WEBVTT

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

00:00:17.584 --> 00:00:21.793
Hi everyone, I'd like to start
by thanking the organizers

00:00:21.793 --> 00:00:27.648
for this excellent venue,
for a very important discussion.

00:00:27.649 --> 00:00:31.410
It is my great pleasure
to share with all of you

00:00:31.411 --> 00:00:34.493
some of my thoughts
on the future of China.

00:00:34.501 --> 00:00:40.113
I wish I could say the same thing
as what Kevin Rudd said,

00:00:40.114 --> 00:00:42.048
"I'm here to help."

00:00:42.049 --> 00:00:46.836
But somehow, predicting the future
is a very difficult task.

00:00:46.837 --> 00:00:52.767
First, social scientists are not
very well equipped to predict the future,

00:00:52.768 --> 00:00:57.621
as we've seen
in the collapse of the Soviet Union,

00:00:57.622 --> 00:01:02.386
the financial crisis in East Asia,
and so on and so forth.

00:01:02.387 --> 00:01:09.124
Another reason is that black swans
actually show up, so it's very difficult.

00:01:09.125 --> 00:01:14.161
Particularly, when it comes down
to China, the future of China,

00:01:14.162 --> 00:01:16.704
the challenge is much more daunting,

00:01:16.705 --> 00:01:19.746
and I have to talk about it
in just 15 minutes.

00:01:19.747 --> 00:01:24.659
So I'll try my best to give some answers.

00:01:27.430 --> 00:01:30.166
These are the two cartoons that I adopted

00:01:30.167 --> 00:01:33.323
from South China Morning Post
early this year.

00:01:33.324 --> 00:01:37.058
As you can see,
in the cartoon on the right side,

00:01:37.059 --> 00:01:39.498
Chinese officials are trying very hard

00:01:39.499 --> 00:01:43.149
to maintain the growth rate
of 7% or higher.

00:01:44.224 --> 00:01:47.098
And then, on the left side,
this cartoon says

00:01:47.099 --> 00:01:50.868
there are three new think tanks
starting up in China.

00:01:50.869 --> 00:01:54.529
And then the guy sitting at the desk says
we don't need any more think tanks,

00:01:54.530 --> 00:01:58.464
we need "know" tanks
because they give me some answers.

00:01:58.465 --> 00:02:03.800
I hope I can give you answers
by the end of this 15-minute presentation

00:02:03.801 --> 00:02:06.740
but even if I cannot,
please bear with me.

00:02:06.741 --> 00:02:10.102
Let me first introduce one book.

00:02:11.709 --> 00:02:14.903
This book came out in 2006

00:02:14.918 --> 00:02:18.862
from a publisher
called Rowman & Littlefield,

00:02:18.863 --> 00:02:21.862
and this book grew out
of an international conference

00:02:21.863 --> 00:02:23.938
that took place in 2004.

00:02:24.511 --> 00:02:29.246
In this book, I put together
eight internationally renowned experts

00:02:29.247 --> 00:02:35.317
to chart China's future
from what we had back in 2004.

00:02:36.297 --> 00:02:42.102
In that book, we laid out
eight possible scenarios for future China.

00:02:45.623 --> 00:02:50.184
If you look at the column on the left,
these are the three scenarios

00:02:50.185 --> 00:02:53.910
that I'd like to take off
from the list at this point.

00:02:53.911 --> 00:02:57.960
Although we considered
these three possibilities back in 2006,

00:02:57.961 --> 00:03:03.252
but I think these three scenarios
are no longer plausible or applicable

00:03:03.253 --> 00:03:04.682
to the future of China

00:03:04.683 --> 00:03:08.212
from the vantage point
of 2015 which is now.

00:03:08.213 --> 00:03:13.067
Yugoslavia doesn't exist anymore,
it's completely disintegrated;

00:03:14.350 --> 00:03:16.502
you cannot find it on the map.

00:03:16.503 --> 00:03:21.712
Now you can refer to Serbia,
Bosnia, Herzegovina, and so on.

00:03:21.713 --> 00:03:23.195
It's gone.

00:03:23.196 --> 00:03:26.542
So I don't think
this will be the future for China.

00:03:26.543 --> 00:03:32.606
Indonesia, back in 2004, when we were
actually doing research for this book,

00:03:32.607 --> 00:03:36.342
Indonesia was economically very backward,

00:03:36.343 --> 00:03:40.322
politically it was not
a democratic system,

00:03:40.323 --> 00:03:42.156
and it didn't really have

00:03:42.157 --> 00:03:46.296
a very strong diplomatic
or strategic presence at all.

00:03:46.297 --> 00:03:51.743
So we didn't think China's future
will go down the path of Indonesia,

00:03:51.744 --> 00:03:53.628
so it's off the list as well.

00:03:53.629 --> 00:03:57.085
Latin America: a lot of people
compare high Gini coefficient,

00:03:57.087 --> 00:04:01.241
that means income inequalities,
in China to those of Latin America.

00:04:01.242 --> 00:04:02.614
That might be true.

00:04:02.615 --> 00:04:07.546
But Latin America's diplomatic
strategic presence is not felt.

00:04:07.547 --> 00:04:13.994
Differently, China is now rising
and is making its imprints everywhere

00:04:13.995 --> 00:04:18.567
so I think the Latin America model
is also off the list.

00:04:18.567 --> 00:04:23.136
If you look at the column in the middle,
there are three models.

00:04:23.137 --> 00:04:27.355
Indian model, back in 2004,
India's economy was not that great.

00:04:27.356 --> 00:04:29.937
Of course it's doing a great job now.

00:04:29.938 --> 00:04:32.287
But even so, India's presence,

00:04:32.288 --> 00:04:35.017
particularly from the viewpoint
of Northeast Asia,

00:04:35.018 --> 00:04:37.768
is not being felt very strongly.

00:04:37.769 --> 00:04:39.779
Of course, there is still a possibility

00:04:39.780 --> 00:04:44.172
that China's path might actually resemble
that of India in the future.

00:04:44.173 --> 00:04:48.625
So there is a possibility
for these three models in the middle,

00:04:48.626 --> 00:04:52.648
but not really high, I would say.

00:04:52.649 --> 00:04:56.730
Soviet Union: as you all know
what happened to Soviet Union,

00:04:56.731 --> 00:05:00.026
now it's Russia,
it's now still a semi-global power,

00:05:00.027 --> 00:05:05.254
although its global reach
has been constricted considerably.

00:05:05.255 --> 00:05:07.063
But there is still a possibility

00:05:07.064 --> 00:05:10.237
that China might go down actually
the path of the Soviet Union,

00:05:10.238 --> 00:05:13.837
but the possibility as I see it
is not that high.

00:05:13.838 --> 00:05:17.577
Finally, the French model:
France is a global power,

00:05:17.578 --> 00:05:21.595
but France cannot make
international rules and norms by itself.

00:05:21.596 --> 00:05:24.148
But France actually makes its imprints

00:05:24.149 --> 00:05:29.372
by vetoing what others are willing to do,
particularly the United States.

00:05:29.373 --> 00:05:31.246
So it's a global veto power.

00:05:31.247 --> 00:05:34.144
Will China resemble the path of France?

00:05:34.145 --> 00:05:36.396
It remains to be seen.

00:05:36.397 --> 00:05:40.248
So these three possibilities
in the middle column still remain,

00:05:40.249 --> 00:05:45.725
but I'd say the likelihood
is not very great.

00:05:45.726 --> 00:05:50.743
If you want me to bet, my bet
would be on the column on the right,

00:05:50.744 --> 00:05:54.423
either the Chinese model
or the American model.

00:05:54.424 --> 00:05:56.139
What does the Chinese model mean?

00:05:56.140 --> 00:05:58.188
It means an authoritarian political system

00:05:58.189 --> 00:06:01.930
with a highly competitive
market-based economic system.

00:06:01.931 --> 00:06:07.317
China has been successful
in sustaining this particular model.

00:06:07.318 --> 00:06:11.383
If China really should prove successful
in the future as well, and I think

00:06:11.384 --> 00:06:15.730
that will have enormous implications
scholarly, as well as policy-wise.

00:06:16.510 --> 00:06:21.239
The American model: that is market-based,
highly competitive, efficient system

00:06:21.240 --> 00:06:23.904
as well as a politically
democratic system.

00:06:23.905 --> 00:06:26.455
Will China eventually go down this path?

00:06:26.456 --> 00:06:30.396
I don't know, but if you want me to bet,
among these eight models,

00:06:30.397 --> 00:06:33.462
probably China will go down
either the Chinese model

00:06:33.463 --> 00:06:35.852
or in the long run, the American model.

00:06:35.853 --> 00:06:37.331
We'll see.

00:06:37.332 --> 00:06:42.223
I think, down the road,
probably the easiest task

00:06:42.224 --> 00:06:45.844
that China can accomplish
is economic development.

00:06:46.692 --> 00:06:49.561
When will China overtake
the US in GDP terms?

00:06:49.562 --> 00:06:52.891
Already my colleagues from China
have talked about it,

00:06:52.892 --> 00:06:56.836
but I'd like to lay out
a couple of important predictions

00:06:56.837 --> 00:06:59.836
made by "think" tanks not know-tanks.

00:06:59.837 --> 00:07:03.505
Goldman Sachs provided two estimates.

00:07:03.506 --> 00:07:06.723
In 2003, they said
that China would surpass

00:07:06.724 --> 00:07:10.404
the United States in GDP terms by 2050.

00:07:11.321 --> 00:07:14.471
And then six years later, in 2009,

00:07:14.472 --> 00:07:18.593
Goldman Sachs revised
their figures, to 2027.

00:07:20.251 --> 00:07:23.174
And then the Economist,
the magazine based in London,

00:07:23.175 --> 00:07:27.020
gave out the prediction for 2019.

00:07:27.021 --> 00:07:33.080
And Japan's Cabinet Research Office
came out with an estimate of 2025.

00:07:34.223 --> 00:07:40.858
And China's own Academy of Sciences
came out with an estimate of 2019.

00:07:40.859 --> 00:07:42.841
So what does this tell us?

00:07:42.842 --> 00:07:48.370
I think this seems to suggest
that between 2019 and 2025,

00:07:48.371 --> 00:07:53.696
China's GDP is very likely
to surpass that of the United States.

00:07:53.697 --> 00:07:57.343
So I think accomplishing
the economic takeover

00:07:57.344 --> 00:08:02.333
is probably the easiest and I think
it's going to happen very soon.

00:08:02.334 --> 00:08:08.573
Maybe, at the latest, within 10 years,
the fastest, probably within 5 years.

00:08:08.574 --> 00:08:13.193
Particularly given what my colleagues
from China and New Zealand

00:08:13.194 --> 00:08:15.743
have said about One Belt One Road;

00:08:15.744 --> 00:08:19.741
if that should prove successful,

00:08:19.742 --> 00:08:24.668
I think it will give an enormous impetus
for China's economic development.

00:08:24.669 --> 00:08:29.689
Don't forget that America's rise
was based in significant part

00:08:29.690 --> 00:08:32.760
on the gold rush toward California

00:08:32.761 --> 00:08:37.224
because it expanded
the spatial as well as the time dimension

00:08:37.225 --> 00:08:40.224
for development, by 50 to 100 years.

00:08:40.225 --> 00:08:45.637
So if that One Belt One Road initiative
should become successful,

00:08:45.638 --> 00:08:49.539
then, I think, it would be
an enormous variable for China's future.

00:08:49.540 --> 00:08:51.198
So economic dimension:

00:08:51.199 --> 00:08:57.205
I think there is very little debate
on what China will become in 2025.

00:08:58.279 --> 00:09:02.118
I think more debatable
is China's military power.

00:09:02.119 --> 00:09:04.523
Let me introduce two books here.

00:09:04.524 --> 00:09:08.009
The one on the left is
the Task Force Report

00:09:08.010 --> 00:09:10.369
which came out in 2003

00:09:10.370 --> 00:09:13.795
by the Council on Foreign Relations
in the United States.

00:09:13.796 --> 00:09:18.349
And this Task Force Report was chaired
by Mr. Harold Brown,

00:09:18.350 --> 00:09:20.569
the former Secretary of Defense.

00:09:20.570 --> 00:09:26.899
And he put together more than 20 experts,
security and military experts in America

00:09:26.900 --> 00:09:30.848
and the findings, the conclusion
of this Task Force Report

00:09:30.849 --> 00:09:35.529
is that as of 2003,
the publication date of that report,

00:09:35.530 --> 00:09:42.278
as of 2003, China's military power
was lagging behind the US by 20 years.

00:09:42.279 --> 00:09:47.514
So if we take that conclusion
at face value, that means, by 2023,

00:09:47.515 --> 00:09:52.301
China's military power
will most likely equal that of the US.

00:09:52.968 --> 00:09:55.229
Now, let me introduce
the book on the right.

00:09:56.110 --> 00:09:59.640
This is the book I edited,
and it will be forthcoming in two months,

00:09:59.641 --> 00:10:02.790
in early October this year by Macmillan.

00:10:02.791 --> 00:10:05.799
I put together
13 internationally renowned scholars;

00:10:05.800 --> 00:10:08.554
among them three were military experts.

00:10:08.555 --> 00:10:11.373
They contributed
three chapters to the book.

00:10:11.374 --> 00:10:16.208
One on conventional military power,
a second on nuclear weapon power,

00:10:16.209 --> 00:10:19.458
and a third one on cyber and space power.

00:10:19.459 --> 00:10:21.704
They all agreed to one fact

00:10:21.705 --> 00:10:28.544
that is, by 2025, China is not going to be
a match for the US on a global theater.

00:10:28.545 --> 00:10:32.638
So globally, China is not going
to be a match for the US.

00:10:32.639 --> 00:10:34.974
However, they added a footnote.

00:10:34.975 --> 00:10:38.147
That is in the regional setting,
particularly East Asia,

00:10:38.148 --> 00:10:41.930
China will be a peer competitor.

00:10:41.931 --> 00:10:45.177
Particularly given
the technological leapfrogging

00:10:45.178 --> 00:10:48.566
China has been making
in the last 10 years or so,

00:10:48.567 --> 00:10:50.864
including
the anti-ship ballistic missiles,

00:10:50.865 --> 00:10:53.464
supersonic weapons, and so forth;

00:10:53.465 --> 00:10:55.143
I think this is real.

00:10:55.144 --> 00:11:01.121
So, on the global setting,
China is no match even by 2025,

00:11:01.122 --> 00:11:05.430
but the conclusion might be
quite different in regional settings.

00:11:05.431 --> 00:11:12.157
So, economically, China
will be number one by 2025,

00:11:12.158 --> 00:11:17.583
but militarily China will still be limited
to a regional competitor.

00:11:17.584 --> 00:11:21.460
Globally, the US will still be
the hegemon.

00:11:22.336 --> 00:11:24.748
Then I think we have to think

00:11:24.749 --> 00:11:27.573
what will be the final game?

00:11:28.410 --> 00:11:32.003
The final game will be basically
something about perception:

00:11:32.004 --> 00:11:37.746
how the US will view China,
and how China will view the US.

00:11:37.747 --> 00:11:40.236
And most importantly,
how the international community

00:11:40.236 --> 00:11:44.319
and regional states
will view the United States and China.

00:11:44.320 --> 00:11:47.601
In other words,
which of the two will be considered

00:11:47.602 --> 00:11:50.265
as a more benign and friendly power.

00:11:50.266 --> 00:11:54.958
I think that with perception,
competition will be very important.

00:11:54.959 --> 00:11:56.823
Now, given the limited time,

00:11:56.824 --> 00:12:00.062
I'll just focus on the perceptions
between the US and China.

00:12:01.502 --> 00:12:06.610
These are the summary statistics
based upon PEW Global Research

00:12:06.611 --> 00:12:10.060
between 2008 to2014.

00:12:10.061 --> 00:12:14.428
And these are American perceptions
and Chinese perceptions of the future,

00:12:14.429 --> 00:12:18.286
whether or not China
will surpass the United States.

00:12:18.287 --> 00:12:22.500
If you look at the third column
from the left,

00:12:23.429 --> 00:12:27.427
about 10% of both Americans
and Chinese think

00:12:27.428 --> 00:12:30.427
that China already surpassed the US.

00:12:30.428 --> 00:12:35.198
10% of the Americans and Chinese think
China already surpassed the United States.

00:12:35.199 --> 00:12:37.650
That's not correct,
that is not the reality,

00:12:37.651 --> 00:12:42.787
but people are already thinking
that China already surpassed the US.

00:12:42.788 --> 00:12:48.130
If you look at the second column,
the percentage of Americans and Chinese

00:12:48.131 --> 00:12:53.019
who think China will eventually surpass
the US is increasing by the year.

00:12:53.020 --> 00:12:57.302
So if you look at 2014,
39% of Americans, nearly 40%,

00:12:57.303 --> 00:13:00.107
and nearly 50% of Chinese are thinking

00:13:00.108 --> 00:13:04.387
the so called power transition
is inevitable.

00:13:04.388 --> 00:13:06.441
If you look at the fourth column,

00:13:06.442 --> 00:13:09.523
the percentage of Americans
and Chinese who think

00:13:09.524 --> 00:13:13.503
China will never surpass the US
is actually decreasing.

00:13:13.504 --> 00:13:14.940
So what does this tell us?

00:13:14.941 --> 00:13:19.546
Increasing number of Chinese
and Americans are thinking

00:13:19.547 --> 00:13:22.077
that power transition is going to happen.

00:13:23.016 --> 00:13:27.286
More importantly, the next slide,

00:13:27.287 --> 00:13:32.520
these are the summary statistics
based upon Gallup polls in the US

00:13:32.521 --> 00:13:36.040
between 2001 and 2014.

00:13:36.041 --> 00:13:41.010
Which country constitutes
the biggest enemy in the eyes of America?

00:13:41.979 --> 00:13:44.543
If you look at 2001, China was number two.

00:13:44.544 --> 00:13:48.723
But since then, until 2011,
China never made top two.

00:13:48.724 --> 00:13:51.810
It was always Iran, Iraq,
and North Korea.

00:13:52.563 --> 00:13:56.498
But after 2010, the year when we all think

00:13:56.499 --> 00:14:00.609
China began to make
some assertive diplomacy,

00:14:01.322 --> 00:14:04.030
American perception of China
began to change.

00:14:04.031 --> 00:14:09.134
So in 2011, China made it
to number two biggest enemy

00:14:09.135 --> 00:14:13.812
in the minds of the Americans,
and in 2012, China remained number two,

00:14:13.813 --> 00:14:18.742
but in 2014, China finally became
number one enemy of the US.

00:14:18.743 --> 00:14:21.364
Of course, public perceptions change.

00:14:21.365 --> 00:14:23.284
Public opinions are very fickle.

00:14:23.285 --> 00:14:26.905
However, given the fact
that America is a democratic system,

00:14:26.906 --> 00:14:28.988
public opinions do matter.

00:14:28.989 --> 00:14:33.852
It may have an enormous influence
on policy making.

00:14:33.853 --> 00:14:35.945
So this is not very good news.

00:14:35.946 --> 00:14:41.275
However, probably that is why
our colleagues and Kevin Rudd

00:14:41.276 --> 00:14:43.843
were talking about constructive realism.

00:14:43.844 --> 00:14:48.661
Thus far I've talked only about China.

00:14:48.662 --> 00:14:50.934
I haven't talked much about the US.

00:14:50.935 --> 00:14:54.124
But I think, in order to talk
about the future of China,

00:14:54.125 --> 00:14:55.872
we have to talk about the US.

00:14:55.873 --> 00:14:58.719
Why? Because it's a game of relativity.

00:14:58.720 --> 00:15:02.941
If China grows richer and stronger,
but the US stagnates here,

00:15:02.942 --> 00:15:05.969
then power transition
would definitely take place.

00:15:05.970 --> 00:15:10.323
But if China grows stronger and faster,
but the US also grows stronger and faster,

00:15:10.324 --> 00:15:14.295
then power transition
is not likely to take place.

00:15:14.296 --> 00:15:19.099
So this is a very important dynamics
that we have to bear in mind.

00:15:20.534 --> 00:15:23.492
History has taught us a lesson

00:15:23.493 --> 00:15:27.172
that the biggest enemy
of an empire or a hegemon

00:15:27.173 --> 00:15:31.522
is not another country,
but actually it is self-complacency.

00:15:33.858 --> 00:15:37.408
These are the quotations
I got from British politicians

00:15:37.409 --> 00:15:40.641
in the late 19th century
and early 20th century.

00:15:41.334 --> 00:15:46.793
Mr. Benjamin Disraeli was
Earl of Beaconsfield in the UK.

00:15:46.793 --> 00:15:49.467
He made a speech in 1872.

00:15:49.468 --> 00:15:52.591
1872 is a very significant year,
because it is the year

00:15:52.592 --> 00:15:58.155
when the GDP of the US
has surpassed that of the UK.

00:15:58.156 --> 00:16:03.360
And Earl Disraeli says,
"I express here my confident conviction

00:16:03.361 --> 00:16:05.651
that there never was a moment
in our history

00:16:05.652 --> 00:16:07.734
when the power of England was so great

00:16:07.735 --> 00:16:11.184
and her resources
so vast and inexhaustible."

00:16:11.185 --> 00:16:14.880
30 years later, Mr. Joseph Chamberlain,
a very renowned politician,

00:16:14.881 --> 00:16:19.751
made another speech in 1903,
along the similar lines.

00:16:19.752 --> 00:16:22.929
UK has never been more powerful,
never been stronger.

00:16:22.930 --> 00:16:26.256
But we all know
what happened 40 years later.

00:16:26.250 --> 00:16:29.625
In 1944,
the Bretton Woods System was created,

00:16:29.639 --> 00:16:33.537
giving the US the status of a hegemon,

00:16:33.538 --> 00:16:37.576
making the UK nearly irrelevant
in international relations.

00:16:37.577 --> 00:16:43.142
So, I think what the US will do,
and what the US will be able to do,

00:16:43.143 --> 00:16:48.708
in the 10 years and after would probably
shape the future of China as well.

00:16:48.709 --> 00:16:50.192
Thanks for listening.

00:16:50.193 --> 00:16:51.583
(Applause)