would say.

0:04:52.649,0:04:56.730
Soviet Union: as you all know[br]what happened to Soviet Union,

0:04:56.731,0:05:00.026
now it's Russia,[br]it's now still a semi-global power,

0:05:00.027,0:05:05.254
although its global reach[br]has been constricted considerably.

0:05:05.255,0:05:07.063
But there is still a possibility

0:05:07.064,0:05:10.237
that China might go down actually[br]the path of the Soviet Union,

0:05:10.238,0:05:13.837
but the possibility as I see it[br]is not that high.

0:05:13.838,0:05:17.577
Finally, the French model:[br]France is a global power,

0:05:17.578,0:05:21.595
but France cannot make[br]international rules and norms by itself.

0:05:21.596,0:05:24.148
But France actually makes its imprints

0:05:24.149,0:05:29.372
by vetoing what others are willing to do,[br]particularly the United States.

0:05:29.373,0:05:31.246
So it's a global veto power.

0:05:31.247,0:05:34.144
Will China resemble the path of France?

0:05:34.145,0:05:36.396
It remains to be seen.

0:05:36.397,0:05:40.248
So these three possibilities[br]in the middle column still remain,

0:05:40.249,0:05:45.725
but I'd say the likelihood[br]is not very great.

0:05:45.726,0:05:50.743
If you want me to bet, my bet[br]would be on the column on the right,

0:05:50.744,0:05:54.423
either the Chinese model[br]or the American model.

0:05:54.424,0:05:56.139
What does the Chinese model mean?

0:05:56.140,0:05:58.188
It means an authoritarian political system

0:05:58.189,0:06:01.930
with a highly competitive[br]market-based economic system.

0:06:01.931,0:06:07.317
China has been successful[br]in sustaining this particular model.

0:06:07.318,0:06:11.383
If China really should prove successful[br]in the future as well, and I think

0:06:11.384,0:06:15.730
that will have enormous implications[br]scholarly, as well as policy-wise.

0:06:16.510,0:06:21.239
The American model: that is market-based,[br]highly competitive, efficient system

0:06:21.240,0:06:23.904
as well as a politically[br]democratic system.

0:06:23.905,0:06:26.455
Will China eventually go down this path?

0:06:26.456,0:06:30.396
I don't know, but if you want me to bet,[br]among these eight models,

0:06:30.397,0:06:33.462
probably China will go down[br]either the Chinese model

0:06:33.463,0:06:35.852
or in the long run, the American model.

0:06:35.853,0:06:37.331
We'll see.

0:06:37.332,0:06:42.223
I think, down the road,[br]probably the easiest task

0:06:42.224,0:06:45.844
that China can accomplish[br]is economic development.

0:06:46.692,0:06:49.561
When will China overtake[br]the US in GDP terms?

0:06:49.562,0:06:52.891
Already my colleagues from China[br]have talked about it,

0:06:52.892,0:06:56.836
but I'd like to lay out[br]a couple of important predictions

0:06:56.837,0:06:59.836
made by "think" tanks not know-tanks.

0:06:59.837,0:07:03.505
Goldman Sachs provided two estimates.

0:07:03.506,0:07:06.723
In 2003, they said[br]that China would surpass

0:07:06.724,0:07:10.404
the United States in GDP terms by 2050.

0:07:11.321,0:07:14.471
And then six years later, in 2009,

0:07:14.472,0:07:18.593
Goldman Sachs revised[br]their figures, to 2027.

0:07:20.251,0:07:23.174
And then the Economist,[br]the magazine based in London,

0:07:23.175,0:07:27.020
gave out the prediction for 2019.

0:07:27.021,0:07:33.080
And Japan's Cabinet Research Office[br]came out with an estimate of 2025.

0:07:34.223,0:07:40.858
And China's own Academy of Sciences[br]came out with an estimate of 2019.

0:07:40.859,0:07:42.841
So what does this tell us?

0:07:42.842,0:07:48.370
I think this seems to suggest[br]that between 2019 and 2025,

0:07:48.371,0:07:53.696
China's GDP is very likely[br]to surpass that of the United States.

0:07:53.697,0:07:57.343
So I think accomplishing[br]the economic takeover

0:07:57.344,0:08:02.333
is probably the easiest and I think[br]it's going to happen very soon.

0:08:02.334,0:08:08.573
Maybe, at the latest, within 10 years,[br]the fastest, probably within 5 years.

0:08:08.574,0:08:13.193
Particularly given what my colleagues[br]from China and New Zealand

0:08:13.194,0:08:15.743
have said about One Belt One Road;

0:08:15.744,0:08:19.741
if that should prove successful,

0:08:19.742,0:08:24.668
I think it will give an enormous impetus[br]for China's economic development.

0:08:24.669,0:08:29.689
Don't forget that America's rise[br]was based in significant part

0:08:29.690,0:08:32.760
on the gold rush toward California

0:08:32.761,0:08:37.224
because it expanded[br]the spatial as well as the time dimension

0:08:37.225,0:08:40.224
for development, by 50 to 100 years.

0:08:40.225,0:08:45.637
So if that One Belt One Road initiative[br]should become successful,

0:08:45.638,0:08:49.539
then, I think, it would be[br]an enormous variable for China's future.

0:08:49.540,0:08:51.198
So economic dimension:

0:08:51.199,0:08:57.205
I think there is very little debate[br]on what China will become in 2025.

0:08:58.279,0:09:02.118
I think more debatable[br]is China's military power.

0:09:02.119,0:09:04.523
Let me introduce two books here.

0:09:04.524,0:09:08.009
The one on the left is[br]the Task Force Report

0:09:08.010,0:09:10.369
which came out in 2003

0:09:10.370,0:09:13.795
by the Council on Foreign Relations[br]in the United States.

0:09:13.796,0:09:18.349
And this Task Force Report was chaired[br]by Mr. Harold Brown,

0:09:18.350,0:09:20.569
the former Secretary of Defense.

0:09:20.570,0:09:26.899
And he put together more than 20 experts,[br]security and military experts in America

0:09:26.900,0:09:30.848
and the findings, the conclusion[br]of this Task Force Report

0:09:30.849,0:09:35.529
is that as of 2003,[br]the publication date of that report,

0:09:35.530,0:09:42.278
as of 2003, China's military power[br]was lagging behind the US by 20 years.

0:09:42.279,0:09:47.514
So if we take that conclusion[br]at face value, that means, by 2023,

0:09:47.515,0:09:52.301
China's military power[br]will most likely equal that of the US.

0:09:52.968,0:09:55.229
Now, let me introduce[br]the book on the right.

0:09:56.110,0:09:59.640
This is the book I edited,[br]and it will be forthcoming in two months,

0:09:59.641,0:10:02.790
in early October this year by Macmillan.

0:10:02.791,0:10:05.799
I put together[br]13 internationally renowned scholars;

0:10:05.800,0:10:08.554
among them three were military experts.

0:10:08.555,0:10:11.373
They contributed[br]three chapters to the book.

0:10:11.374,0:10:16.208
One on conventional military power,[br]a second on nuclear weapon power,

0:10:16.209,0:10:19.458
and a third one on cyber and space power.

0:10:19.459,0:10:21.704
They all agreed to one fact

0:10:21.705,0:10:28.544
that is, by 2025, China is not going to be[br]a match for the US on a global theater.

0:10:28.545,0:10:32.638
So globally, China is not going[br]to be a match for the US.

0:10:32.639,0:10:34.974
However, they added a footnote.

0:10:34.975,0:10:38.147
That is in the regional setting,[br]particularly East Asia,

0:10:38.148,0:10:41.930
China will be a peer competitor.

0:10:41.931,0:10:45.177
Particularly given[br]the technological leapfrogging

0:10:45.178,0:10:48.566
China has been making[br]in the last 10 years or so,

0:10:48.567,0:10:50.864
including[br]the anti-ship ballistic missiles,

0:10:50.865,0:10:53.464
supersonic weapons, and so forth;

0:10:53.465,0:10:55.143
I think this is real.

0:10:55.144,0:11:01.121
So, on the global setting,[br]China is no match even by 2025,

0:11:01.122,0:11:05.430
but the conclusion might be[br]quite different in regional settings.

0:11:05.431,0:11:12.157
So, economically, China[br]will be number one by 2025,

0:11:12.158,0:11:17.583
but militarily China will still be limited[br]to a regional competitor.

0:11:17.584,0:11:21.460
Globally, the US will still be[br]the hegemon.

0:11:22.336,0:11:24.748
Then I think we have to think

0:11:24.749,0:11:27.573
what will be the final game?

0:11:28.410,0:11:32.003
The final game will be basically[br]something about perception:

0:11:32.004,0:11:37.746
how the US will view China,[br]and how China will view the US.

0:11:37.747,0:11:40.236
And most importantly,[br]how the international community

0:11:40.236,0:11:44.319
and regional states[br]will view the United States and China.

0:11:44.320,0:11:47.601
In other words,[br]which of the two will be considered

0:11:47.602,0:11:50.265
as a more benign and friendly power.

0:11:50.266,0:11:54.958
I think that with perception,[br]competition will be very important.

0:11:54.959,0:11:56.823
Now, given the limited time,

0:11:56.824,0:12:00.062
I'll just focus on the perceptions[br]between the US and China.

0:12:01.502,0:12:06.610
These are the summary statistics[br]based upon PEW Global Research

0:12:06.611,0:12:10.060
between 2008 to2014.

0:12:10.061,0:12:14.428
And these are American perceptions[br]and Chinese perceptions of the future,

0:12:14.429,0:12:18.286
whether or not China[br]will surpass the United States.

0:12:18.287,0:12:22.500
If you look at the third column[br]from the left,

0:12:23.429,0:12:27.427
about 10% of both Americans[br]and Chinese think

0:12:27.428,0:12:30.427
that China already surpassed the US.

0:12:30.428,0:12:35.198
10% of the Americans and Chinese think[br]China already surpassed the United States.

0:12:35.199,0:12:37.650
That's not correct,[br]that is not the reality,

0:12:37.651,0:12:42.787
but people are already thinking[br]that China already surpassed the US.

0:12:42.788,0:12:48.130
If you look at the second column,[br]the percentage of Americans and Chinese

0:12:48.131,0:12:53.019
who think China will eventually surpass[br]the US is increasing by the year.

0:12:53.020,0:12:57.302
So if you look at 2014,[br]39% of Americans, nearly 40%,

0:12:57.303,0:13:00.107
and nearly 50% of Chinese are thinking

0:13:00.108,0:13:04.387
the so called power transition[br]is inevitable.

0:13:04.388,0:13:06.441
If you look at the fourth column,

0:13:06.442,0:13:09.523
the percentage of Americans[br]and Chinese who think

0:13:09.524,0:13:13.503
China will never surpass the US[br]is actually decreasing.

0:13:13.504,0:13:14.940
So what does this tell us?

0:13:14.941,0:13:19.546
Increasing number of Chinese[br]and Americans are thinking

0:13:19.547,0:13:22.077
that power transition is going to happen.

0:13:23.016,0:13:27.286
More importantly, the next slide,

0:13:27.287,0:13:32.520
these are the summary statistics[br]based upon Gallup polls in the US

0:13:32.521,0:13:36.040
between 2001 and 2014.

0:13:36.041,0:13:41.010
Which country constitutes[br]the biggest enemy in the eyes of America?

0:13:41.979,0:13:44.543
If you look at 2001, China was number two.

0:13:44.544,0:13:48.723
But since then, until 2011,[br]China never made top two.

0:13:48.724,0:13:51.810
It was always Iran, Iraq,[br]and North Korea.

0:13:52.563,0:13:56.498
But after 2010, the year when we all think

0:13:56.499,0:14:00.609
China began to make[br]some assertive diplomacy,

0:14:01.322,0:14:04.030
American perception of China[br]began to change.

0:14:04.031,0:14:09.134
So in 2011, China made it[br]to number two biggest enemy

0:14:09.135,0:14:13.812
in the minds of the Americans,[br]and in 2012, China remained number two,

0:14:13.813,0:14:18.742
but in 2014, China finally became[br]number one enemy of the US.

0:14:18.743,0:14:21.364
Of course, public perceptions change.

0:14:21.365,0:14:23.284
Public opinions are very fickle.

0:14:23.285,0:14:26.905
However, given the fact[br]that America is a democratic system,

0:14:26.906,0:14:28.988
public opinions do matter.

0:14:28.989,0:14:33.852
It may have an enormous influence[br]on policy making.

0:14:33.853,0:14:35.945
So this is not very good news.

0:14:35.946,0:14:41.275
However, probably that is why[br]our colleagues and Kevin Rudd

0:14:41.276,0:14:43.843
were talking about constructive realism.

0:14:43.844,0:14:48.661
Thus far I've talked only about China.

0:14:48.662,0:14:50.934
I haven't talked much about the US.

0:14:50.935,0:14:54.124
But I think, in order to talk[br]about the future of China,

0:14:54.125,0:14:55.872
we have to talk about the US.

0:14:55.873,0:14:58.719
Why? Because it's a game of relativity.

0:14:58.720,0:15:02.941
If China grows richer and stronger,[br]but the US stagnates here,

0:15:02.942,0:15:05.969
then power transition[br]would definitely take place.

0:15:05.970,0:15:10.323
But if China grows stronger and faster,[br]but the US also grows stronger and faster,

0:15:10.324,0:15:14.295
then power transition[br]is not likely to take place.

0:15:14.296,0:15:19.099
So this is a very important dynamics[br]that we have to bear in mind.

0:15:20.534,0:15:23.492
History has taught us a lesson

0:15:23.493,0:15:27.172
that the biggest enemy[br]of an empire or a hegemon

0:15:27.173,0:15:31.522
is not another country,[br]but actually it is self-complacency.

0:15:33.858,0:15:37.408
These are the quotations[br]I got from British politicians

0:15:37.409,0:15:40.641
in the late 19th century[br]and early 20th century.

0:15:41.334,0:15:46.793
Mr. Benjamin Disraeli was[br]Earl of Beaconsfield in the UK.

0:15:46.793,0:15:49.467
He made a speech in 1872.

0:15:49.468,0:15:52.591
1872 is a very significant year,[br]because it is the year

0:15:52.592,0:15:58.155
when the GDP of the US[br]has surpassed that of the UK.

0:15:58.156,0:16:03.360
And Earl Disraeli says,[br]"I express here my confident conviction

0:16:03.361,0:16:05.651
that there never was a moment[br]in our history

0:16:05.652,0:16:07.734
when the power of England was so great

0:16:07.735,0:16:11.184
and her resources[br]so vast and inexhaustible."

0:16:11.185,0:16:14.880
30 years later, Mr. Joseph Chamberlain,[br]a very renowned politician,

0:16:14.881,0:16:19.751
made another speech in 1903,[br]along the similar lines.

0:16:19.752,0:16:22.929
UK has never been more powerful,[br]never been stronger.

0:16:22.930,0:16:26.256
But we all know[br]what happened 40 years later.

0:16:26.250,0:16:29.625
In 1944,[br]the Bretton Woods System was created,

0:16:29.639,0:16:33.537
giving the US the status of a hegemon,

0:16:33.538,0:16:37.576
making the UK nearly irrelevant[br]in international relations.

0:16:37.577,0:16:43.142
So, I think what the US will do,[br]and what the US will be able to do,

0:16:43.143,0:16:48.708
in the 10 years and after would probably[br]shape the future of China as well.

0:16:48.709,0:16:50.192
Thanks for listening.

0:16:50.193,0:16:51.583
(Applause)