[Script Info]
Title: 
[Events]
Format: Layer, Start, End, Style, Name, MarginL, MarginR, MarginV, Effect, Text
Dialogue: 0,0:00:15.54,0:00:17.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,(Korean) Hello, I am Jae Ho Chung.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:17.58,0:00:21.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Hi everyone, I'd like to start\Nby thanking the organizers
Dialogue: 0,0:00:21.79,0:00:27.65,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,for this excellent venue,\Nfor a very important discussion.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:27.65,0:00:31.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,It is my great pleasure\Nto share with all of you
Dialogue: 0,0:00:31.41,0:00:34.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,some of my thoughts\Non the future of China.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:34.50,0:00:40.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I wish I could say the same thing\Nas what Kevin Rudd said,
Dialogue: 0,0:00:40.11,0:00:42.05,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,"I'm here to help."
Dialogue: 0,0:00:42.05,0:00:46.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But somehow, predicting the future\Nis a very difficult task.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:46.84,0:00:52.77,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,First, social scientists are not\Nvery well equipped to predict the future,
Dialogue: 0,0:00:52.77,0:00:57.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,as we've seen\Nin the collapse of the Soviet Union,
Dialogue: 0,0:00:57.62,0:01:02.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the financial crisis in East Asia,\Nand so on and so forth.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:02.39,0:01:09.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Another reason is that black swans\Nactually show up, so it's very difficult.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:09.12,0:01:14.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Particularly, when it comes down\Nto China, the future of China,
Dialogue: 0,0:01:14.16,0:01:16.70,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the challenge is much more daunting,
Dialogue: 0,0:01:16.70,0:01:19.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and I have to talk about it\Nin just 15 minutes.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:19.75,0:01:24.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So I'll try my best to give some answers.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:27.43,0:01:30.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,These are the two cartoons that I adopted
Dialogue: 0,0:01:30.17,0:01:33.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,from South China Morning Post\Nearly this year.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:33.32,0:01:37.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,As you can see,\Nin the cartoon on the right side,
Dialogue: 0,0:01:37.06,0:01:39.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Chinese officials are trying very hard
Dialogue: 0,0:01:39.50,0:01:43.15,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to maintain the growth rate\Nof 7% or higher.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:44.22,0:01:47.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And then, on the left side,\Nthis cartoon says
Dialogue: 0,0:01:47.10,0:01:50.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,there are three new think tanks\Nstarting up in China.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:50.87,0:01:54.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And then the guy sitting at the desk says\Nwe don't need any more think tanks,
Dialogue: 0,0:01:54.53,0:01:58.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we need "know" tanks\Nbecause they give me some answers.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:58.46,0:02:03.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I hope I can give you answers\Nby the end of this 15-minute presentation
Dialogue: 0,0:02:03.80,0:02:06.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but even if I cannot,\Nplease bear with me.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:06.74,0:02:10.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Let me first introduce one book.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:11.71,0:02:14.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,This book came out in 2006
Dialogue: 0,0:02:14.92,0:02:18.86,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,from a publisher\Ncalled Rowman & Littlefield,
Dialogue: 0,0:02:18.86,0:02:21.86,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and this book grew out\Nof an international conference
Dialogue: 0,0:02:21.86,0:02:23.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that took place in 2004.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:24.51,0:02:29.25,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,In this book, I put together\Neight internationally renowned experts
Dialogue: 0,0:02:29.25,0:02:35.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to chart China's future\Nfrom what we had back in 2004.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:36.30,0:02:42.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,In that book, we laid out\Neight possible scenarios for future China.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:45.62,0:02:50.18,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If you look at the column on the left,\Nthese are the three scenarios
Dialogue: 0,0:02:50.18,0:02:53.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that I'd like to take off\Nfrom the list at this point.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:53.91,0:02:57.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Although we considered\Nthese three possibilities back in 2006,
Dialogue: 0,0:02:57.96,0:03:03.25,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but I think these three scenarios\Nare no longer plausible or applicable
Dialogue: 0,0:03:03.25,0:03:04.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to the future of China
Dialogue: 0,0:03:04.68,0:03:08.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,from the vantage point\Nof 2015 which is now.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:08.21,0:03:13.07,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Yugoslavia doesn't exist anymore,\Nit's completely disintegrated;
Dialogue: 0,0:03:14.35,0:03:16.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,you cannot find it on the map.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:16.50,0:03:21.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Now you can refer to Serbia,\NBosnia, Herzegovina, and so on.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:21.71,0:03:23.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,It's gone.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:23.20,0:03:26.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So I don't think\Nthis will be the future for China.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:26.54,0:03:32.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Indonesia, back in 2004, when we were\Nactually doing research for this book,
Dialogue: 0,0:03:32.61,0:03:36.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Indonesia was economically very backward,
Dialogue: 0,0:03:36.34,0:03:40.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,politically it was not\Na democratic system,
Dialogue: 0,0:03:40.32,0:03:42.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and it didn't really have
Dialogue: 0,0:03:42.16,0:03:46.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a very strong diplomatic\Nor strategic presence at all.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:46.30,0:03:51.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So we didn't think China's future\Nwill go down the path of Indonesia,
Dialogue: 0,0:03:51.74,0:03:53.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,so it's off the list as well.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:53.63,0:03:57.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Latin America: a lot of people\Ncompare high Gini coefficient,
Dialogue: 0,0:03:57.09,0:04:01.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that means income inequalities,\Nin China to those of Latin America.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:01.24,0:04:02.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,That might be true.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:02.62,0:04:07.55,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But Latin America's diplomatic\Nstrategic presence is not felt.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:07.55,0:04:13.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Differently, China is now rising\Nand is making its imprints everywhere
Dialogue: 0,0:04:13.100,0:04:18.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,so I think the Latin America model\Nis also off the list.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:18.57,0:04:23.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If you look at the column in the middle,\Nthere are three models.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:23.14,0:04:27.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Indian model, back in 2004,\NIndia's economy was not that great.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:27.36,0:04:29.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Of course it's doing a great job now.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:29.94,0:04:32.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But even so, India's presence,
Dialogue: 0,0:04:32.29,0:04:35.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,particularly from the viewpoint\Nof Northeast Asia,
Dialogue: 0,0:04:35.02,0:04:37.77,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is not being felt very strongly.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:37.77,0:04:39.78,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Of course, there is still a possibility
Dialogue: 0,0:04:39.78,0:04:44.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that China's path might actually resemble\Nthat of India in the future.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:44.17,0:04:48.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So there is a possibility\Nfor these three models in the middle,
Dialogue: 0,0:04:48.63,0:04:52.65,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but not really high, I would say.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:52.65,0:04:56.73,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Soviet Union: as you all know\Nwhat happened to Soviet Union,
Dialogue: 0,0:04:56.73,0:05:00.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,now it's Russia,\Nit's now still a semi-global power,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:00.03,0:05:05.25,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,although its global reach\Nhas been constricted considerably.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:05.26,0:05:07.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But there is still a possibility
Dialogue: 0,0:05:07.06,0:05:10.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that China might go down actually\Nthe path of the Soviet Union,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:10.24,0:05:13.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but the possibility as I see it\Nis not that high.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:13.84,0:05:17.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Finally, the French model:\NFrance is a global power,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:17.58,0:05:21.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but France cannot make\Ninternational rules and norms by itself.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:21.60,0:05:24.15,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But France actually makes its imprints
Dialogue: 0,0:05:24.15,0:05:29.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,by vetoing what others are willing to do,\Nparticularly the United States.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:29.37,0:05:31.25,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So it's a global veto power.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:31.25,0:05:34.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Will China resemble the path of France?
Dialogue: 0,0:05:34.14,0:05:36.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,It remains to be seen.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:36.40,0:05:40.25,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So these three possibilities\Nin the middle column still remain,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:40.25,0:05:45.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but I'd say the likelihood\Nis not very great.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:45.73,0:05:50.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If you want me to bet, my bet\Nwould be on the column on the right,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:50.74,0:05:54.42,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,either the Chinese model\Nor the American model.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:54.42,0:05:56.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,What does the Chinese model mean?
Dialogue: 0,0:05:56.14,0:05:58.19,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,It means an authoritarian political system
Dialogue: 0,0:05:58.19,0:06:01.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,with a highly competitive\Nmarket-based economic system.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:01.93,0:06:07.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,China has been successful\Nin sustaining this particular model.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:07.32,0:06:11.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If China really should prove successful\Nin the future as well, and I think
Dialogue: 0,0:06:11.38,0:06:15.73,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that will have enormous implications\Nscholarly, as well as policy-wise.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:16.51,0:06:21.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,The American model: that is market-based,\Nhighly competitive, efficient system
Dialogue: 0,0:06:21.24,0:06:23.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,as well as a politically\Ndemocratic system.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:23.90,0:06:26.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Will China eventually go down this path?
Dialogue: 0,0:06:26.46,0:06:30.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I don't know, but if you want me to bet,\Namong these eight models,
Dialogue: 0,0:06:30.40,0:06:33.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,probably China will go down\Neither the Chinese model
Dialogue: 0,0:06:33.46,0:06:35.85,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,or in the long run, the American model.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:35.85,0:06:37.33,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,We'll see.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:37.33,0:06:42.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I think, down the road,\Nprobably the easiest task
Dialogue: 0,0:06:42.22,0:06:45.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that China can accomplish\Nis economic development.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:46.69,0:06:49.56,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,When will China overtake\Nthe US in GDP terms?
Dialogue: 0,0:06:49.56,0:06:52.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Already my colleagues from China\Nhave talked about it,
Dialogue: 0,0:06:52.89,0:06:56.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but I'd like to lay out\Na couple of important predictions
Dialogue: 0,0:06:56.84,0:06:59.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,made by "think" tanks not know-tanks.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:59.84,0:07:03.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Goldman Sachs provided two estimates.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:03.51,0:07:06.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,In 2003, they said\Nthat China would surpass
Dialogue: 0,0:07:06.72,0:07:10.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the United States in GDP terms by 2050.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:11.32,0:07:14.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And then six years later, in 2009,
Dialogue: 0,0:07:14.47,0:07:18.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Goldman Sachs revised\Ntheir figures, to 2027.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:20.25,0:07:23.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And then the Economist,\Nthe magazine based in London,
Dialogue: 0,0:07:23.18,0:07:27.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,gave out the prediction for 2019.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:27.02,0:07:33.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And Japan's Cabinet Research Office\Ncame out with an estimate of 2025.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:34.22,0:07:40.86,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And China's own Academy of Sciences\Ncame out with an estimate of 2019.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:40.86,0:07:42.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So what does this tell us?
Dialogue: 0,0:07:42.84,0:07:48.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I think this seems to suggest\Nthat between 2019 and 2025,
Dialogue: 0,0:07:48.37,0:07:53.70,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,China's GDP is very likely\Nto surpass that of the United States.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:53.70,0:07:57.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So I think accomplishing\Nthe economic takeover
Dialogue: 0,0:07:57.34,0:08:02.33,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is probably the easiest and I think\Nit's going to happen very soon.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:02.33,0:08:08.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Maybe, at the latest, within 10 years,\Nthe fastest, probably within 5 years.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:08.57,0:08:13.19,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Particularly given what my colleagues\Nfrom China and New Zealand
Dialogue: 0,0:08:13.19,0:08:15.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,have said about One Belt One Road;
Dialogue: 0,0:08:15.74,0:08:19.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,if that should prove successful,
Dialogue: 0,0:08:19.74,0:08:24.67,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I think it will give an enormous impetus\Nfor China's economic development.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:24.67,0:08:29.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Don't forget that America's rise\Nwas based in significant part
Dialogue: 0,0:08:29.69,0:08:32.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,on the gold rush toward California
Dialogue: 0,0:08:32.76,0:08:37.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,because it expanded\Nthe spatial as well as the time dimension
Dialogue: 0,0:08:37.22,0:08:40.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,for development, by 50 to 100 years.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:40.22,0:08:45.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So if that One Belt One Road initiative\Nshould become successful,
Dialogue: 0,0:08:45.64,0:08:49.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,then, I think, it would be\Nan enormous variable for China's future.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:49.54,0:08:51.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So economic dimension:
Dialogue: 0,0:08:51.20,0:08:57.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I think there is very little debate\Non what China will become in 2025.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:58.28,0:09:02.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I think more debatable\Nis China's military power.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:02.12,0:09:04.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Let me introduce two books here.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:04.52,0:09:08.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,The one on the left is\Nthe Task Force Report
Dialogue: 0,0:09:08.01,0:09:10.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,which came out in 2003
Dialogue: 0,0:09:10.37,0:09:13.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,by the Council on Foreign Relations\Nin the United States.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:13.80,0:09:18.35,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And this Task Force Report was chaired\Nby Mr. Harold Brown,
Dialogue: 0,0:09:18.35,0:09:20.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the former Secretary of Defense.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:20.57,0:09:26.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And he put together more than 20 experts,\Nsecurity and military experts in America
Dialogue: 0,0:09:26.90,0:09:30.85,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and the findings, the conclusion\Nof this Task Force Report
Dialogue: 0,0:09:30.85,0:09:35.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is that as of 2003,\Nthe publication date of that report,
Dialogue: 0,0:09:35.53,0:09:42.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,as of 2003, China's military power\Nwas lagging behind the US by 20 years.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:42.28,0:09:47.51,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So if we take that conclusion\Nat face value, that means, by 2023,
Dialogue: 0,0:09:47.52,0:09:52.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,China's military power\Nwill most likely equal that of the US.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:52.97,0:09:55.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Now, let me introduce\Nthe book on the right.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:56.11,0:09:59.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,This is the book I edited,\Nand it will be forthcoming in two months,
Dialogue: 0,0:09:59.64,0:10:02.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in early October this year by Macmillan.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:02.79,0:10:05.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I put together\N13 internationally renowned scholars;
Dialogue: 0,0:10:05.80,0:10:08.55,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,among them three were military experts.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:08.56,0:10:11.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,They contributed\Nthree chapters to the book.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:11.37,0:10:16.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,One on conventional military power,\Na second on nuclear weapon power,
Dialogue: 0,0:10:16.21,0:10:19.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and a third one on cyber and space power.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:19.46,0:10:21.70,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,They all agreed to one fact
Dialogue: 0,0:10:21.70,0:10:28.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that is, by 2025, China is not going to be\Na match for the US on a global theater.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:28.54,0:10:32.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So globally, China is not going\Nto be a match for the US.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:32.64,0:10:34.97,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,However, they added a footnote.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:34.98,0:10:38.15,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,That is in the regional setting,\Nparticularly East Asia,
Dialogue: 0,0:10:38.15,0:10:41.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,China will be a peer competitor.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:41.93,0:10:45.18,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Particularly given\Nthe technological leapfrogging
Dialogue: 0,0:10:45.18,0:10:48.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,China has been making\Nin the last 10 years or so,
Dialogue: 0,0:10:48.57,0:10:50.86,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,including\Nthe anti-ship ballistic missiles,
Dialogue: 0,0:10:50.86,0:10:53.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,supersonic weapons, and so forth;
Dialogue: 0,0:10:53.46,0:10:55.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I think this is real.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:55.14,0:11:01.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So, on the global setting,\NChina is no match even by 2025,
Dialogue: 0,0:11:01.12,0:11:05.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but the conclusion might be\Nquite different in regional settings.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:05.43,0:11:12.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So, economically, China\Nwill be number one by 2025,
Dialogue: 0,0:11:12.16,0:11:17.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but militarily China will still be limited\Nto a regional competitor.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:17.58,0:11:21.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Globally, the US will still be\Nthe hegemon.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:22.34,0:11:24.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Then I think we have to think
Dialogue: 0,0:11:24.75,0:11:27.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,what will be the final game?
Dialogue: 0,0:11:28.41,0:11:32.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,The final game will be basically\Nsomething about perception:
Dialogue: 0,0:11:32.00,0:11:37.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,how the US will view China,\Nand how China will view the US.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:37.75,0:11:40.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And most importantly,\Nhow the international community
Dialogue: 0,0:11:40.24,0:11:44.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and regional states\Nwill view the United States and China.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:44.32,0:11:47.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,In other words,\Nwhich of the two will be considered
Dialogue: 0,0:11:47.60,0:11:50.26,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,as a more benign and friendly power.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:50.27,0:11:54.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I think that with perception,\Ncompetition will be very important.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:54.96,0:11:56.82,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Now, given the limited time,
Dialogue: 0,0:11:56.82,0:12:00.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I'll just focus on the perceptions\Nbetween the US and China.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:01.50,0:12:06.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,These are the summary statistics\Nbased upon PEW Global Research
Dialogue: 0,0:12:06.61,0:12:10.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,between 2008 to2014.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:10.06,0:12:14.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And these are American perceptions\Nand Chinese perceptions of the future,
Dialogue: 0,0:12:14.43,0:12:18.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,whether or not China\Nwill surpass the United States.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:18.29,0:12:22.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If you look at the third column\Nfrom the left,
Dialogue: 0,0:12:23.43,0:12:27.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,about 10% of both Americans\Nand Chinese think
Dialogue: 0,0:12:27.43,0:12:30.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that China already surpassed the US.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:30.43,0:12:35.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,10% of the Americans and Chinese think\NChina already surpassed the United States.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:35.20,0:12:37.65,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,That's not correct,\Nthat is not the reality,
Dialogue: 0,0:12:37.65,0:12:42.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but people are already thinking\Nthat China already surpassed the US.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:42.79,0:12:48.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If you look at the second column,\Nthe percentage of Americans and Chinese
Dialogue: 0,0:12:48.13,0:12:53.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,who think China will eventually surpass\Nthe US is increasing by the year.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:53.02,0:12:57.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So if you look at 2014,\N39% of Americans, nearly 40%,
Dialogue: 0,0:12:57.30,0:13:00.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and nearly 50% of Chinese are thinking
Dialogue: 0,0:13:00.11,0:13:04.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the so called power transition\Nis inevitable.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:04.39,0:13:06.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If you look at the fourth column,
Dialogue: 0,0:13:06.44,0:13:09.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the percentage of Americans\Nand Chinese who think
Dialogue: 0,0:13:09.52,0:13:13.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,China will never surpass the US\Nis actually decreasing.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:13.50,0:13:14.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So what does this tell us?
Dialogue: 0,0:13:14.94,0:13:19.55,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Increasing number of Chinese\Nand Americans are thinking
Dialogue: 0,0:13:19.55,0:13:22.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that power transition is going to happen.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:23.02,0:13:27.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,More importantly, the next slide,
Dialogue: 0,0:13:27.29,0:13:32.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,these are the summary statistics\Nbased upon Gallup polls in the US
Dialogue: 0,0:13:32.52,0:13:36.04,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,between 2001 and 2014.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:36.04,0:13:41.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Which country constitutes\Nthe biggest enemy in the eyes of America?
Dialogue: 0,0:13:41.98,0:13:44.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If you look at 2001, China was number two.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:44.54,0:13:48.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But since then, until 2011,\NChina never made top two.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:48.72,0:13:51.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,It was always Iran, Iraq,\Nand North Korea.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:52.56,0:13:56.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But after 2010, the year when we all think
Dialogue: 0,0:13:56.50,0:14:00.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,China began to make\Nsome assertive diplomacy,
Dialogue: 0,0:14:01.32,0:14:04.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,American perception of China\Nbegan to change.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:04.03,0:14:09.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So in 2011, China made it\Nto number two biggest enemy
Dialogue: 0,0:14:09.14,0:14:13.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in the minds of the Americans,\Nand in 2012, China remained number two,
Dialogue: 0,0:14:13.81,0:14:18.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but in 2014, China finally became\Nnumber one enemy of the US.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:18.74,0:14:21.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Of course, public perceptions change.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:21.36,0:14:23.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Public opinions are very fickle.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:23.28,0:14:26.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,However, given the fact\Nthat America is a democratic system,
Dialogue: 0,0:14:26.91,0:14:28.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,public opinions do matter.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:28.99,0:14:33.85,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,It may have an enormous influence\Non policy making.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:33.85,0:14:35.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So this is not very good news.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:35.95,0:14:41.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,However, probably that is why\Nour colleagues and Kevin Rudd
Dialogue: 0,0:14:41.28,0:14:43.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,were talking about constructive realism.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:43.84,0:14:48.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Thus far I've talked only about China.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:48.66,0:14:50.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I haven't talked much about the US.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:50.94,0:14:54.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But I think, in order to talk\Nabout the future of China,
Dialogue: 0,0:14:54.12,0:14:55.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we have to talk about the US.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:55.87,0:14:58.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Why? Because it's a game of relativity.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:58.72,0:15:02.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,If China grows richer and stronger,\Nbut the US stagnates here,
Dialogue: 0,0:15:02.94,0:15:05.97,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,then power transition\Nwould definitely take place.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:05.97,0:15:10.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But if China grows stronger and faster,\Nbut the US also grows stronger and faster,
Dialogue: 0,0:15:10.32,0:15:14.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,then power transition\Nis not likely to take place.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:14.30,0:15:19.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So this is a very important dynamics\Nthat we have to bear in mind.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:20.53,0:15:23.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,History has taught us a lesson
Dialogue: 0,0:15:23.49,0:15:27.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that the biggest enemy\Nof an empire or a hegemon
Dialogue: 0,0:15:27.17,0:15:31.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is not another country,\Nbut actually it is self-complacency.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:33.86,0:15:37.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,These are the quotations\NI got from British politicians
Dialogue: 0,0:15:37.41,0:15:40.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in the late 19th century\Nand early 20th century.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:41.33,0:15:46.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Mr. Benjamin Disraeli was\NEarl of Beaconsfield in the UK.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:46.79,0:15:49.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,He made a speech in 1872.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:49.47,0:15:52.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,1872 is a very significant year,\Nbecause it is the year
Dialogue: 0,0:15:52.59,0:15:58.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,when the GDP of the US\Nhas surpassed that of the UK.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:58.16,0:16:03.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And Earl Disraeli says,\N"I express here my confident conviction
Dialogue: 0,0:16:03.36,0:16:05.65,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that there never was a moment\Nin our history
Dialogue: 0,0:16:05.65,0:16:07.73,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,when the power of England was so great
Dialogue: 0,0:16:07.74,0:16:11.18,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and her resources\Nso vast and inexhaustible."
Dialogue: 0,0:16:11.18,0:16:14.88,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,30 years later, Mr. Joseph Chamberlain,\Na very renowned politician,
Dialogue: 0,0:16:14.88,0:16:19.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,made another speech in 1903,\Nalong the similar lines.
Dialogue: 0,0:16:19.75,0:16:22.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,UK has never been more powerful,\Nnever been stronger.
Dialogue: 0,0:16:22.93,0:16:26.26,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,But we all know\Nwhat happened 40 years later.
Dialogue: 0,0:16:26.25,0:16:29.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,In 1944,\Nthe Bretton Woods System was created,
Dialogue: 0,0:16:29.64,0:16:33.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,giving the US the status of a hegemon,
Dialogue: 0,0:16:33.54,0:16:37.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,making the UK nearly irrelevant\Nin international relations.
Dialogue: 0,0:16:37.58,0:16:43.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So, I think what the US will do,\Nand what the US will be able to do,
Dialogue: 0,0:16:43.14,0:16:48.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in the 10 years and after would probably\Nshape the future of China as well.
Dialogue: 0,0:16:48.71,0:16:50.19,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Thanks for listening.
Dialogue: 0,0:16:50.19,0:16:51.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,(Applause)