The Munk Debates Podcast - Victor Gao Munk Dialogue - The "One China" Policy is Under Attack

Episode Date: August 17, 2022

Tensions between China and America are at a new, dangerous high following Nancy Pelosi’s recent visit to Taiwan in her capacity as Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. The trip was seen in Beijing as an affront to the longstanding “One China” policy which asserts that Taiwan is part of China operating under its own system of governance. In retaliation, China immediately launched large-scale military drills around Taiwan and halted cooperation with the U.S. on military matters and the global fight against climate change. The American response has been to renew its support for Taiwan’s right of self-defence and signal that more U.S. navy ships will be transiting the Taiwan strait in the months to come. What is the world to make of this crisis? Is it the opening act of a larger conflict between Beijing and Washington that could lead to war? Are there ways to defuse China-US tensions and re-establish relations between the world’s two superpowers to address common issues and concerns from climate change to the global economy to security in South Asia?  For a Chinese perspective on the state and future of Taiwan, China-US relations and the prospects for armed conflict the Munk Dialogues welcomed Professor Victor Gao, Vice President of the Center for China and Globalisation. He is a prominent Chinese lawyer, former investment banker and served as English language translator to the paramount leader of the People's Republic of China, Deng Xiaoping. He is the Chair Professor of Soochow University. QUOTES: Taiwan is part of China and the People's Republic of China is the sole legal representative of China. So as far as China is concerned, this is a frontal attack on the one thing that matters the most to China. That is China's sovereignty and territorial integrity.  The host of the Munk Dialogues  is Rudyard Griffiths - @rudyardg.   Tweet your comments about this episode to @munkdebate or comment on our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/munkdebates/ To sign up for a weekly email reminder for this podcast, send an email to [e-mail].   To support civil and substantive debate on the big questions of the day, consider becoming a Munk Member at https://munkdebates.com/membership Members receive access to our 10+ year library of great debates in HD video, a free Munk Debates book, newsletter and ticketing privileges at our live events. This podcast is a project of the Munk Debates, a Canadian charitable organization dedicated to fostering civil and substantive public dialogue - https://munkdebates.com/ Producer: Marissa Ramnanan  Editor: Adam Karch  Become a Munk Donor ($50 annually) to get 72-hour advanced access to the full length editions of Friday Focus and Munk Dialogues. Go to www.munkdebates.com to sign up. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

These statues have to come down. It's always been a pandemic of the unvaccinated. The problem now is it's a pandemic of the willfully unvaccinated. Falling birth rates are good. They're good for our planet. They're good for our societies. We're not responsible for the escalation with Russia. We're not the ones who invaded Ukraine.

I don't think it's fair to portray people of color as victims. It is a very dangerous time in American politics. Hello, Mug podcast listeners. your host and moderator here. Welcome to our latest installment of the Monk Dialogues. These are our long-form interviews with some of the world's sharpest minds and brightest thinkers on the big issues and ideas shaping this unique moment that we're all living through. The focus of today's program is the fate and future of Taiwan and U.S.-China relations. We'll be speaking in-depth with Victor Gao, one of China's leading international affairs experts. He's a chair of professor at Su Chow University and vice president

of the prestigious center for China and globalization in Beijing. He's had a storied career in international finance and public service in China, including acting as Deng Xiaoping's English translator. The next voice you'll hear is me, Rudyard Griffiths, in conversation with Victor Gao. I hope you enjoy this monk dialogue. Professor Gao, welcome to the Monk Dialogues. Thank you very much for having me. Well, a privilege indeed to have this conversation. I've been looking forward to this ever since we arranged this call

and thank you for your quick response in reaction to the recent events around Taiwan, the visit of Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, which has set off a crisis, arguably one of the bigger crises in American Chinese relations in recent history. So the opportunity to speak with you to go beyond the constraints of a five-minute interview and instead kind of think deeper and learn from you the Chinese perspective. That's what I'm really looking for here. Through the Western media, we certainly hear from your diplomats. we hear from select Chinese commentators, but rarely do we have the chance, Victor, to go and have an extended form conversation with someone of your experience and just knowledge of the issues at hand.

So if we could begin, Victor, take a little time, set up for us your sense of how the Chinese people and the Chinese government has reacted to. the visit by Nancy Pelosi to Taiwan. Explain to a Western audience why the Chinese response has been so scaled up, maybe surprising some Western observers to the extent to which your government felt that it had to act. It had to, since, provide a demonstration of force in the aftermath of Speaker Pelosi's trip to Taipei. Thank you. It's a great honor and privilege to talk to you about this very important subject. Nancy Pelosi is the third highest ranking official in the U.S. government, even though she is the Speaker of the House of Representatives. In terms of succession to the presidency of the United States,

she ranks next only to the vice president. And she is a very important. leader of the Democratic Party and very active on the American political scene. Now, ever since the news about her proposed to visit to Taiwan leaked back in February and March, China has scrambled into action. China has called the U.S. government again and again and made the case that it is absolutely a violation of the one China policy if the Speaker of the House of Representatives set forward. in Taipei in her official visit. Now then, about one month ago, when the idea of her visit again surfaced in connection with

her proposed visit to East Asian region as a whole, then China again made the case to the U.S. government again and again, and you do not know how many representations and consultations have been made by the Chinese side to the American side. Now, allow me to also alert to one fact. That is, President Biden mentioned to the world that he would have a phone call with Chinese President Xi Jinping about 10 days before that phone call. The Chinese side didn't confirm.

They basically say we don't have information to provide on this subject. Now, as late as almost exactly on the date of that very important virtual summit between the two leaders of the two countries, China confirmed that indeed two heads of state had agreed to talk. Now, I would say China would never agree to have such a virtual summit between the two heads of states, between China and the United States, unless they felt that. that there was some kind of assurance that the United States government or President Biden himself would do something to make sure that Nancy Pelosi would not make an official visit to Taiwan. But anyway, once Nancy Pelosi confirmed in a very secretive way and very illicit way that she would make it to Taiwan with her important congressional delegation, China scrambled into action again. emphasizing that this visit should not happen. This visit will be a frontal attack on China's sovereignty and territorial integrity because the whole world recognizes or acknowledges that there is only one China.

Taiwan is part of China and the People's Republic of China is the sole legal representative of China. So as far as China is concerned, this is a frontal attack on one thing that matters the most. to China, that is China's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Now, it is also very interesting to see that President Biden also counsel that the Pentagon said the timing is not the best for Nancy Pelosi to make it to Taipei. The U.S. military also mentioned that it's bad timing for Nancy Pelosi to visit Taipei. Now, behind the scene, I was told that the Chinese side and the American side really conducted lots of exchanges and a dialogue about how this visit should not happen.

Well, eventually it happened. China gave all the warnings you could as a country with decency, with full respect and commitment to respect its sovereignty and territorial integrity. And it made its case to the United States. It exhausted itself. And then Nancy Pelosi still went to Taiwan, not as a tourist, not as a grand old madam doing some shopping in Taipei shopping mall, for example, but as the head of an official congressional delegation, third in line to succession, third highest ranking official in the United States, second in line to the succession of the succession of the U.S. presidency of the United States. Therefore, from the Chinese perspective, we reached a moment very similar to the situation in the Korean War after the landing by General MacArthur in Yingchuan. You may remember that after the landing China made representations to the United States directly and indirectly through emissaries, for example, that the U.S. troops should not move above or beyond 38 parallel.

and China warned that if you move beyond and above 38 parallel, there will be consequences. Now, General MacArthur completely disregarded Chinese warning. He probably held the warning incomplete contempt, and his troops marched all along beyond 38 parallel all the way up to the Yalu River. And then we know what happened. The U.S. troops were forcefully pushed back. not only to below 38 parallel, but way below, for example, and in this process, the United States military suffered the most humiliating defeat in its history. We should know that when China gave warning to another sovereign country's government, China means it, and China is really very

serious. This is fascinating, Victor, it's so helpful for us again to kind of understand with you some of the, you know, the context here from your policymakers from the Chinese public. And you know this argument. People will say that Nancy Pelosi represents a different branch of the U.S. government, constitutionally separate from the executive, purposely established in that way, and that she was acting within her rights as the head of the legislative branch of the U.S. government. And Joe Biden similarly was bound to. by convention. He was bound by the fact that he is the president of the United States. He's the head of the executive. There's a separation of powers between him and the legislative. So I'd like you to

just go a little bit deeper on this sense that there was an insult here that was real and felt at the highest levels of the Chinese government. And then how you and the Chinese government think about the argument around the separation of powers and whether that is legitimate here in terms of the box, the constraints that the Biden administration was operating under. Thank you very much. Allow me to mention that I actually majored in constitutional law of the United States when I was pursuing my JD at your law school. So talking about these separations of power, et cetera,

you remind me of all the books, all the cases that I've been devoting my many hours. to when I was in New Haven. Now, from the Chinese perspective, there is only one United States of America, and China established its relations with one United States of America. And the commitments China made to the United States were not just made towards the U.S. executive branch. It's Chinese commitment made to the United States for all that matters as far as your government is concerned. judiciary or legislative. This should be the better norm in international relations. We cannot compartment allow ourselves to deal with, let's say, the legislative branch versus the executive branch versus the judiciary branch. We need to separate the federal government versus the state government, et cetera. No,

from the Chinese perspective, there is one country called the United States of America. It established a diplomatic relations with China, it recognized that there is only one China, Taiwan is part of China, and the United States recognizes the People's Republic of China as the sole legal representative of China, period. Now, how the United States is divided up internally, for example, that's your internal matter. That should not involve state-to-state relations between China as a state and the United States as a state, is that right? So I think China definitely has a point in saying that if the third highest ranking official of the United States make an official visit to Taiwan, then China need to react. That's the first point. The second point is that it's not just a humiliation or a slight against China slap in the face. No, China is very, very committed to do the things in the right way, regardless of all these. things. But what matters to China most is protecting its sovereignty and territorial integrity to protect the secrecy of the one China policy. And allow me to mention, Nancy Pelosi had only

one purpose when she set foot in Taiwan. She went there to promote Taiwanese independence and Taiwanese separatism. She added fuel onto that five. that's brewing in Taiwan because there were politicians which we in China, mainland, consider them to be separatists because they keep getting arms from the United States. They keep getting military assistance. And the U.S. military keep working with them on intelligence, on cyber security, you name it, as if Taiwan is a separate country, is a sovereign country, is part of the United States, is part of what the U.S. created, the block of democracies versus what?

The versus another block, including China. So literally the United States and Nancy Pelosi in particular, through this visit of hers to Taiwan, try to separate China, I mean China's mainland versus Taiwan, which is the province of China, into two opposing blocks. Now, if you do not call this hollowing out of the one, China policy, give me another reason how the one China policy can be hollowed out. If you do not call this a direct affront to China's sovereignty and territorial integrity,

tell me how you can put a name on this. Now, if any country goes to California and say, hello, I want to promote you as a member of the United Nations, let me send you all the advanced weapons to you. Let me urge you that it is the right thing for you to break away from the union. Do you think I will not be committing something that the U.S. federal government will chase me after, for example, for really creating major trouble for the integrity of the Union of the United States? And do you think any other country in the world will tolerate such behavior in its extreme form to challenge the sovereignty and territorial integrity of another country? And we're not talking about a small country. We are talking about a country whose economy is larger than that of the United States

by persons in power parity, which is about 80% of that of the United States, if we use official exchange rate as the benchmark. And we are talking about China and the United States, both armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, as well as with the most sophisticated conventional weapons. So if Nancy Pelosi wanted to light a fire through her visit to Taiwan, she succeeded to this. We are now suffering the consequences. Fascinating, Victor. You know, one of the things that I think is noticeable in this conversation, at least here in the West, is an ahistoricism.

I think it would be interesting for our audience to hear a little bit from you about why, Taiwan is of such importance to China? You may recall that the decline of the Chinese empire in the 19th century started in 1840 when Britain launched an opium war against China and they defeated the Chinese military because of their more advanced weaponry and their mastery of the Navy to force China to import opium. from the British India at times, the colony of the Great Britain. Now, ever since then, China's fortune declined because of what we call semi-colonialism, and then more or less at the same time, Japan rose up because of the rapid industrialization

and militarization, etc. Then there was a war between China and Japan, because Japan encroached upon China's territories in Shandong, in Liaoning, etc. Now, as a result of that war, Japan forced China to seat Taiwan to Japanese control. So between 1895 to 1949, Taiwan was not only occupied by Japan, Taiwan was actually part of the Japanese empire. And in Taiwan, Japan forced the local people, Chinese, to abandon their Chinese culture. They could not use their Chinese names. They had to adopt Japanese names.

They could not speak Chinese. They had to speak Japanese, for example. They were assimilated into the Japanese empire. Now, you may know, Japan unconditionally surrendered in 1949 because of the heroic struggle of the Allied countries, including the United States, Great Britain, China, and the former Soviet Union. Now, as far as the U.S. is concerned, the Second World War is only about four years between 1941 to 1945. But as far as China is concerned, the war against Japanese aggression lasted for 14 years between 1931 all the way to the victory in 1945. Now, as the cornerstones of

the post-second World War international order. There was a Cairo Declaration and post-Declaration in which it was very, very clearly stipulating that when Japan unconditionally surrendered, they need to do several things, including surrendering Taiwan back to China, because it was considered as illegal assets seized by Japan through acts of war of aggression against China. Therefore, when Japan unconditionally surrendered, Taiwan was rightfully returned to China. After 1945, Taiwan was returned to China, and the nationalist government, headed by Generalissimo Changkhek, exercised control, administration of Taiwan as part of the territory of the Republic of China. Then in the latter part of the 1940s, there was a big, unfortunate, tragic civil war breaking out in China, leading to the establishment of the People's Republic of China in China's mainland in 1949,

and they're fleeing from China's mainland to Taiwan by the nationalist government, headed by Generalissimo Chang Kajerk. And from day one, the people, Republic of China has vowed to take back Taiwan because Taiwan is part of the Chinese territory. If you read the documents giving rise to the United Nations, giving rise to the unconditional surrender of Japan, you name it, which form the corners of the international world order that we understand after the Second World War, then you will know that Taiwan is part of China. And China is the country which holds completely the sovereignty and the territorial integrity as far as Taiwan is concerned.

And I had a great honor to interpret for Dr. Henry Kissinger during his visits to China as former Secretary of State in 1985 and 1987. And I worked for former President Nixon when he visited China as a private citizen in 1985. And we really chatted about what they were doing back in 1971. 1972. Now, throughout the 1970s, the United States wanted to normalize relations with the People's Republic of China. China through Mao Zedong, Zhou and Lei, and later, Deng Xiaoping raised three preconditions for the normalization of relations between China and the United States. One, terminate U.S. diplomatic recognition of Taiwan or the Republic of China, withdraw all U.S. troops from Taiwan, and then abrogate the U.S. ROC or U.S. Taiwan Defense Treaty.

And for the United States to agree to do these three things, it was truly, truly momentous. And it took the United States quite a few years from Nixon presidency, for the presidency, until the Carter administration. When President Carter and his administration mustered enough support and courage and commitment to do so, And then on January 1st, 1979, the People's Republic of China and the United States formally recognized each other and established diplomatic relations with each other. Now, the United States, as far as Taiwan is concerned, fully recognized that there is only one China, Taiwan is part of China, and the People's Republic of China is the sole legal representative of China. Now, as far as China's concerned, these are the cornerstones upon which China-U.S. relations were established upon. And how can China, a big country, great civilization lasting more than 5,000 years continuously,

a permanent member of the Security Council, the second largest economy in the world of today, the largest economy if we use purchasing power parity, and the economy which will surpass that of the United States in a matter of less than 10 years, if we still use the official exchange rate, how can anyone expect that China will tolerate and turn the blind eye to the continuous hollowing out of the one-China policy by the United States?

And Nancy Pelosi's illicit visit to Taiwan is the last straw which probably collapsed the whole camel. We really need to put this in historical term. This is no joking matter. This is not child's play in a kindergarten, for example. As far as China's concerned, you encroached upon the most important and sacred thing that matters for China as a country,

the Chinese nation as a nation, Chinese civilization, and every one of the Chinese nation, including people like, me. Hi, Rudyard Griffiths here, your host and moderator. I have a favor to ask you, please consider becoming a monk member. Membership is free and you get access to a series of great benefits, including a 10 plus year library of some of our best debates, dialogues, and podcasts. You also get a free monthly newsletter featuring the debates that we're watching around the world. And you get

a specially curated Friday weekly monk members only. podcast that focuses on the big international events and trends shaping our world. All of that, again, free at www.w.com. I hope you'll consider joining and becoming part of our community. Now, back to our program. Very helpful to go back through this history from, you know, a Chinese perspective. Others obviously will have a different analysis, but I, again, I think it's just critical for us to to listen to the arc of history that you've unfolded there.

And you're very real concerns about where we are at right now. And that's the remaining time together. I want to shift to now the crisis as it is. We have seen these large-scale, sophisticated Chinese military operations involving your Navy, your Air Force, possibly your submarines, a full kind of pay. panoply and display of China's military sophistication. And as you say, over the last decade or so, increasing military capacity designed in no small part to ensure and project

your power over the South China Sea, over the strait of Taiwan, and over Taiwan itself. So where does this crisis go from here? because right now, from the outside, it looks as if this latest series of military demonstrations were enacting or practicing a blockade of Taiwan. Thank you very much. You are raising some very important questions. China made major military drills and exercises over the past few days,

and it completely changed the paradigm involving Taiwan, involving Taiwan's defense, etc. Why? Because originally Taiwan's military defense was designed towards repulsing Chinese military advances from China's Fujian province or other coastal provinces, massive landing on the beaches on the west side of the Taiwan island, and then pushing them back into the sea, for example, repelling them, preventing them from occupying the whole island. And then they would involve land, naval air forces to deal with the PLA from China's mainland. And then, given the geography of Taiwan, they built a strategic hideouts and storage places on the east side of the island, which is very cliffy, mountains over there, very narrow strip

of land along the beaches, for example. And this whole defense of Taiwan's strategy, seem to work. And then Taiwan claimed there is a middle line in the middle of the Taiwan straight. Taiwan hold itself out as a sovereign country with its territorial waters, EEZ and continental shelf, etc. Now, through this military exercises, allow me to mention the first important thing. Everything collapsed. The PLA completely disregarded a medium line in the middle of the Taiwan Strait, the Chinese military already penetrated within the so-called territorial sea areas of Taiwan. And for the six sea area and air area military exercises, they were to the north, to the south, to the west, as well as to the east of the Taiwan island.

Now, it's very important for you to recall that the east side of the Taiwan island, actually faces the Pacific Ocean. And for the territorial waters, EEZ continental shelf that Taiwan claimed as a sovereign country, everything basically changed. Why? Because China's position now is that these important territorial lines, territorial sea, EEZ continental shelf lines, etc., they are not Taiwan provincial lines. They are China's sovereign lines. Therefore, you will not be surprised if China is already exercising jurisdiction over Taiwan. Now, the exercise of the jurisdiction will take several forms and faces. The first phase is already starting. That is, China completely disregarded the so-called medium line and the so-called,

called national, in quotation marks, of course, boundaries of Taiwan, because China reasserted itself to the whole world that Taiwan as a part of China does not possess its own international boundary. Taiwan's boundary is completely within China itself. Now, from the two sides of the Taiwan's straight perspective, now the perspective is completely shifted. It's shifted to the east side of the Taiwan island because that will be the front line as far as China's concerned.

For any foreign ships, military in particular, to get close to Taiwan eventually, for any foreign military planes to get close to Taiwan, China will give them warning. because strictly speaking, they are getting close to the Chinese airspace as well as territorial waters. And China will really exercise central governments' authorities and jurisdictions over Taiwan. Victor, what I'm hearing for you in a sense is that the one China policy is possibly mortally wounded here. And that we know that in a matter of the next few weeks, the United States Navy has declared its intention to transit the Taiwan Strait with, you know, U.S. destroyers and other ships. So what do you think is going to happen?

I mean, are we now at a risk going forward of actual conflict? We do not want to have war and battles and confrontations. Whatever that's happening in Ukraine is sickening. It's really a deep, deep insult to human decencies, that right? They are killing each other. Allow me to mention the Taiwan Strait right now is not closed. Any ship, military or civilian, can safely sail through the Taiwan Strait or through the South China Sea. No problem.

Freedom of navigation is not a problem, has never been a problem in this part of the world. However, if any military ships, naval ships sail to this part of the world, when live military exercises are being conducted as we speak, then you need to abide by the international law. Don't turn yourself into an unintended target. But if your intention is for war, for confrontation, for conflict, for rivalry, for breaking Taiwan away from China, then what you will be met will be the mightiness of the Chinese people

and the mightiness of the Chinese people's liberation army. Now, you talk about the U.S. naval ships as if, you know, they exist in a vacuum. No, when they sail close to Taiwan or Chinese mainland, their advantages may soon disappear. Why? Because Taiwan is within 150 kilometers of China's mainland. Is that right? And China is not a simple country. China is one of the largest, most powerful nuclear powers in the world, and China has a military on a par with the United States. So if anyone really wants to walk into a war, allow me to mention, don't do it. this, this will be terrible. This will be causing tragedies for anyone who participates in this.

And if anyone really believes that in a matter involving China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, they can wrestle China down to the ground, it's completely fallacy. China will fight to defend its territory and sovereignty to the hilt. And any ships sailing across the Taiwan Straits or in the South China Sea, to be viewed as an enemy force, for example, will be dealt with as such. You can ask the military in the United Kingdom, in Canada, in Australia, in the United States to do war games of one kind of another. No one will win this battle of this war in case they want to deliberately intentionally get involved

in China's effort to achieve finally the national reunification. Victor, final question. You've been very generous with your time. I know having listened to you over the years on the BBC and having read your commentary in the international press, I know you're someone who has really dedicated a significant part of your professional life to try to create understanding between China and the West.

I know you've often been someone who's been really hopeful about a positive relationship between China and America and vice versa. I sense listening to you now since this crisis that something has changed in your analysis and in your worldview. Am I right for this? That this crisis has been a bit of a watershed for you in terms of your own sense of the state, maybe the dysfunction. of the conversation between the West and its views on Taiwan at this moment.

With due respect, allow me to say you are completely wrong on this particular point. Why? Because I'm a firm believer in inevitable peace between China and the United States and China and all the Western countries and China and the world at large. I'm a firm believer in the complete fallacy of the destined to war theory proposed by Professor Ellison of Harvard. Why? Because he analyzed all those dozens of wars, et cetera, and built upon these analysis, he came up with this theory of two cities, and then he claimed that between China and the United States, they are destined to war. Now, with due respect to Professor Ellison, is completely wrong because all the wars he analyzed happen to be conventional wars,

whereas the United States and China today are not only conventional powers, but very, very important nuclear powers. Therefore, for the theories, assume these theories are correct, they should be applied to conventional powers rather than to the United States and China, because they are not only conventional powers. nuclear powers, how can you apply a theory based on cases which are completely different from the situation involving China and the United States? Therefore, in rebuke of the destined to war fallacy proposed by Professor Alison of Harvard, I came up with my own theory, if you allow me to use

that word, that's called inevitable peace. We know in the United States or in the West you normally say several things are inevitable, death and pain tax. Now there is another thing inevitable. That is peace with China. Whether you like it or not, it will be peace between China and the United States. Why? As Dr. Henry Kissinger correctly pointed out, war is and should not be an option between China and the United States. If a war breaks out, do you know what's the consequence? it will soon spill out of control into amygdome. Who wants to look at amygaden? Who really wants to have the spectre of amygaden

hanging above your head? I don't want my kids to have to look into amygaden. I don't want to see Chinese or the Americans or the Canadians or the British, for example, the Australians anyone in the world to really face amygaden because Dr. Allison's theory is a fallacy. China and the United States, rather than being destined to war,

they are destined to inevitable peace. This is why I'm so committed to promoting China-U.S. friendship. But on a higher level of analysis, because I'm already transcending above war, why? Because war is not possible. If the United States wants to launch a war against China involving Taiwan, they probably will suffer a defeat more miserable than General MacArthur suffered in the Korean War. This is no joking.

The United States cannot afford to suffer a major defeat militarily. You see the irony of that? If they want to try that and if this really is defeated, if they are defeated, if they are defeated, what will be the result? I truly believe decision makers, both civilian as well as military in Washington, will look at the situation very carefully. If they want to do the freedom of navigation exercises through the Taiwan Strait, through the South China Sea, be my guest. Just do it very, very carefully. If they want to use the freedom of navigation exercises as a pretext for war, then it will be pierced through and they will be dwelt with as it is.

After all, the United States cannot be locked up in this illogicality, contradiction and untruthfulness. They acknowledge there is one China. They acknowledge Taiwan is part of China. They acknowledge that People's Republic of China is the sole legal representative of China and they want to fight a war against China over Taiwan. Be my guest. Come on. This is illogicality maximized. How can you do that? I also truly have great confidence in the future course of development between China and the United States. Fundamentally, China is not an enemy of the

United States and the Chinese people are very friendly towards the American people. We want to live in a world whereby we respect each other, we deal with each other, we get along with each other despite of all the differences. After all, whatever I do, you cannot really turn me into a white American. Is that right? There will always be differences. We need to respect our differences. We need to get along with each other.

China will be different. China has been here for 5,000 years. And we survived all the tragedies, all the disasters, all the wars, etc. We dwelt with the Huns, with the Turks, with the Mongols, you name it. And we still so. survive. We still do it in an excellent way. Do you really think China as a nation committed to defend its territorial integrity and sovereignty as we have done throughout the millennium and we will let us down? We will let any country bully China as the British did back in 1840

by forcing China to buy opium from them through their gumboat diplomacy and war. Nothing in the world can defeat China on this matter because China believes it is in possession of truth, nothing but the truth and the totality of truth because we are fighting for our lives for the survival of the Chinese nation and the survival of China as a country and the Chinese as a nation and the Chinese civilization which has already lasted for 5,000 years. Don't mess with this united strength of the 1.4 billion Chinese people. Thank you, Professor Victor Gao. This is exactly what I wanted to do with you. We've gone longer than expected, but it's been such a fulsome conversation. And I just think an important addition to people's engagement with all the issues that we've touched on from Chinese history to the issues around. Chinese sovereignty and identity, the future, the state and future of the island of Taiwan,

all of this encapsulated in our conversation today. So thank you so much for coming on the program today. Thank you very much for having me. I hope you enjoyed today's long form interview with Victor Gao, the vice president of the Center for China and Globalization and Professor at Su Chau University. If you have feedback, suggestions, thoughts on our monk dialogue with Victor Gal, please send us an email to podcast at monk debates.com. You can also visit our website, triple w monkdebates.com, for all kinds of great debates and dialogues on China. This is a topic that is of interest to you that sparked your curiosity. Check out our terrific main stage China debate with Henry Kissinger and Neil Ferguson, among others,

You can access that right now on our website as part of our basic monk membership. Access to your membership at triple-w monkdebates.com forward slash membership. Thank you for lending your time and attention to our efforts here at the monk debates to bring civility and substance back to the public square, at least when it comes to our conversations about issues and ideas that matter. I'm your host and moderator, Rudyard Griffiths. The Monk Debates are a project of the Aurea and Peter and Melanie Monk charitable foundations. Rudyard Griffiths and Ricky Gurwitz are the producers.

The Monk Debates podcast is mixed by Adam Karsh. Be sure to download and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. And if you like us, feel free to give us a five-star rating. Thank you again for listening.