0:01

You don't help the poor by making

0:04

everybody poorer. The

0:06

media has a frame and the frame is

0:08

Israel is the oppressor and the Palestinians are

0:11

the oppressed. I shouldn't be forced to

0:13

acknowledge my privilege unless I desire for

0:15

that to be part of my interaction

0:17

with somebody else. What I know

0:19

to be true and what all of

0:21

my fellow Gen Z know to be

0:23

true is that this is the most

0:26

talented generation yet. With respect to every

0:28

indicia of disadvantage, there is still a

0:30

racial hierarchy. And though I am

0:32

of course an Anglo, I'm certainly

0:34

not a f****** Saxon. Hello,

0:37

Monk listeners. Rudyard Griffiths here, your host

0:39

and moderator. Welcome to this, our continuing

0:41

conversations called the Monk Dialogues. On each

0:43

Monk Dialogue, we go deep into the

0:45

big issues and ideas driving

0:47

the public conversation with

0:50

an important international thinker.

0:52

On this Monk Dialogue, we are gonna be

0:55

talking with one of China's leading security experts.

0:57

His name is Zhou Bo. He's a

1:00

senior retired colonel in

1:02

People's Liberation Army of China and

1:04

a senior fellow at the Center

1:06

for International Security and

1:09

Strategy at Tsinghua

1:11

University in Shanghai. He's

1:14

also a director at the

1:16

Ministry of National Defense of

1:18

China. In this far reaching

1:20

conversation, we talk with Bo

1:22

about why Taiwan remains an

1:24

ongoing security issue for China.

1:27

The regional disputes are occurring with other

1:29

Asian powers in the South China Sea

1:32

and the lessons that Chinese leaders are

1:34

drawing from the ongoing war in Ukraine.

1:37

Zhou Bo, welcome to the Monk

1:40

Dialogues. Hi, Rod, nice to be

1:42

here. Let's talk a

1:44

little bit about China's

1:46

own sphere of influence and

1:48

surely, and correct

1:51

me if I'm wrong, but would you

1:53

characterize the increasingly

1:55

uncertain status of

1:58

Taiwan as China's... biggest

2:01

national security issue at this time?

2:04

Well, Taiwan is always the

2:07

biggest national security concern for

2:09

China. The reasoning is very

2:12

simple. Actually, for all

2:14

the militaries around the world,

2:16

territorial and national defense is

2:18

top priority. What

2:21

makes China different is that it has

2:23

some other missions being a major

2:25

power. So if you look

2:27

at China, China has a very unique

2:31

role. First, the

2:33

major power is not reunified. This

2:36

is extremely rare among major

2:38

powers. And besides, it has

2:41

to go abroad. And

2:43

its interests are overseas. It's

2:45

ubiquitous. So we

2:47

are talking about such a major power that is

2:50

so sophisticated and

2:53

complicated. But

2:56

this is a kind of natural feeling for

2:58

Chinese to have a peaceful

3:00

reunification with Taiwan. Then

3:04

there are a number of questions.

3:06

First, are we becoming impatient? Yeah.

3:12

This is actually a big question. I

3:14

would say we're still patient. This

3:17

is the thing in a number of

3:19

anomalies. For example, in October

3:21

last year, Xi

3:23

Jinping's report to the Chinese

3:26

Communist Party's Congress, he

3:28

still talked about the

3:31

Taiwan issue using two

3:33

phrases that impressed me most. That

3:35

is, we still have an utmost

3:38

sincerity. And

3:40

we would make utmost efforts in

3:43

the peaceful reunification. In

3:45

my understanding, that means at least

3:47

by October last year, we

3:49

still have competence. And

3:53

then we see from the facts. The

3:56

fact is there are a lot

3:58

of policies to tie. submarine

6:00

is much more sophisticated even than an

6:03

aircraft. Because I

6:05

came from Air Force, I'm not a pilot, but

6:07

I know normally aircraft

6:10

can never be said to be mature

6:12

until a pilot has

6:15

flown it for many years. That

6:17

means it was produced, it was trialed. But

6:20

then only pilots can tell you how

6:22

many problems they really have. So

6:25

with submarine, the first main

6:27

submarine, conventional submarine, I'm sure

6:29

there are a lot of problems. And

6:31

actually, it was delivered in a hurry

6:33

because this would be a kind

6:36

of a political legacy by

6:38

Taiwan, left by her.

6:42

But even if they could produce

6:45

eight submarines, even now altogether, would

6:47

that matter? Yes, they could

6:50

complicate decision making, Beijing. But generally

6:53

speaking, in

6:55

comparison with China's military

6:59

advances by leap and bounce, it

7:01

doesn't really matter. I think the United

7:03

States is now adopting

7:05

a strategy, overturning

7:07

Taiwan into a porcupine. Do

7:10

they really believe Taiwan could be such a

7:12

powerful porcupine? I doubt about it.

7:15

But it serves the interest. It

7:18

shows that while supporting democracy,

7:20

it serves the interest of

7:23

the military industrial complex of

7:25

selling weapons. Why not

7:27

if it is such a good opportunity?

7:30

So I think it

7:32

also serves them as a kind

7:34

of bargaining chip in this ever

7:37

sophisticated relationship between China

7:40

and the United States. I

7:43

think Americans actually have made

7:45

some progress through learning

7:47

from the failures. For example,

7:50

decoupling now looks totally like

7:52

nonsense. So they called it

7:54

derisking, which is actually the term borrowed from

7:57

the long line. But why

7:59

do they call derisking? because it

8:01

sounds more moderate because the economy

8:03

is impossible. But

8:05

what does this risk mean? I

8:08

think they would have to search their own

8:10

cell to find out because

8:12

even about the risk

8:14

in semiconductors and chips,

8:17

they would find it increasing difficult.

8:19

It's not that we are asking

8:22

them to do what they don't

8:24

want to do. It's these chips

8:26

manufacturers altogether would

8:28

have pressure on the White House because they are

8:30

losing the Chinese market. So

8:33

I think the United States is

8:35

actually having a problem with this

8:37

One China policy because

8:40

internally we

8:42

know people like Richard Haas,

8:45

the former president of the American

8:48

Council of Foreign Relations, has written

8:50

an article about how American policy

8:53

toward China should turn from

8:55

ambiguity to clarity. But

8:57

some other scholars actually disagree with him

9:00

because this kind of clarity actually

9:03

would make the situation more dangerous. But

9:06

why this kind of debate is happening? I

9:09

believe that is because the

9:11

strength of PRC is growing.

9:14

Because in the past, PRC is so weak, so

9:17

even if they maintain positive

9:19

ambiguity, you

9:21

don't know what kind of attitude they are

9:24

having and you are

9:27

in doubt, you are

9:29

constantly guessing. But because mainland

9:31

strength is growing, they

9:33

are afraid that unless they make it clear

9:36

that they would defend Taiwan militarily,

9:38

probably many of China would launch

9:40

an attack on Taiwan

9:43

first. But if they make this

9:45

kind of policy with

9:47

clarity, some people are afraid

9:49

this may just invite an empty strike

9:52

from mainland in the first place. So

9:54

I think they are now caught in this dilemma. And

9:57

Look at the American domestic situation.

10:00

The Biden undertaking so weak

10:02

and their this kind of

10:04

bipartisan in a rivalry is

10:06

extreme. And. Economic speaking Bomb

10:09

the it is doing good but

10:11

is er zur rough but if

10:13

you put into again as big

10:15

a drop as and know if

10:17

you listen to Donald Trump. Or

10:20

your nose Americans. the whole

10:22

situation A he is that

10:24

even the easy you that

10:26

in the carnage right? So

10:29

and the and A democracy.

10:31

The zebra Democracy has been

10:33

in steady decline for seventy

10:35

years. And. A hoodie? The

10:37

that's Apparently it has nothing to

10:40

do with China or Russia, right?

10:42

And the. First time he like

10:44

me. Of even for anybody. It's

10:47

a so so upholding to

10:49

see an American president. Would.

10:52

Ask is you know the protester.

10:55

To. Take over Capitol Hill. This

10:58

is on be livable. This is eye

11:01

opener. And. This won't even

11:03

have and the that african country. So.

11:06

Putting all this together, How

11:08

confident? Are we in a

11:10

stable. American policy

11:12

toward China and Taiwan.

11:15

A really have zero stuff. You.

11:17

Masses and just to check this with

11:19

you if because it is a at

11:21

the base. As you said in American

11:24

political circles, some. Republicans arguing

11:26

there should be an explicit

11:29

U S security guarantees extended

11:31

to Taiwan similar to Earth

11:34

article Five type. Commitment.

11:36

Within Nato? what would

11:39

be Beijing's reaction. If.

11:41

That policy came into force,

11:43

Would that be seen as

11:45

provocative? a lesser says

11:47

the looking to the debate about the

11:50

one china policy eater or butter this

11:52

ambiguity of that at illicit said clarity

11:54

eventually the still talk about the

11:56

one china why because it they're actually

11:59

holding now concept, but

12:01

they still put it as a big

12:03

basket, right? Because this would make things

12:06

easier for them. They kind of use

12:08

the, you know, endless different explanation, explain

12:10

what is one China. If you do

12:12

not see it as one China, then

12:14

of course that is kind of an

12:17

earthquake for them and for

12:19

us. So I

12:21

think we can learn from

12:23

Lance Pelosi's visit that

12:25

we are serious about it. So

12:28

some people ask me what

12:30

will happen if a new

12:34

American house speaker visits Taiwan.

12:37

I said, I don't know, because it

12:40

says certainly we have a plan, a

12:42

plan, b plan, c, but I can

12:45

guess out of my God's

12:47

feeling that our response has to be

12:49

greater. Yeah.

12:53

Otherwise, how can we just tell ourselves

12:55

that we're doing the right thing? So,

12:58

so I think this is a kind

13:00

of, I doubt they would actually openly

13:04

support Taiwan in such a

13:06

manner, but I'm fully confident

13:08

that the mainland China being

13:11

stronger now has more means to

13:13

handle this. This

13:15

debate over American posture

13:18

vis-a-vis Taiwan is unfolding

13:20

within a larger American

13:22

strategy in the South Pacific.

13:24

It has a name, AUKUS,

13:26

not a very, doesn't roll off the

13:28

tongue, but it's a

13:30

supposed alliance of the United States, Australia,

13:34

the United Kingdom. Around

13:36

that, there is

13:38

an effort to develop closer security

13:41

ties with Japan, the Philippines,

13:45

to a certain extent, South Korea. How

13:48

is this being perceived by

13:50

Chinese security officials? Is

13:52

there a feeling of encroachment

13:54

here, a feeling of an

13:56

adversary setting up

13:58

a concerted opposition? you

16:00

would find this country very interesting in that

16:03

historically it always for

16:05

other people's walls elsewhere you know

16:08

beating glipoli in Afghanistan

16:12

or somewhere far away from

16:15

continental Australia except during Second

16:17

World War when Japanese bombed

16:20

Darwin for example so

16:22

this is an

16:24

interesting country always deciding other people's walls

16:27

but now China is a one-third

16:30

of the export goes to China and

16:33

yes they are again buying

16:35

eight submarines but how

16:38

important are these eight submarines it's

16:40

almost like the submarines in Taiwan

16:42

they could complicate decision making

16:44

in Beijing but it's

16:47

not a big deal because

16:49

in terms of number of ships

16:51

we are already the largest

16:54

in the world and these

16:56

eight submarines will be delivered probably

16:59

after 10 to 15 years to say the

17:01

least so and by then how

17:07

stronger PLA will become I

17:10

think this

17:12

has a lot to do with

17:14

the Morrison government right now the

17:16

Albany's government is also making changes

17:19

so all this whole

17:21

picture is not so black and the

17:23

white yeah so but the

17:26

Philippine is interesting in that in

17:30

that you know President Marcos the policy

17:32

to which China seems to to

17:35

be a Utah from its predecessor I

17:38

personally ask myself why why

17:41

is this because the president

17:43

Duterte certainly has a

17:45

career in a lot of favor

17:47

from China even if

17:49

he himself would suppose the ruling

17:53

of the tribunal that of course was

17:55

in favor of the Philippines so

17:57

on this you know policy

18:00

issue, he actually did not mention

18:02

it so often, but he certainly

18:05

was supportive of the tribunal's

18:08

ruling. But

18:10

then he knows the fact, that

18:13

is the fact, then he just

18:15

went along to have good relations

18:18

with China for

18:20

better understanding for some other benefits. But

18:22

then when it came to President Marcos,

18:25

it's difficult for me to understand,

18:27

because I believe there

18:30

are something to do with his personal

18:32

background, because his personal background

18:36

or his firm or

18:38

strong connection with the United States and

18:41

the Filipinos military, basically

18:44

all the senior officers were more or

18:47

less trained in the United States. But

18:50

still it doesn't make sense to me. Why

18:53

doesn't make sense to me? Because

18:55

in China's relationship with any claimants

18:57

in South China Sea, you

18:59

have never heard Chinese threatening to

19:02

use force against them. China

19:05

actually has laid down three conditions when

19:07

it, I mean, men

19:10

in China laid down three conditions

19:12

when it might adopt

19:15

the non-peaceful means regarding Taiwan

19:17

issue. But on South China

19:19

Sea, China has never threatened any other country.

19:22

So if all of a sudden the

19:25

Filipino government would open up

19:27

nine bases from American use,

19:31

then we would ask why? This

19:34

doesn't really make sense. Actually it would

19:36

make the

19:38

Philippines more vulnerable, because

19:41

if Americans use these as

19:44

a kind of a forefront of the

19:46

battlefields, then of course

19:48

they become targets for

19:50

Chinese strikes, which is on

19:53

the soil of the Philippines. Is

19:55

that in the interest? Well,

22:01

I'm loyal of Ukraine, I

22:03

would say. The. Of putting

22:05

knows what would happen. you know

22:07

he probably would dare got up

22:09

there. but given strategy whether that

22:11

a strategy is a wolf one

22:13

not there I just don't know.

22:16

But of course a very the

22:18

reason why is he would that

22:20

have to do this. As

22:22

as the truth he is actually

22:24

from or there are a Soviet

22:26

and Russian leaders starting from because

22:28

grub job to bar seals him

22:30

to print the pudding or warned

22:32

against this so he's not assess

22:34

the person to make warning but

22:36

a that the first person to

22:38

say how seats enough right but

22:40

the apparently he refers the Russian

22:42

mob the forces it has proven

22:44

to be extremely resilient but to.

22:47

But. As data was not deciding

22:49

so well in the beginning I

22:51

would not say that to this

22:53

has any direct link with the

22:55

wizard Taiwanese Sure because of that

22:58

said activities in. Britain. Eyes

23:00

that bag map more than one hundred

23:02

seventy country to be time as a

23:04

turnoff thats right and a many people

23:06

as as it is A in the

23:09

beginning I believe the Chinese government is

23:11

still patient and the many people would

23:13

say hey. As

23:15

a member some people you you need to

23:18

wash and and believe this is kind of

23:20

the complete is inevitable and I actually have

23:22

that. Have. Some doubts even

23:24

by quoting what it you know.

23:26

Secretary of Defense and Old Austin

23:29

said himself I was a huge

23:31

sandra real a dialogue. And.

23:33

Actually now been. I

23:36

haven't attended the seven or eight

23:38

hundred dollars but of for this

23:40

yes it really does dialogue. The

23:42

what impressed me most is that

23:44

as he talked about a conflict.

23:47

Not. The imminent. Not.

23:49

Inevitable. So. The

23:52

background these before his remarks are

23:54

quite a few. As.

23:56

you know where remarks made by some

23:58

american generals talking about the 2025 scenario

24:00

or 2027 scenarios that many China

24:05

would definitely launch attacks or so on and so forth.

24:09

But that was not a

24:11

response, I would say. But because American

24:14

Secretary of Defense should have all

24:17

the intelligence information reports whatsoever, to

24:19

support his argument. So it is important

24:21

for him to make it clear of

24:24

such important meeting of Shangri-La dialogue. So

24:26

that actually is a relief to me,

24:29

because it is a confirms to what

24:31

I believe is the real

24:33

situation. Some people say, okay,

24:36

Taiwanese people do not want to be,

24:38

you know, integrated with you.

24:40

And I believe this may

24:44

not be so true. Why? Because

24:46

before COVID, actually, more

24:49

than 1.5 million Taiwanese people are living

24:51

in China, mostly

24:53

around Shanghai. And that

24:55

would be more than 6% of Taiwanese

24:58

population. What does that mean? That

25:01

means if if

25:05

many China can provide Taiwanese

25:07

with better opportunities of

25:10

employment, of making money,

25:12

these people actually don't care so

25:14

much to live in a

25:17

different society with

25:19

different system. Right? So

25:22

then the question is, could the

25:24

mainland China continue to provide this kind

25:27

of environment? I believe it

25:29

is possible. Why? Because,

25:32

first of all, Chinese economy is

25:34

so integrated with rest of the

25:36

world. So China has to open

25:38

up, like it or not. And

25:40

China wants to continue to open up. And

25:43

so long as China continue to open up,

25:46

while the world is becoming smaller

25:48

because of this kind of globalization.

25:52

So therefore, the speed of

25:54

people's interaction will suddenly become

25:56

faster. People

25:58

everywhere. I mean,

26:01

people everywhere. So this kind

26:03

of integration between China and

26:06

Taiwan will also become faster. So

26:08

it is in this logic, I believe

26:11

this kind of integration is inevitable. And

26:13

finally, China has never

26:15

announced a timetable to say,

26:18

okay, we must become reunified. If

26:21

we have done that, that is another issue, but we have

26:23

not done that. So we're still patient.

26:27

I believe time might just give

26:29

us the best help in this

26:31

regard. We're coming

26:33

to the end of our time. So let me just

26:35

ask some final bigger picture

26:38

questions. We've talked

26:40

a lot about China's

26:43

rise, its status

26:46

as a civilizational power

26:48

in the 21st century.

26:51

To what extent

26:53

are your colleagues, senior

26:56

security officials in China

26:59

concerned that you

27:01

now face an adversary in the United

27:04

States who is

27:06

trying across a series

27:08

of domains, military, technological,

27:11

and economic to

27:14

prevent China's rise, to

27:16

thwart your ascension

27:18

to potentially either economically or whatever

27:21

other metrics you want to choose

27:23

to become the world's

27:25

dominant power? Is

27:28

that on people's minds or is this

27:30

more of, again, a Western misinterpretation

27:33

of what you

27:35

and your colleagues are actually thinking and

27:37

what you're actually concerned about? This

27:40

is really the biggest questions.

27:43

And out of the questions, there could

27:45

be dozens of smaller questions and each

27:47

one of them could be extremely important.

27:51

So let me

27:53

repeat what I said to

27:55

some people, whether we have entered

27:57

into a new Cold War, for example. Yeah?

28:01

And my answer is very simple. We

28:04

won't know until we have avoided

28:07

a hot war. Because

28:09

this is exactly what happened during Cold War.

28:11

Every day people actually were preparing for the

28:13

hot war, right? So, but

28:15

people went through it and

28:19

had a big relief. Oh, okay, we didn't have

28:22

a hot war. So, what happened

28:24

instead is a cold war. Yeah,

28:27

then my argument

28:29

is we'd never know the future. And

28:32

we would only, you know, know

28:34

the future until we have gone through

28:36

it. So, this kind of

28:38

question is meaningless. But apparently there are

28:41

so many different things, you know, from

28:43

this kind of competition between

28:45

China, US, and the one

28:48

during the Cold War between two

28:50

superpowers. So, I

28:52

think what happened is that if

28:54

you look at China's policy, China's

28:57

policy toward the

28:59

United States is

29:02

fairly consistent. Yeah? It

29:04

didn't change at all much. And

29:08

the United States would have

29:10

like a roller coaster, you see. That's

29:13

much more difficult to predict. I

29:16

think that has a lot of things to do

29:18

with our mentality. Because this country

29:20

wrongly believe that they are the city

29:22

upon the hill. I

29:24

tell people, where is the city upon

29:26

the hill? The personal is only

29:29

city upon the hill. That

29:31

is empty, broken, somewhat

29:34

grandiose, but tourists only,

29:36

right? So, that is only city upon the

29:39

hill. And again, recently

29:42

Biden repeat how the United

29:44

States is indispensable. That

29:47

is right. But every nation

29:49

is indispensable, yeah? It

29:52

is indispensable for people to know that

29:54

there is a small country called the

29:56

Maldives deep in the Indian Ocean. That

29:59

is so... so beautiful because it

30:01

is so important for our human

30:04

being to remember that the whole

30:07

human society is just like a forest

30:10

that has different fauna and flora. And

30:14

that is why the world is beautiful. It

30:16

is fine that the United States

30:18

has NBA, McDonald's, Hollywood, but so

30:20

what? The Maoist Indians don't have

30:22

any of these, but they just

30:24

know every morning thousands of tourists

30:26

would come and just tell them

30:28

how beautiful their country is. So

30:32

finally back to your question in the

30:34

beginning. So I

30:36

believe so far China's rise

30:38

is very peaceful and

30:41

this is unprecedented in human history.

30:44

In China's rise of 40

30:46

years and plus, the

30:48

only sacrifice we made

30:51

is four soldiers on our side

30:53

and 20 Indian soldiers on the

30:55

other side, right? Because

30:58

of a clash along the border. But

31:00

that was interesting because they were not shooting

31:02

at each other. They were fighting

31:04

with each other. It is

31:06

mostly interesting to see that two modern

31:09

militaries were fighting each

31:11

other in a map found

31:14

in Stone Age. Why

31:16

is that? Why is it not popular? Other

31:19

people from both sides know that in any

31:21

circumstances we should not shoot at each other.

31:24

So back to your question again. China's

31:27

rise is peaceful and probably

31:30

in less than 10 years time, China may

31:32

become the largest economy in the world as

31:34

it may be again. But

31:37

this then would be unprecedented

31:39

in human history to

31:41

see a country reaching the apogee

31:45

of fame, of glory without

31:47

firing a bullet. This

31:50

is still the same. We

31:52

didn't fire a bullet. How

31:56

unbelievable that is. You see

31:58

in human history, people give all

32:00

kinds of reasons or justifications for

32:02

all kinds of war. But

32:05

eventually, who remembers all these reasons? People

32:08

died, and nobody gave a

32:10

damn about all these reasons

32:13

whatsoever. But look

32:15

at the United States. How many people have died? They

32:18

may just give reasons, but people died,

32:20

you see. And China

32:22

has made a difference. And

32:24

the Chinese military overseas is

32:27

remarkable in that it

32:29

only commit itself to

32:31

humanitarian operations, be it

32:33

peacekeeping, counter-parasy, or disaster

32:36

relief. I as

32:38

an ex-serviceman, as a veteran,

32:41

my hope for my country is China

32:43

continues to rise peacefully, and

32:45

the Chinese PLA will only

32:48

do humanitarian operations

32:50

overseas. In that way, you

32:52

just provide assistance

32:56

to people around the world. You're not

32:58

killing anyone. If

33:00

a country that rises to

33:03

the top of the world and for

33:05

its military to behave so

33:08

mildly or

33:11

blindly overseas, under

33:13

the world, lucky to have such a power. So

33:16

my hope is, I don't

33:18

know whether the world would become more

33:22

beautiful, but I hope with China's

33:25

rise, China can

33:27

actually make the world safer. And

33:29

with China's growing stress, China probably

33:32

can contribute in that regard. Joe

33:35

Bu, those are great words for us to

33:37

end this fascinating conversation on.

33:40

I really appreciate your time coming

33:42

to us from

33:44

China to have this conversation with us

33:46

today. It's an important one,

33:48

and your messages are

33:50

heard and received. And let's keep these

33:52

dialogues going, because I think that's really

33:54

what is important for us to do,

33:56

is to have conversations, to expose each

33:59

other. to different ideas and

34:02

through those ideas come conversations

34:04

and through conversations hopefully come

34:06

understanding. So thank you for

34:08

your contributions today. Thank

34:10

you, Rod, for all this conversation. Well,

34:15

that wraps up today's dialogue. I want to

34:17

thank our guest, Shobhu. He certainly gave us

34:19

a lot to think about. If you have

34:21

reflections or comments on what you just heard,

34:23

please send us an email to podcast at

34:25

monkdebates.com. Thank you for spending

34:27

your time with us lending your attention

34:30

to our efforts to bring back the

34:32

art of public dialogue one

34:34

conversation at a time. I'm your

34:36

host and moderator, Rudyard Griffiths. The

34:43

Monk Debates are a project of the

34:45

Oria and Peter and Melanie Monk Charitable

34:47

Foundations. Rudyard Griffiths and

34:49

Ricky Gerwitz are the producers. Be

34:53

sure to download and subscribe wherever you

34:55

get your podcasts. And if you like

34:57

us, feel free to give us a

34:59

five-star rating. Thank you again

35:01

for listening. Thank

35:24

you.