Hello and welcome to another episode of the OddLotss podcast. I'm Joe Weisenthal and I'm Tracy Aloway. Tracy, you know, we talk all the time about USChina relations multiple times a month, it seems, for obvious reasons. We, you know, we usually get it from something resembling a US perspective. Not always, but I think it's a bit skewed. Yeah, there is a geographic bias at play for sure and a linguistic one. Yes, but you're right. There is always a lot going on with USChina relations and especially recently. Right.

So, we're recording this on September 16th, and we have Chinese and American officials gathering in I think it's Madrid to talk trade, try to hammer out some sort of deal on the tariffs. By the time this episode comes out, maybe USChina relations will have changed completely, but uh somehow I doubt it. There's going to be some new era of peace. Everything is going to be solved. There's going to be no more anxiety about trade. a Tik Tok deal will have been made with the perfect algorithm that satisfies everyone everything. No, probably unlikely. Probably we are going to be talking about some version of this for a long time.

I don't want to say, you know, it's not like our perspectives are just strictly US. You know, we talked to Cameron Johnson who works in China regular. So, it's not none, but we obviously have to uh change the mixup. I admire your efforts at being unpartisan. Well, crossborder, you know, we have to still do it via Zoom obviously, but isn't this a long historic trend to try to like build build dialogue between multiple sides and get multiple perspectives in the hopes of achieving something bigger than that? What I'm going to say is we need to go to Beijing mostly for the food, but also for uh inter US China dialogue. The dream is that in 2026 we host a live it's in Beijing. We're putting it out into the world right now in the hope that we can manifest it into existence. Yes.

All right. Well, I am really excited to say that in these efforts, we really do have the perfect guest. We are going to be speaking with uh Henry Wong. He is the founder and president for the Center for China and Globalization. It's the largest independent think tank in China. Someone perfectly placed to talk about all of these topics from a Chinese perspective that we don't usually get. So, Henry, thank you so much for uh coming on the podcast. Thank you. Yeah, my pleasure.

What is the center for China and globalization? Why did you found it? What is its goal? What is this independent think tank that exists? Yes, we actually founded uh since 208 actually. Yeah. Right after the Beijing Olympics. You know, at that time, you know, when we watched the Beijing Olympic, the slogan for the Olympics then was one word, one dream. So we thought that that is actually it's a globalization and uh and China actually embarked on a globalization era because I think Olympic Beijing Olympic in 208 was something that China starting to really looking globally and uh so that's where we we start to found this uh think tank at first I have to take out a lot of savings you know I was doing a lot of business before but we really want to start this but I I really have found this think tank to kind of combine my experience in a government business and academic.

So so so CCG you know abbreviation for center for China global is a bridge is a communication platform dialogue platform and also it's a research platform for uh big issues policy issues uh regarding US and China global governance uh global economy and of course global migration so just to name a few but uh but since then we've been doing okay we had about over uh 60 70 people and we we've been based in Beijing and Hjo and and Guangjo a few places in China and uh we've been very active. We're doing a 100 event a year. We publish a dozen books and multiple reports. So, so thank you for for for asking that. M so uh you described the center as something of a bridge and I was reading an economist article from a couple years ago where you yourself are described as something of a gobetween for technocratic government ministries, Chinese entrepreneurs and foreign embassies in Beijing. So my question is how busy have you been lately?

We are pretty busy. I just give you a few examples. For example, last week I was in Shaman attending September 8 the 25 annual China uh investment and business forum and expo there and the vice premier Hurong who is now in Madrid talking with Scott Benson was there uh opening up that forum and uh so I was speaking at a keynote speaker at one of the bricks summit uh conference there but also just uh Friday uh senator of a China government hold another conference at uh China international service expo you know held in Beijing uh where there's another 100 some countries come as well and uh yesterday we had our 17th monthly VIP launching and we have a 10 ambassadors from European from Japan from Turkey from many other countries quite a number from European countries and just yesterday with 50 people also IMF representative in China. We have a lot of multinational global media and also of course uh last night I attended a relevant reception. The US embassy hold a reception welcoming the new deputy head of the mission Mr. Greg and and he actually made an excellent speech there. He said uh China and US relation now rather than in the past I mean you know I I know that in the past we had a lot of strategic rivalry but the new head of new deputy head of the US mission here in China and said now we should put strategic stability he's not talking about strategic arrival so strategic stability in maintaining US China relation and secretary rubio also said that in July so it's very encouraging to see I going on. But that's also shows how busy we are meeting all the peoples and talking to all the parties and and business too.

For example, last week I was in Shaman attending September 8 the 25 annual China uh investment and business forum and expo there and the vice premier Hurong who is now in Madrid talking with Scott Benson was there uh opening up that forum and uh so I was speaking at a keynote speaker at one of the bricks summit uh conference there but also just uh Friday uh senator of a China government hold another conference at uh China international service expo you know held in Beijing uh where there's another 100 some countries come as well.

and uh yesterday we had our 17th monthly VIP launching and we have a 10 ambassadors from European from Japan from Turkey from many other countries quite a number from European countries and just yesterday with 50 people also IMF representative in China. We have a lot of multinational global media and also of course uh last night I attended a relevant reception.

The US embassy hold a reception welcoming the new deputy head of the mission Mr. Greg and and he actually made an excellent speech there. He said uh China and US relation now rather than in the past I mean you know I I know that in the past we had a lot of strategic rivalry but the new head of new deputy head of the US mission here in China and said now we should put strategic stability he's not talking about strategic arrival so strategic stability in maintaining US China relation and secretary rubio also said that in July so it's very encouraging to see I going on. But that's also shows how busy we are meeting all the peoples and talking to all the parties and and business too.

I get that various people might describe an ambition for stability. It does not typically feel like it when I read the headlines that this is a stable relationship for various reasons, particularly the headlines that come out of the Trump administration, which strike me as volatile. Setting aside what you hear from officials whether at the embassy or um the state department, does it feel like that is the trajectory? Cuz it certainly feels especially over the last 10 years that when I was younger the relationship felt something more like stability and that these days it's much more about rivalry and anxiety about potential conflict.

That's right. I I agree with you. I think that basically because of uh uh this deterioration since the first Trump administration you know 2017 uh and now 8 years later the the region does really go down quite a lot already and because in the 2017 the national security committee of US has put out a strategic report and according a strategic rivalry number one I mean before Russia actually so so we see that since then we had a trade war and the tariff war.

But this second term somehow we I felt uh well in China uh it bit more uh you know getting used to this kind of a tariff trade war and China is also better prepared than the other countries because we already experienced in the first Trump administration.

Uh so now I think also China economy is is is second only to the US. the two countries has too much independence among each other and uh so you know because geopolitically we are really looking very bad and then I think the consensus on both government is that we need to look for some stability because we can't change each other we cannot wipe you know delete each other we we have to coexist peacefully and that's probably the conclusion that we're we're getting there and so we have to uh seek a common ground and coexisting even we are having a lot of different views and ideas.

So you mentioned just then the idea of the world's two biggest economies being more dependent on each other. Um perhaps less so nowadays but over I guess the decades of the early 2000s um certainly they grew more dependent on each other because of globalization. And this is something that I wanted to ask you which is what exactly is China's definition or understanding of globalization? And I ask this because I think in the west it's sort of generally thought of as this process of more countries trading with each other and again becoming more economically dependent on each other. But there's also this sort of social element that's also in there because I think the assumption was always that as countries trade more with each other they're going to start sharing you know values um whether those are political or social. And I'm curious if globalization is thought of the same way in China.

Well, I think that uh uh in China because it was a late commerce, you know, uh uh for example, you see the globalization in the 19th century which is uh you know uh Britain invented steam power that led the industrial revolution in the 19th century and 20th century American invented you know internet computers and and digital and US is led in the 20th century. I think 21st century China is is also you know coming up now for example on the green power China is leading on EVs on on the solar panels and and also the wind power and all the same.

but in the globalization concept in the Chinese mind is really more referred to the economic globalization because uh because that's the benefit they're getting uh substantially for example 800 million people has been lifted out of poverty since China embraced opening up basically embraced the globalization And then uh you can see China now is the largest trading nation or major trading nation with 157 countries around the world.

And also furthermore uh China is uh have since opening up in the last uh 47 years. China has about almost 10 million student study abroad. I mean almost half of that in the United States. So that means globalization. I think there's a there a flow of people, flow of talent, uh flow of goods uh you know internet connectivities uh fast uh uh you know stock market exchange listed with each other uh and also business doing you know there are 70,000 US company uh operating in China and generating 700 billion revenues here in China and uh uh and also uh you know Apple make 80 90% of iPhone in China and Tesla make 50% of its EV cars in China and Walmart purchase about 60% of its supplies from China.

So I think that that's probably the coin China felt the substantial benefit uh probably for both Chinese and also American consumers. They are less ideological but they're more probably uh on economic sense that uh uh globalization is really bring them a lot of good and benefit. For example, since China joined the WTO in 20 2011, China's GDP has gone up 13 14 times. So that really I think in in the minds of Chinese when they talk about globalization, they're really uh talking about join uh economic globalization rather than the sec global securization.

They don't want to see the arcus. They don't want to see the quad. They don't want to see camp David of Korea, Japan and all those security or or NATO moving to Asia. that kind of a militarized globalization. They want to see more economic globalization.

I'm a huge personal beneficiary of these students abroad living in the East Village where there's been an absolute explosion of amazing Chinese restaurants in my neighborhood of New York City because there are so many students there. So, I'm personally very invested in this trend continuing. But let's talk a little bit more about the security angle. You've actually written somewhat recently that China could play some role in the eventual hopeful end of Russia's war with Ukraine. But we don't tend to associate the Chinese government with playing an active role in global conflicts not directly near the borders including Israel and Gaza which we uh should talk about too.

But when it comes to something, you know, when it comes to the Russia Ukraine war that tends to be focused on, okay, the Europeans, the role that US will play, is there going to be a point in the near future, or is there something we're missing where China sees this conflict that is far from its direct borders and wants to play a more activist role in bringing peace? Or is this something that is only associated with the sort of American style, Westernled style of globalization?

Well, I think that's probably uh now the world is I mean I was at uh Munich Security Conference uh kickoff meeting in Berlin early this year uh with the chairman of Munich Security Conference. They issued a report. I was discussing on that report they called multipolarity. So we are getting into multipolar war. I mean China certainly become one of of this multipolar war.

And then you can see what happened in the in the Russian Ukraine war there. It's getting nowhere. We had the Alaska summit. Uh that's why I published an op at the foreign policy two days before the Alaska summit. Basically, I suggest that uh if US defense secretary, I heard him saying at the Munich security conference that they want peacemaking troops coming from European countries and non-European countries. So what mean by non-European countries? So I think that uh countries could be this brick countries from uh China, India, Brazil, you know, South Africa or Turkey, whatever bricks countries.

But basically again you see that when Trump actually after the Alaska talking to G7 at White House, Putin actually talked to to President She before his Alaska and talked to Lula, talked to Moody and talked to the president of South Africa after the Alaska.

So I think that I I recently seen Mong proposing that let's have 26 European countries troops placed into Ukraine but that get very strong reaction from Russia that Putin said okay if that is the case that we regard it as as a NATO violation or something. So we see that the excuse for Putin to start the war is because the NATO troops approaching uh Russian border. I mean after three and a half years fight I mean you have a NATO European troops there again. I mean he will not probably ending that war easily.

So I think a more extra guarantee for this peacemaking in addition to NATO, EU and and also US. Let's get China, India, Brazil, those the largest buyers of of Russian energy product and and what else is really extra safekeeping for the for the border and then by having Chinese peacekeeping force there it will really uh you know make you know make Russia difficult to violate that peace border because you know China has a lot of influence on Russia. Same for India, same for Brazil. So, so I think that uh we are in the risk this we're stuck in this uh you know Trump says you know he started sanctioning again you're not going anywhere but I think by adding the China bricks element we probably see a more security piece that's going to happen.

What does China actually think its role in the world should be? And we talked about its role economically in the idea of globalization. But setting aside economies when it comes to geopolitical security, what exactly does China want to be? Yes. Well, thank you. I think but basically uh China is is a large country of course, but it's basically agricultural culture. You know, it's basically you have a th 5,000 years history. I interrupt the civilization. It's based on an agricultural economy. The farmers cultivate along the Yans River and the Yellow River.

And Confucious said if your parent alive don't travel far away. And then you can you can only cultivate the land four seasons that they can grow enough vegetables and and and wheat and and grain to to feed yourself. So it's really that kind of a culture cultivated the culture of China. And they are not really a nation on the horses or like Mongols. they're going to have expeditions or going to have a cononalize any places in in the mean that is there was a marshall called Jung had a big expedition trips uh uh beyond almost to Africa also uh uh you know as countries southeast Asia they never they never stayed anywhere they never occupy any places they all returned seven times it was even earlier than Colombia so you see that is really the culture China has until now.

for the last 40 years China hasn't started any war send any soldiers anywhere or colonize any place or invaded any other country. So I I think geopolitically we had this big parade on on September 3rd to commemorate the second world war but I think China has produced enough deterrence so that uh you know probably if they are in any hot conflict they have enough defenses to detering that.

so so if we cannot have a nuclear or hot war to mutually assure destruction then the only thing remain is is peaceful competition on economy uh on the soft power on the culture on on the people-to-people exchanges. So I think China wants to really see let's have a level playing field and let's really compete on economic.

China now is uh having 70% of global speed railway 60% of 5G networks of the world out of the 10 largest container ports seven of them in China. China also has uh 30 million college graduates every year and uh you know they have a lot of things uh that they're doing on on their own now and also on on energy installation now their electricity consumption is 2.5 times of US three times of Europe now and in terms of green power China has produced 15 16 million EV cars total number of be 30 million and they have a 16 million charge stations in China everywhere you very convenient to charge your EV car now.

So, so I think you know they want to probably compete in those area rather than geopolitically. So I think maybe if China can play some maintain some peacekeeping would be great because China is the largest peacekeeping budget contributor to the UN. China is the largest peacekeeping sending force among the P5 member countries.

So, so if China can do more peacekeeping and also economically you know China launched many initiative uh below initiative uh China just did so uh summit in in Tenzin where they establish so bank they have a breaks bank new development bank so they're doing all this kind of economic stuff uh I think that's how they view the world should be intertwined more uh economically business-wise uh rather than we are really divided according to the ideological uh divided according to democracy versus autocracy and divided by you know this this east or west.

So there's many things I think China is is thinking a little differently.

You mentioned the United Nations and there's sort of this question about the relevance or the vitality of a lot of these western developed multilateral organizations WTO being among them but UN specifically in your vision maybe it's China's vision or maybe there's uh distinct is it important to breathe new life into these organizations or is there a new set of organizations including some of the ones that China has set up itself Whether it's the Barri, whether we're talking about the bricks, whether we're talking about some of these others, is the future more okay, if we're going to have this sort of new style of globalization, we actually genuinely need new organizations rather than the husks of the organizations that were sort of built out of the western liberal order.

Absolutely. I I think that's that's quite true. I had I I have recently recently uh wrote a book uh about my dialogue with Graham Madison, the founding de of Harvard Kennedy School which become a very good sale in China. And also English wise basically we find that in our dialogue we we talk about US China relation as as conjun twins you know we cannot separate each other you know if we want to separate each other we we end up damage ourselves so so that's the given so we should avoid this hijis trap that grand medicine famously defined but also on the other hand we should also avoid the kinder trap which means that when a new rising power starting to catching up existing number one power there's a vacuum in the global public goods like when US was taking place UK there's a lot of missing linking points you know we got big recession in the in the in the 30 1930s and things like that.

so China actually is US is now put a bit back on its policy now it's become a mega you know make me first make me great again and and uh and rather than there's no country really is looking at the global public goods so that's what China is now China has not backed on on on climate change agreement. China strongly support that and China has developed a very climate friendly environment now and we reach carbon neutral and carbon peak ahead of time.

But just to be clear, these legacy organizations specifically like the UN, does China feel like these are are there bets that China is intends to make that these are going to be important institutions or are they fading like many legacy institutions and that the sort of new more stable order that you may envision does it have to be with a fresh set of multilateral international organizations? No, I think China is a is a strong support of of existing UN system and as president she just recently proposed the global governance initiative. I mean on on five point two or three point he was emphasized the UN principle view and charter of UN and also uh we we can help to enhance improve and make it better but but we should not just restart or.

but but on the other hand we see UN also getting quite marginalized and there's been weakening and for example China becoming the second largest donor to the UN budget now close to US almost no difference now and also when US pulling out of the WHO China committed 500 million US dollars to WHO and when you know WTO is marginalized China is working with Europe Europeans to to do that.

but furthermore I think China is still the only public big country one of the largest economy still proposing economic corporation like like a belton row initiative for the last 12 13 years China invest over$1 trillion US dollars for 3,000 project and also furthermore China has started the China Africa economic summit China Latin American economic summit, China Assan economic summit and China uh Central Asia and China Arab economic summit. So it's all economic related.

and furthermore and uh while President Trump is raising 100 some country tariff China announced they're going to going to reduce the tariff of 53 least developing country tariff zero for coming to China. So you can see the contrast there. So I think China is really providing enough public goods to fill some of vacuum. US is backing off on development on the global south and on on the on the UN system. You know, China is when US is pulling out the UNISO. China is also a big support of UNISO uh and and and so on and so forth. So, so I think China is doing a lot of that kind of activities. Now,

when it comes to USChina relations, you know, you mentioned that your book was selling well in China. I'm really curious, what is the biggest misunderstanding or the biggest concern that you hear from Chinese people on the ground when it comes to US policy? And I realize it's a little bit unfair. We're treating you as a spokesman for an entire country. Um, and China, we really don't intend to do that. We don't intend to do that. But I'd be curious like what sort of questions do you get on a daily basis from the average Chinese person about America and what it's doing? Well, I think the biggest throwing point basically that bothers ordinary Chinese that we see the US uh you know navies coming to Chinese Tyran street or or South China Sea or quite often we see uh you know airplane patrol in this part of the world. We never see Chinese uh aircraft or navy go to Hawaii or go to Caribbean, you know, we never see that.

But we see the US military person is very strong. We had the 40,000 uh US military personnel in South Korea just just neighboring China and another I don't know how many you know it's quite 30 40,000 probably in Japan and we have now in Philippine and then they have also missiles mid range missiles placed there and also they are going to place new missiles in Japan now and and South Korea so those things are actually bought because because China felt you know Taiwan is part of China.

and uh certainly the people in the USA oh China is a democra cy we have to defend that. But China has a has a Chinese style democracy, meritocracy. It also works perfect you know not perfect but at least work well for this most populous country in the world. So I think you know we all have a different uh governing style but just because our governing style is with you and then that's why you need to because Taiwan because the reason for protecting Taiwan is Taiwan is a democracy that we have to protect that.

but I think you know China can also absorbing that and uh you know China promised to Taiwan you know no tax to be given uh to federal government lot of autonomy and China announced that Taiwan Taiwanese will be free to work in the ma mainland you no visa needed do anything needed. We are already 2 million Taiwanese working the mainland and there's half a million husband wife married across the street and then before Tai even uh you know former president of Taiwan you know there's 6 million mainland flooded Taiwan with with with tourism sending the money spending restaurant hotels you know there was almost integrated already if not for the foreign interference.

So I I think the Chinese say okay please maybe just let us peacefully unified like like Germany you had the you know East Germany West Germany unified and and let's also hope North Korea South Korea unified so basically they would really looking for less interference on that and so I think that would be greatly improving the region because in the communicate that the established three communicate China US have it set very clear US will not maintain you We just maintain normal time, no official ties. But then we see US officials, parliament man, Nancy Pelosi keep visiting Taiwan or Taiwanese leaders coming to the visiting US. So those probably bother a bit of of ordinary Chinese.

But of course again we understand of course US was was a world policeman for a long time but now we see many countries uh also the governing model is not working perfectly. We have all the domestic issues. uh US has it, European has it, all the countries has that. But China on the other hand seems uh maintain a pretty good uh status and that's also keep lifting people out of poverty. So I think they should give China some uh credit for doing that rather than okay uh is is always show in front of China's uh doorsteps and you have US parade of military muscles all the time. you. So that's a little bothering for the Chinese. basically

when you think about China's relationship with the other BRICS countries uh with African countries with uh the global south countries so to speak have you seen substantive changes in those relationships specifically since the wake of October 2023 and the start of the war on Gaza and countries sort of rethinking uh you know has this prompted a concrete rethinking about you know you said the US was the global policeman and a lot of people have perceived that in the wake of this ongoing war. Has there been a substantive change in the way countries want to have a relationship with China?

Well, absolutely you can you know this series for the first time uh you see China ASEAN summit at the GCC you know Gulf countries all came to to ASEAN. So you you had the first China Assan GCC summit and then you can see also uh the BRICS countries expanding that uh you had you know uh UAE was there and and and uh there's a lot of you know Middle East countries are really uh coming to China. You have you also have the S Shanghai corporation summit recently. You had the Turkey, you had the Iranian president. You have a lot of people from that region.

So I think China's role does play because China for example a few years ago China clinched the deal between Sawudis and and Iranians rather than you know we are seeing the current chaos going on. China also causing the 14 different factions of Palestinian group had a Beijing Palestinian decoration and China could probably do more in making a peace promoting peace between Israel and Palestinian. China also maintained good relation in the past with Israel.

So I I think that u sooner or later probably those country will realize that we cannot really let just what happened uh the Gaza the humanitarian crisis the you know deaths of thousands of tens of thousands of people uh what happened in your living room on a daily basis I mean where is where is the where's the you know children are dying and all those things so that kind of justice where is the justice now so of course there's there's there's always problem uh uh to start with but I think we cannot because two wrong doesn't make a right. I I really think that we should continue to have this international moral power that United Nations Security Council should really exercise rather than, you know, be vetoed all the time. So I I'm thinking, you know, China public could play more role in the future.

But that's let's that's let's let's solve this Ukraine crisis if the if the BRICS country peacemaking can happen uh led by China. And I'm sure that model could be applied to other conflicts in other region. China also trying to you can see Prime Minister Modi and Prime Minister of Pakistan was at the same table a few months after the fighting in China and we said Armenia and and Aabaijan president coming to SO summit in Tangent as well. So probably China is is is building up its mediating power and peacekeeping power as time goes on.

Just going back to globalization for a second. I think everyone agrees and you've already talked about this that China has been a huge beneficiary from globalization over time. But I get the sense that there is still a feeling within China that some aspects of the global economic order or trade agreements are unfair to China. How do you sort of square that tension and where do you think the concern or the worries over unfairness actually comes from? And by the way, I could ask this question to American officials as well. like the US is a massive beneficiary of the global economic order and yet the Trump administration clearly feels very aggrieved about America's place in the world but when it comes to China like where does the sense of unfairness actually come from

well there's quite a few actually uh you see u one of the things that US was treating the pure deficit as the only reason they start the tariff war I was giving a talk just just last April two a few months ago at the UN security council where they called a special arena meeting in New York 80 countries represented the UN participated where I gave a speech there I was saying that for example US only looking at the goods deficit you know merchandise but out of that deficit was maybe you know 30 40 50% was produced by multinational 30% by US for example out of the 400 billion deficit that Trump is levy on China 300 some billion deficit He immediately waved 100 billion because a lot of the companies are made goods in China.

Apple has to source their iPhone from India but it's not enough. Uh so they have to lift that sanctions on those deficit anyway and there's a lot of intertwin but also US enjoyed $1 trillion trade surplus on the service trade. They're not counting that and also the calculation about China's export.

For example, every every phone we made in China, iPhone made here, China probably made the labor cost. You know, 80% was made by multinationals EV cars the same. So when you just purely looking at the trade deficit numbers, a lot of money was not made in China, was made by international multinational companies and they're not sending back to the country.

So that's why I I agree with President Trump to have more investment back to us because multinational made a lot of money in China and elsewhere. But they should really uh investment back uh rather than put into tax heavens. So that's why the global minimum tax proposed by OECD has agreed by over 100 some countries but it's not practiced yet on that now. So that's one aspect.

The other aspect I could say is the for example US is starting these sanctions on China for example forbidden the use selling the trips to China. So that that is really an also they called in the Trump administration you know high fence small yard and all those thing and there's 1,500 Chinese companies on the US entity the list I mean maybe China has a a dozen or two dozen of US company but compared with magnitude of of US is too much too many over the sec overuse of the security raises to really restrict all the Chinese companies on that so that really become a problem and.

So that's why China starting to say okay if chips can be the do use goods right you can say okay can be used for security or military same is true for rare earth right rare earth can be making for airplanes tank tanks everything so when China start a little bit on that then US starting to relax on the sale of the chips now uh quite a bit so you can see uh you know morally u it's the same reason if US doing things in the first term China didn't respond like that but now China starting to respond like that. So I think that's why we see quite a few agreement made by between US and Chinese officials because China is much resilient now much stronger and also US has realized if they really sanction so hard on China the Christmas shopping season we're coming up their shelves will be empty and we could you know American consumer will suffer and then that going to hurt Trump's base uh that's why they keep extending uh they seems more uh they talk to each other more more friendly than talk to Indian Brazil and others So I think they they probably realize they're two largest economy. They can really organize each other. They have to find a way to collaborate.

So I think that's why we see quite a few agreement made by between US and Chinese officials because China is much resilient now much stronger and also US has realized if they really sanction so hard on China the Christmas shopping season we're coming up their shelves will be empty and we could you know American consumer will suffer and then that going to hurt Trump's base uh that's why they keep extending uh they seems more uh they talk to each other more more friendly than talk to Indian Brazil and others So I think they they probably realize they're two largest economy. They can really organize each other. They have to find a way to collaborate.

The uh the Christmas shopping season is my personal Super Bowl. Yes. Earlier this year, actually not that long ago, Bloomberg reported, so therefore it's absolutely true. Uh it says, quote, "Officials in Beijing verbally encouraged regulatory agencies and local governments to curb technology transfers and equipment exports to India and Southeast Asia." And there were some stories about Foxcon engineers for example who may have been part of some sort of moving the supply chain of those Apple uh iPhones that you meant part of the final assembly perhaps to India and this report that uh Chinese officials may have been pushing back against it. I get like rhetorically the existing system where American companies do a lot of manufacturing or in China has been incredibly beneficial. Is China totally comfortable with the fact that as part of this globalization some of this manufacturing may end up leaving or is uh you know US seeks to diversify its sources is China comfortable with this

China's I think it's pretty comfortable now that's why China is more confident for example 2019 when before co US is largest trading partner of China and now US fall into the third place or even fourth place now because ASA become the largest place trading part of China since the asset uh regional comprehensive partnership agreement and then that that is actually happening because uh you know Vietnam become China fourth largest trading partner now and Indonesia, Malaysia and now expanded to Latin American you know most Latin American countries China is their largest trading partner and also with Africa now China lifted all the tariff from African countries products coming to China you see a flood of African products coming to China.

So so I think you know that probably China doesn't mind there's the low maybe a little bit labor intensive because the labor average labor workforce migrant workers age is 43 years old it's getting old China so there's a lot of shoe making or you know low low income labor cost jobs went to Vietnam went to Asia China really uh doesn't mind that China now is focused on the high end now for example China is focused on the green power transmission car.

So there's no curbs like there's no curbs as far There's like from your perspective there's no impulse of the government to curb moving some of these more advanced things again talk about iPhones and such to a country like India. Not really. I I think China still you encouraged the investment for example BYD or uh you know CL and I I know quite a few companies still very bullish investing overseas. There may be sensitive military or rare earth stuff that China may be question a little bit but but on the general I think things are still quite open. Yeah.

Is there an argument to be made that China should perhaps open its own economy further if you know it actually desires more economic integration with the rest of the world because we're talking about globalization still but China still has capital controls still has currency controls still has some restrictions on investment and things like that should it be more open

absolutely I I agree with you I think China should be more open and that's why we be that's our think tank role to promote that. For example, we propose be promoting the the visa. Now, China has issued the unilaterally issued the visa for 40ome countries, now European countries, Australia, Japan, South Korea. I I urge also you recommend China to policy makers to open visa for US citizens, for Canadian citizens coming to China free.

But also on the trade policy, I think there there should be more liberalization continuously. I know that the government is looking at that and the 15th five years plan will probably be even more open. Of course, there's always rooms to improve. I totally agree. And uh uh they have opened the financial sector quite a long time ago. And uh as you say maybe currency they should be more convertible and also on the on the investment in the culture in the in the in the you know other areas uh pharmaceutical and and now China also welcome foreign university come to China to open their branches and doing I'm I'm on the board of Duke Kensangan University in China which is John Van between Duke University and Wuhan University. uh you know we have so many international student there and NYU Shanghai is operating very well so we hope to have more global uh exchanges I agree with you you know there there there's still more rooms that's why I think this kind of talk between China and the US now we see Tik Tok is almost maybe have a deal there and it's great so we we this is the style we should continuously talk and engage and reach agreement and open up further uh to accommodate each other

But also on the trade policy, I think there there should be more liberalization continuously. I know that the government is looking at that and the 15th five years plan will probably be even more open. Of course, there's always rooms to improve. I totally agree. And uh uh they have opened the financial sector quite a long time ago. And uh as you say maybe currency they should be more convertible and also on the on the investment in the culture in the in the in the you know other areas uh pharmaceutical and and now China also welcome foreign university come to China to open their branches and doing I'm I'm on the board of Duke Kensangan University in China which is John Van between Duke University and Wuhan University. uh you know we have so many international student there and NYU Shanghai is operating very well so we hope to have more global uh exchanges I agree with you you know there there there's still more rooms that's why I think this kind of talk between China and the US now we see Tik Tok is almost maybe have a deal there and it's great so we we this is the style we should continuously talk and engage and reach agreement and open up further uh to accommodate each other

first comes diplomacy through dance videos, Joe. And then comes an easing of uh currency restrictions. Well, podcast recordings have to be right. And just to be clear, you know, obviously we don't expect you to be the representative of the entire Chinese perspective. Tracy and I need to establish that we do not represent the entire United States and the questions that we have. You mentioned the goods trade deficit and of course one of the things is you know obviously China has gotten much richer thanks to the booming industrial sector. The US has benefited from a lot of less expensive, more sophisticated goods that it buys. But there is this source of concern, and I say this, you know, a couple weeks after that military parade, there is a source of concern that without a robust American manufacturing capacity, that we can no longer be a powerful military country as well. And I know I do not believe it is China's role to sort of help the US figure out its industrial capacity questions. Nonetheless, from the perspective, does the US concern make sense to you? Perhaps there are things that seem unfair, certain technology transfer restrictions seem counter to the spirit of globalization, etc. But is the US fundamentally wrong to be concerned that as more and more of the world's share, however you want to measure it, of manufacturing of advanced goods somehow becomes centered around China that that long-term weakens the national security position of the United States.

Well, I I I think we are now in a more intertwined war now and there's lot there's quite a bit of a competitive advantage like you know David Victo mentioned many years ago. So what I think US is still leading US is very good at uh uh inventing innovation. You see Silicon Valley, you see AI, you know, by the way uh Jason Hong said half of the AI talents coming from China. You know, US is a big harvest of Chinese talent too. And uh that's why I'm saying several million Chinese went to United States. I mean probably half of them return uh still have remain. uh that greatly benefit the US economy.

So what I think that that is really US is good doing zero to one maybe China is good at one to 100. So out of the world 100 university top 50 still in the United States. The reason China did all those manufacturing because as I mentioned China has 70% of the global speed railway 60% of global 5G networks 10 largest container port seven of in they have the infrastructure to do that. So this is a value chain supply chain for the world not for China. So made in China is made for the world.

I think US only worry about if they can make you cannot make a big ships or or aircraft. Now they go to South Korea to do that now. Right. So they they still find a way to do that. But I don't think that you you have to depend totally on the manufacturing. So if if if if we are living in the pre uh uh you know trade war era you know where we we buy so much chips from US China 70% of China energy depends on import China spend more money buying the chips than China importing energy so now you say they're not selling to China then the US company losing the big profit uh center and then they they really reduce their R&D budget and China is forced to do reinvent well and there's a lot of waste there.

So we see this uh uh separation is really no good all on security reasons. We should not overseerize and we should really display our own each other's competitive advantage.

I want to ask one more question about security philosophy. Obviously when Russia invaded Ukraine, the US imposed all kinds of sanctions on Russia and tried to constrain its ability to trade at all or make any money. going back to Israel's war in Gaza and you expressed the horror that you see from that and the sort of response to that. But China still trades with Israel as the US does in the future in a sort of different uh global world order. Would it ever be part of China's diplomatic arsenal to take a more heavy hand in some of these conflicts and say, "Oh, we're not going to trade you. We're not going to sell you advanced technology that you need to run your economy or run your military." etc. Because so far, despite the sort of concerns or the the response, there hasn't been any change in the trading relationship. Could it ever get to that point where China views its sort of diplomatic commercial power that way in conflicts that it's not directly involved in?

Well, I think China certainly would like to do more, you know, like what happening on the WHO, China's already fulfilled its obligations, too. I I think the key is really we need to restore the UN uh authority and principle uh particularly the UN security council. Maybe we should also reform that too. Maybe we should add G20 uh members other 16 G20 members as associate permanent member of UN and and we should really not let the unilateral single veto be abused.

uh for for example since the founding of UN Russia over abused the use the VA 100 sometimes 20 40 times US 100 times China 20 times we we we need to really control that so I think we reform UN to reflect this multipolar world and in the future if there any other there's any problem happen let's send the UN peacekeeping force to do that and so if the all the security member have a big majority and general assembly have a big majority we make that happen. So I think reform this multipolar world we also need to reform you to reflect that because uh the world is no longer fits the the superructure does not fit the reality today now.

All right. Uh Henry Wong founder and president uh for center for China and globalization. So fantastic to have you on the show. Can we do a live odd lots in Beijing with you at some point? Yeah. Yeah, please. We welcome that. All right. We are going to as soon as as soon as we get off this call, we are going to begin the preparations to figure out how we're going to make this happen. So great chatting you with you. Thank you for staying up late uh in your time to talk with us and hope to talk to you again soon. Thank you. Thank you so much both of you. Thank you so much.

Tracy, I really enjoyed that conversation. It was interesting thinking about, you know, this idea that rhetorically there are a lot of people on both sides of the aisle who say things like, "Oh, we need to get out of this sort of competition framework, etc." It doesn't really feel like anything is actually happening on that front. Yes. One thing that struck me from the conversation was I guess how um economically oriented it feels like all of Chinese policy actually is. And I suppose maybe that gets back to this idea, this is an old idea now, but that social contract idea about the CCP. So as long as people feel that their lives are getting better, then the CCP has strong support. I think the economic focus really came through in that conversation.

I think you know obviously in from the US perspective there is this view that you know Henry used the word global policeman and a lot of people would say yes absolutely and that a big role of the US Navy specifically is enforcing the fact or freeing the world for trade right that part of the reason that the world can trade freely that that's like a public good providing a public good and Adam Posen has talked about this and Others have talked about this idea that these things go hand in hand.

And it's interesting because so Henry talked about this impulse for continuation of global trade including with the US etc. There clearly to my mind seems to be less of an appetite from China to like or it's not obvious that there is a to fill the gap. Yeah. Or that you know and I guess there's question like does the world need such muscle to trade, right? Does could you have a world of trade where there is not one entity that has a truly global military footprint? I think these are really interesting questions.

Henry of course talked about, especially in that last answer, restrengthening the UN, etc. restructuring restructuring the UN. Exactly. It's not entirely obvious to me that these institutions as they're constructed can really be revived even with um lots of Chinese money going into them. I think that's still kind of TBD. Well, I think this is it, right? Even if you restructured the security council so that you know you wouldn't have one powerful member um vetoing stuff all the time. Even if people agreed to do things, what is the UN actually going to do? Right.

Right. What is the UN actually going to do? I don't know. We didn't get into it that much, but like the idea of a sort of more I don't know bricks composed peacekeeping force. I bet there are a lot of people in the US who would love that. They're like, "Yeah, let's have peace. Let's have a ceasefire. Someone else take care of let's have a ceasefire in Russia and Ukraine and also let's not have it be particularly dominated by Western peacekeepers shouldering that burden. I bet a lot of people in the US would love that. I would, you know, had with more time. I would love to really explore like what the constraints on that actually happening are there. But I thought that was a uh a very useful sort of overview of some of these questions from the Chinese perspective. Absolutely. Don't explore the constraints, Joe. Just take credit for solving US China tensions on the podcast. Okay. In less than an hour. Um shall we leave it there? Let's leave it there.

This has been another episode of the Odd Thoughts podcast. I'm Tracy Aloway. You can follow me at Tracy Aloway. And I'm Joe Weisenthal. You can follow me at the stalwart. Follow our producers Carmen Rodriguez at Carmen Armano Bennett atbot and Kaleb Brooks at Kalebrooks. For more OddLots content, go to bloomberg.com/odlots. We have a daily newsletter and all of our episodes and you can chat about all of these topics 247 in our Discord, discord.gg/odlotss. And if you enjoy OddLots, if you want us to go to Beijing and talk to more people on the ground, then please leave us a positive review on your favorite podcast platform. And remember, if you are a Bloomberg subscriber, you can listen to all of our episodes absolutely adree. All you need to do is find the Bloomberg channel on Apple Podcast and follow the instructions there. Thanks for listening.