Transcription
Hello and welcome to the first episode of Think China Conversations, a series of in-depth interviews with experts on China. I'm Yenping, your host, and with me in the studio is Mr. George Yo, the former foreign minister of Singapore, who continues to be a key global voice on foreign relations, geopolitics, China related issues, and discussions about the future world order. Mr. Yo, thank you for joining us today.
I think many would agree that we are living in a time of growing uncertainty and turbulence and this has raised many questions for people around the world, including myself. We'll begin our discussion with US President Donald Trump. Someone who has come to symbolize many of these shifts. Well, when he spoke about the G of Mexico, Greenland, and Canada as the 51st state, few people imagined that he would take it this far. The US has also published its security and defense strategies, the realistic approach it is taking to ensure its dominance in the western hemisphere and to continue to be in a position of strength against China. How do you see these strategies of the Trump administration? Do you think they strengthen the US coast or in fact undermine its position?
Whether consciously or not the US is sensing its own limitation that it has been overextended is expressed in a growing national debt. It's reached a point now where the annual debt servicing exceeds the defense budget let alone paying back the capital amount. This is not sustainable. Therefore, there has to be a change of national policy and a certain retreat from the US from its global entanglements is a necessity because it cannot be afforded. Uh so Trump wants to consolidate around his own hemisphere. Of course, he's a negotiator. So he his ask is always much greater than his bottom line. He was everything from Greenland all the way down to South America. He will get less than he has asked for, but because he's aggress very aggressive negotiator, what he gets may in fact be more than what is prepared to accept. He asked Canada to be the 51st state. Naturally, the Canadians b. But if he suddenly says, "Look, let's renegotiate trade agreements. let's do things in the way which favor America more. The Canadians may well be relieved to offer him those concessions because the original proposition was for Kender to be incorporated into the US. Look what he's done to Venezuela. He's kidnapped Maduro, spirited him in a way, killed many of his bodyguards, and intimidated the entire Venezuelan population. Does he want to take over Venezuela? Can he? Well, whatever it is, he's intimidated not only Venezuelans, but people in his hemisphere, and the next time he says something, they will take him seriously. Of course, in this game, no one has a final move. He may want China out of South America, but do South Americans want China out because it's in their own interest. So, there has to be bargaining. All this only shows that the US can no longer do what it used to do in the past because the relative weights have changed. It's got national debt. The US dollar is being threatened. Every central bank, every major corporation in the world, every wealthy family worries about exposure to US dollar. And one day if the US dollar loses its reserve position in the world then the flywheel turns the other way instead of financing all these hundreds of bases around the world on the strength of the US dollar so that American taxpayers don't have to pay for them directly but all of us do because we are users of the US dollar. Once that magic spell is broken and people start treating the US dollar in a different way then bases will have to be shut down and the US will have to limit many of its involvement in the politics of other countries and regions. So this is the the period of transition that we're now going through. Trump is not the cause of it. Trump has no sense of history. He's a dealmaker. He is a very aggressive deal maker. I don't think he has a sense of larger tides flowing in the world. But in a sense, he is a catalyst. He's making things happen faster than they otherwise would happen. And what we are going to see eventually will be a multipolar world with the US still has a very big pole influential prestigious but China now has another very big poll maybe even bigger than the US in terms of its economy. Russia will remain a pole. The Europeans will have to rediscover their own footing on their own. Still close to the US but having to stand on their own two feet. There will be a pole if they can somehow keep the European Union together. India will be his own pole. Brazil will be his own pole with influence in South America. So this is a world we're entering the period of adjustment from the end of the cold war to an American dominated postcold war world to the multipolar world that that is coming. This is a transition which is creating a lot of uncertainty, a lot of anxiety in the world today.
>> What you're saying seems to imply that the US is really on a road of decline. But some people also mentioned that you know um the fact that it is actually when it says that it's actually concentrating on the western hemisphere it is actually trying to choke China from the sites all the important you know countries that's offering China resources and all that. How how do you see that?
Well, the US if it could would try to hold China back because it sees China as its most formidable rival. But in the end, it all depends on the internal strength of the US, its own internal unity, the vitality of its economy, the diligence and intelligence of its population. That's the key. It is not how we can pull down somebody else but how good you are yourself. There's growing self-doubt in America about your own weaknesses. You take the drug problem. It is very serious. You can blame fentinu on China. You can blame cocaine on Colombia. You can blame heroin on Mexico. You can blame uh opioids on drug companies. But the deeper question is why is the population so in need of numbing pain in the last century? Of course in China his in Chinese history we blame the west for the for the opium war. But why was there such a demand for opium in China? And not only in China but in overseas Chinese communities in Malaya, Singapore and elsewhere. See when the body politic sick people feel a need to serve their anxieties and that's the demand and the demand will bring on its own supply. There's something sick in the US today. They know it. You take the slogan make America great again. Let's analyze the four words. Make America great again means that it was great once. It is no longer great now. Is in decline. But we want it to recover. So the fact that America in decline is no longer contested even by the Americans themselves. The key question is can it recover? And it is this desire to restore an old position which created the MAGA movement boring propelling Trump into power first in the first administration and then now the hope is to return to the past. But the error of history doesn't go backwards. It goes forward.
>> His opponents also want to go back to the past. maybe to the Obama period. If you say no immigrants and your own population is not capable of the same ability to work hard, to save, to have strong families, if you don't bring in people, your economy will decline further. If you bring in people, you change the demographics. And this is a tension deep in America today. They have to find their own way forward. No one can tell them what to do. They must in their own internal debate and they have many intelligent people think through what the constraints are, what the situation is today and how to move forward to the future. Right now when we watch American politics, there are just two sides railing against each other, each wanting to go back to the past. We have yet to see a clear vision of the way to the future and this is the biggest drama in the world today because if the US recovers then there'll be a certain stability in the world but even that recovery will take easily 10 20 years the US is not able to recover and continues on this trajectory of decline the consequences for the world are enormous. Mhm.
>> I mean, look at the fall of Western Rome. Elect to the dark ages. Look at the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The effects are still being seen today all over the Middle East and North Africa. Look at the decline of Ting Dynasty China. It led to the deaths of tens of millions of people. And out of all this mayhem, the emergence of Hong Kong and Singapore. And if the US continues its decline, the historical implications are farreaching. We don't know. No one has a crystal ball into the future.
>> We just have to say, look, in this scenario, it recovers, but it'll take time. In this other scenario, the decline continues, remembering that a wounded lion is a very dangerous animal. M
When I spoke to some American scholars um they're actually telling me that this is just the US you know being chaotic being competitive being very vibrant they do not see it as like you know exactly on a path of decline how how would you look at that like this is just us this is USA
>> Well, some Americans will say that and you often hear the phrase that no one has no one has won betting against America they look back at their own history at civil war which was a terrible war dividing families. They recovered to become the greatest country on earth. After the two world wars, they became number one superpower. They went through a horrendous period during the Vietnam war when the campuses were in chaos because a whole generation turned against the establishment. It recovered. you had the the Reagan renaissance. So yes, it has a great capacity to heal and we hope it can because if it cannot if the condition is terminal then it'll be a very different set of scenarios that we've got to work on. it may come to be when I went for my class reun reunion at the hub business school just last June two section mates the section is very small it's only 90 of us who stayed together in the first year so the bonds of friendship of our lifetime two of them came up to me separately and asked do you think we're on the decline I was surprised that they asked me that they would never have asked me that question in earlier reunions there is considerable self-doubt. It may be that when they meet foreigners they they they puff themselves up and say look don't bet against us but they themselves are not sure and that's the reason for the ferocity of the domestic debate within the US itself. So you see the situation now in the US as very different from you know the other situations in the past when it was also seen as in a way chaotic and you see it as
>> Every situation is different. Okay it's just that
>> Can they recover from this? Well maybe it can maybe it cannot and can you be sure of your belief or your hope? The contradictions are severe. The problems are not easy to resolve. They brought in Elon Musk to cut the budget deficit and Doge was established amidst great fanfare and Elon Mus was jumping up and down in enthusiasm. In the end, he left till between hind legs and abject failure.
>> Nothing could be cut except maybe USAD.
I want to talk about the Asian century that we were talking about just not too long ago. You know, from the four little dragons to China and India rising to Southeast Asia as the next engine of growth. And China's President Cinping also spoke about changes unseen in a century seemingly led by China. But now I think we see some discussions about whether this Asian century is actually going to happen because we see China's growth slowing. We also I mean while you talk about the US depth but we also see the US economy continues to expand and China also faces its demographic challenges the pressing need to transform its economic model and after Trump came into power all eyes have turned to the US I mean whether it's good or bad but you know everyone is looking at the USA so I want to ask you the question is um is there still an Asian century?
Oh, I think that's a given because the old civilizations are reemerging. We're talking about China, India, and between additional 6700 million people in Southeast Asia. That's more than half the world. They've always contributed enormously to global development. They're recovering an earlier position. When we look back later, the period when the Europeans as a result of a series of events in technology and in politics in Europe suddenly broke out of Europe. First the Portuguese and the Spanish and followed by the the Dutch and the British and then later by others and finally the Americans. That period which if you date it from Columbus reaching America in 1492 to the leadership of Tunga Ping in 1978 that period represented a period of almost total western dominance in the world. The fact that we're speaking in English, the fact that many of the words we use, many of the intellectual categories that is in our minds when we think and speak, they are western. The sciences the way we dress, the way cities are organized, the imprint of the west is is profound. so profound that it's almost unconscious and subconscious. Now we are finding societies once great but fallen and put down then turning inwards to rediscover themselves and then re-emerging again to take up the prior places that is one full cycle in history. So when we talk about Asian century, it's not because of one policy. It's not because of a particular event. We're just looking at a big cycle. The period of western ascendancy has crested and is gradually giving way to the recovery of an older position.
>> Mhm.
>> Of course, we're not going back to the past. The China of the future is not the China past. in the India of the future. It's not the India of the past but the same civilizations modernized dynamic in new ways. So is it an Asian century? You'll be an Asian dominant century. Will Asia dominate the world the way the west dominate the world? I don't think so. Because the ancient peoples, the Indians and the Chinese, they have no wish to make others like themselves. They have no desire to colonize. Would China want to colonize and absorb 100 million non-Chinese into China, making it less homogeneous? Does want to be like New York or Shanghai like London or Paris? No. They'd rather be themselves. And this is an ancient wisdom that there's no profit to moving your armies to capture territory and people and making them your subjects or slaves and then having to deal with a lot of unhappinesses. You may profit once in terms of how much wealth you can acquire but in the end the problems the seeds that you sow will create enormous problems for you. Look at the west today. How much of their problems today arise from the earlier period when they were conquering other countries and subjecting other people to their wills and because of what they did. So now they move to the metropolitan countries. Look at Britain today. Look at France. Look at America. When they look back, was it all worthwhile? Would they not have preferred to be homogeneous? But you can't go back to the past.
>> Do you see the Asian century as something that is going to be led by China and India?
>> It's not that you'll be led by anybody. China is always a universe unto itself. And you almost get a feeling sometimes that China can carry on even if the rest of the world were to disappear. is big enough, diverse enough. It's got its own internal uh market and it it is largely self-sufficient. It can continue to grow organically. Of course, if they don't take cognizance of what goes on in the world, it is too self-satisfied like theQing dynasty under the later Ching Long period. and you felt that we are so superior, no one else can teach us anything. If China becomes like that again, then you can be sure that the decline will begin and one day someone will come knocking on your door and it may not be someone friendly. So it's very important for China to be alert to what's happening in the world. But at the same time the fact that is big enough to be self- sustaining in its own internal circulation that is the result of thousands of years of history. India has a different history. It was never one polity. It is heterogeneous. It's not homogeneous like China but is one civilization. So whether you are an Indian from the northeast or the south or the northwest there's something which binds them all together. I remember once having a conversation with my old friend Pet Chidam. He was a a minister in in in the Indian cabinet, commerce, finance, home minister. We are very old friends over 30 years. He told me this story about Hinduism once. He said all over India there are different stories of Shiva of Lord Shiva. But these stories while there are regional variations there are no contradictions among them. No contradictions. What does it mean? It means that while a region may elaborate stories about Shiva, they were cognizant of the stories of Shiva elsewhere and make sure these stories were not in conflict. India has a basis in one civilization in his Hindu past which is one reason why the BJP government under Modi keeps wanting to go back to the pre-B British pre-Mo pre-Islamic past to India as it arose from the Vic period the India of the Ramayana the Mahabharata of the Moras and the Guptas when they overdo Hindudva It creates new problems. You may end up estranging non-Hindus in your society. But I can understand why Hinduva has such an appeal. They know deep inside themselves. They they are an ancient people and they want to look back into their own history as a self-strengthening exercise. the way Chinese people at the turn of the century had different self-strengthening movements and in doing that you've got to go back to the past but the objective of going back to the past is to move into the future. So Hinduva as a phase in Indian politics I can understand. But for India to continue it much into the future he has to transcend Hindu. Modi wants India to be renamed Barat. Barat as in Bahabarata the great land Tati. I can understand the emotions that that name evokes in India. But in the end, India must find references which should also get the Muslims and the Christians and others to buy in. But it cannot be on the basis of a British past. It has to be on the basis of a long history. And it's a different story from China. And in between we have Southeast Asia 10 now 11 countries with different mixture of influence from China, India and the west. We are each too small to really determine the cause of world history or even of regional history. But each of us, whether you're Thai or La Oceanian or East Maurice, you know you're different and you must have your own identity rooted in your own past because without that rootedness, you have no strength to confront challenges and grow into the future. But there there are examples of this in Europe. You have the Portuguese, the Lithuanians, the Hungarians. There's more communities, but they're very conscious of who they are and determined to be what they are. So, we too in Southeast Asia, but the big reality for us is on the one hand China and on the other India.
How would you rank China's problems? Which one is the most destabilizing with the highest chance of derailing its development? Is it going to be like a domestic problem or is it going to be like an external issue?
>> No, it's always domestic. Yes, I mean China is so big. It's difficult for external powers when he's strong to confront it because he's got all the resources and the population, the intelligence, the knowledge. But you know when the Chinese fight, they fight like hell against one another. And in between dynasties whether it is say before unification tank after the end of hunt when you had the three kingdoms and the the east and western ting and the npa in in periods between the great dynasties you have long periods of internal struggle. Right now in China there's a a series on the period between the end of Tong and the beginning of S. They call it Tingen. Uh it's still going on. I've been watching it with great interest. It's a horrible period. There was famine. There was cannibalism intrigue within the states within the dynasty and each having to fend off the other before final reunification against Anderson. So in China the problems are always internal. If the body politic is strong they can handle external challenges. But if the body politic is sick then external challenges become critical.
>> Then how do you see the domestic political situation in China now I mean especially the fact that they actually you actually cannot see a successor in line.
>> No, I don't see that as a problem.
>> You don't see
>> I mean, it is a problem. is is always a problem in China. You know, throughout it history, China had a key man risk. I just watched an episode yesterday in uh in in this period of the the period. The king died one he had to decide which of the sons to take over. He wanted an adopted son to take over. But the advisor said no, choose your own son by blood. Was not quite prepared for it. And there was one line he said the choice of succession is a very serious matter. In Chinese history, there has always been a key man. There's never a a period when there's no key man. In Chinese history, does will it lead to disaster? Sometimes, sometimes. But there is also wisdom in their own historical experiences. They know that the way to choose leaders is not by voting. And if if it's by voting is by elected representatives, not by universal franchise. But that's China. And it may work in China. It cannot work in India. it cannot work in the west. So when you ask me what are China's major challenges, it is not succession because succession is something they've always had to confront and they have a lot of wisdom in in this matter. The main problem in China is corruption. I once read a financial history of Chinese dynasties. It says when a dynasty is new, the taxes are light but the treasury is full. At the end of a dynasty, the taxes are crushing but the coffers are empty. The people who are rich don't have to pay taxes. In fact, they benefit from taxes collected from other people. Corruption is always the single biggest problem in Chinese society. And you cannot get rid of it because it's tied to Confucious. Confucious requires us to make distinction in relationship. So between husband and wife, between ruler and ministers, between emperor and people, between brothers, friends, relatives, friends, strangers. We have to make distinctions. So Chinese New Year is coming. The women folk under great stress. They got to go to the bank, get new bank notes. They collect all these red envelopes. They got to wrap them. Make little markings to know how much is in each packet. Decide what to give to whom. The children come home. What did he give? You need to know because in the amounts of money transferred in this way, you determine relationships. And this is confusious. And that's what holds Chinese society together between making distinctions and corruption is a slippery slope. Suddenly instead of a homepow which is $50, $100, it become $1,000. Instead of a hamper with a bottle of wine and some biscuits, it becomes a dozen cans of top quality abalone or something. Is it just because of friendship or is there a deeper intention? And for some years in China, the corruption had become very bad, blatant, shameless. When Citing Ping reversed it after taking over in 2013, no one believed at first that he could succeed. And if he had served only two terms, he would have failed. I'm not saying that he's fully justified in extending his tenure, but I can understand the necessity and maybe a couple of million people have been charged and thrown into prison and the fight goes on. Another set of generals have been removed from the central military commission. In the military, they were buying promotions. So the corruption was many layers down. You remove one layer, another layer is still corrupt. Another layer is still corrupt. But eventually you will clean up. But can you remove it completely from Chinese society? It's very difficult because without confucious you can't hold Chinese society together. And that is a an inevitable side effect of relationships. But I find it very intriguing that you're tracing it to Confucianism rather than some people would say it's because of authoritarianism. It's because of the political system because when you trace it to confusionism, it becomes part of culture.
>> I think it's a byproduct of culture and therefore it's something deep and not easily overcome. Therefore, it requires a continuous struggle. is like what goes on within the human body. The good bacteria, the bad bacteria, the positive forces, the negative forces. They're in constant struggle and you have to constantly tell t tell you you know to make the adjustment. You do not want to remove relationships from society because then you it breaks down. But you have to keep it within bounds and when there are problems attack those problems but do not attack it in a way which disrupts the entire society. That was the lesson they learned in the transition from ting to hunt was it was so str. So his son could not hold the empire together. Then Han dynasty brought in Lee into the way it operates. It still had far but relationships became important and over the centuries Chinese society have elaborated. It's not static. It keeps changing but they've elaborated ways to organize people so that a society is stable not because of law only but because people are brought up to behave in a certain way to one another and in the modern world with people concentrated in cities with the internet with AI what is the relevance of confusious in this new world what kind of new neo new confucutionism do you need in this new world to hold Chinese society together. That's an open question. This is the challenge before us today.
How do you see the Taiwan straight issues, one of those issues among China's external or internal problems.
Taiwan would have been reabsorbed into China after 49 but for the outbreak of the Korean War which led the US to seal the seventh fleet in the streets of Taiwan preventing reunification. So the reason why Taiwan is a separate entity today is because of America. The moment America is not in the equation, reunification will happen naturally. the Taiwanese people will know that there's no fighting it. So when we talk about the Taiwan issue, we must really analyze US China relations. Right now USChina relations are stabilizing. Trump is looking forward to visiting China in April and this year they may meet three four times you know G20 APEC bilateral visits and Trump needs the economy to be stabilized for the midterms selection and for uh the well-being of the American economy. They thought they could put pressure on China and get a better deal for the US. So in the end, China had to play the rare earth's card and it's a choke hole. The US has no response to it. When China played it, the US who should have been aware that that cut was there was surprise. It was initially angry, but in the end they recognized the reality. And so a deal has more or less been struck and China is buying the soybeans and it will continue to improve. So against this backdrop, the Taiwan issue will no longer be as hot and this will affect the domestic politics in Taiwan in the balance between blue and white and green. after Trump carried out his operation in Venezuela and kidnapped uh Maduro. He had an interview in the New York Times and he was asked what if Ciinping was to do to Taiwan what you did to Venezuela. Trump said what is for Cing Pin to decide? He knows I'll be very angry. Full stop. If you were Taiwanese, you say, "Oh, so my back stop is US being very angry, not US military support." If you're pinging, you say, "H maybe I should plan a Venezuelan operation in Taiwan and maybe leak it out so that the Taiwanese know it." I think the new realignment of forces will cause a change in Taiwanese domestic politics. It's interesting that the KMT now is reaching out to China. Uh the new chairman Chung I think is likely to meet Singing Ping in the near future. The preparations have already been made. When the deputy chairman of the KMT called on Wang Huning in Beijing, I think they were sorting out the logistics. And it's interesting Wong Huning reiterated, but there's no market with the non blueing also said which was current formulation. and a formulation which siting Ping had used a number of times. Wong Huning repeated it. What China is in fact saying is okay we understand there is a division of views in Taiwan. What about now? That will bring blue and white together. Then green will have to respond. So Taiwanese politics is shifting. So what's happening in Taiwan itself is actually the thing to watch rather than what is going to happen to Taiwan straight or whether war is going to happen to Taiwan straight which we have been talking about. I mean, previously
>> War is highly unlikely. I mean, the US military knows that even if there's war, they're not likely to win. The aircraft carriers will all be attacked by Chinese hypersonics. And without aircraft carriers, how do you bring military force to bear and and even if you can, TSMC will be destroyed? And after that, where do you get your Nvidia chips? China has alternatives. But the rest of the world has no alternatives. So I don't think there'll be war over Taiwan. But China will still be making all kinds of plans.
So um I want to look at the US again and in the west especially the US there's a lot of talk about anti-westernism. Even discussions of like the east rising, the Asian century or China's century of humiliation are often framed that way. In his double speech, Trump called on the west, the US and Europe to stand together and keep shaping human history together. Some see this as the US leading the west in tearing down the old order, which means the US is still leading and having the energy to renew itself and the world. How do you see this east west divide?
There's always been a hope that western solidarity can help to contain China's rise. When the Berlin wall fell and Russia joined the world, we joined the world. They talked about a western assembly stretching from Vancouver to Vladivosto. But with the Ukraine war, we know that Russia will be Russia and Russia will calculate in his own self-interest. And in some ways, the West is pushing Russia into closer friendship with China. And with Trump now, it's quite clear that America is calculating for itself. It wants Greenland for itself even though Greenland is already part of NATO. So the idea of a western alliance can no longer hold. It was never realistic in the first place because there's no history of such an alliance being a political alliance. It is a civilizational thing but it's never been a political construction. You talk about uh a westernism a westernism which is anti-China. I think we can understand the the angst among westerners losing a position of dominance over such a long period of time that it became almost exomatic that they are superior, that they are more civilized, that they are more beautiful, that their aesthetics are universal aesthetics, that their values are universal values. And now you have Asia reemerging, asserting different systems and values and eventually of aesthetics. It's hard for them to accept initially like the stages of grief. The first stage is denial. It's it's it's not real. The data is false. It's make believe. They're just copycats. Then it becomes anger. They stole from us. They did not invent these things themselves. They cheated. They reached intellectual property agreements from denial to anger. Now the anger is giving way to bargaining because they may think what they want but the reality of China's advance in AI in motor cars in battery technology there's no escaping it. Certainly that. So now they're talking about what about you investing in our countries now and we setting certain minimum prices for your cars and you transferring some technology over the last two stages of depression and acceptance. They have to go through all those stages before they become objective and say look hey this is a fact. We got to live with it. We've got to analyze it clinically unemotionally and respond to it. And it begins with ourselves. What's wrong with ourselves? Which means stop blaming others. This is a process the west has got to go through and it bears upon what you said earlier about a westernism which appears to be very anti-Chinese at this particular period
and you would also think that Chinese or Asians confidence would have increased have strengthened over the years because there was one time when you know Asians were publishing books like can Asians think or like Chinese they're publishing books like China can say no So this this is a totally different period from we have moved on from that is is that so
>> Oh, you find growing self-confidence all over Asia now in China in India Korea Japan is in a difficult position because it was under the American thumb for so long they want so hard to be a normal country it's so difficult because there are still 50,000 American troops in Japan and a constitution was imposed upon them. They're still unable to fully recognize what happened during the Pacific War when they did terrible things. So, Japan will go through a longer transition, but you find that growing self-confidence emerging all over Asia. And what you hope is a self-confidence that enables you to do great things is good. But a self-confidence which leads to arrogance and hubris there will be a disaster. In other words, China must not go back to the chain long era. It must not think that it is so great, so powerful that everyone has to listen to China and to come to China to pay homage. Humility is very important and the moment you become proud you stop learning the decline begins.
But we see that a lot of breakthrough technologies are actually still coming from the west and uh they are reshaping the world. Um Ilo Muskin um you know have always said that he envisions a future where machines handle most work and people pursue personal interests. He said AI and robotics could make traditional jobs largely optional within 10 to 20 years and productivity will enable a universal high income. How do you see a world shaped by shared by humans and machines? What kind of social compact might exist between the government and its people?
When new technologies appear in world history, societies respond in different ways. Some take on to the new technologies like fish to water. They immediately adopt it both for defense and for production and they go ahead. Others find these new technology technologies disruptive and say no no no we should control it. maybe hold it back so that we maintain social stability. These societies will slide behind. So every time there's a new technological challenge impinging on humanity, there is almost a realignment of the league table of countries. Some will go ahead, others will slight behind. And that was what happened 500 years ago when science scientific inventions enabled western society to make remarkable advances in uh we weaponry in uh techniques of warfare in social and financial management. So western society were able to move very rapidly and move far ahead of older societies like China and kingdoms in India. So how we respond to technology is very important and in AI the contest seems to be between the US and China. The US for a long time had the best universities and research institutions in the world. So they have an advantage. But when it comes to application of these new technologies, I think China is much more formidable. The founder of Huawei Renfe said there's a divergence in the US. Now when they look at AI, they're talking about who will win the AI race as if there is a a gold medal which you can win and become number one. But what does it mean? You can solve complex equations. What does it mean for people, for society, for the economy? China is going in the other direction. Whatever advance we make in AI and you continue to advance quickly apply it to all aspects of society help people help clean up the air, water, the land, improve maintenance, production, agriculture, safety, aeroplanes, drones, ships, railroads. China is moving in a way which will advance the economy whereas for the US among the magnificent seven the attitude is almost winner takes all who can be number one so I pay more for your software engineers and put them to my team and the valuation is out of the world it's oneird of US stock market once China made large language models open source I don't see how the magnificent 7 can generate the revenue streams justifying their high valuations and if that turns out to be a bubble there are enormous consequences for the global economy. So yes, technology is upon us and will transform society in dramatic ways and how each society responds to technology amilarating side effects and extracting the maximum advantages for a broad spectrum of society. Those become very important and in every society there'll be new divisions and if these new divisions are not addressed they will be held back by social conflict. It could be wealth inequality it could be people losing jobs people feeling dispossessed because now the machine or the robot has replaced me and they feel resentful.
With your experience as Singapore's foreign minister from 2004 to 2011 and your ongoing work advising leaders around the world, what guidance would you offer Singapore on navigating diplomacy in today's rapidly changing world? How can small and middle powers cope with the current chaos and flux while the new world order is nowhere to be seen?
Well, our weakness and our strength is in our small size because we are small, we are compact, we're well organized. We should be able to respond more quickly than others. It requires us to be utterly cold-blooded in our analysis of technological change and political change in the world. We cannot make the world in our own image. We have to accept the world for what it is. If India and China quarrel with each other, well, we can't change that. If they make up, we can't change that. But we must know what's happening and position ourselves accordingly within the neighborhood in Assean. We have some influence and it's very important to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood as our own buffer for defense and for economic development so that whatever happens the region itself is politically stable. Others can bully us and we are not fighting among ourselves. So this is Singapore. We accept the world for what it is. We're price takers. But being small also makes us very vulnerable. I was from the military before. And I sometimes I m over in the age of drone warfare of information warfare. Singapore is even more vulnerable. I mean all you need to do is to pick up all the power stations. What are we left with? Our infrastructure are not easily defended. And in the old days, you can shoot down aeroperanes or have counter battery fire against artillery. But today, you could be facing tens of thousands of drones. Then you got to think of drone warfare. And drone warfare at the heart of it is information data. So your data centers the integrity of your IT both physical and cyber warfare Singapore size being small is an advantage but it's also a very serious vulnerability but that's what keep keeps us on our toes you know if we are not always feeling anxious I think we we may become more relaxed we may end up making small things big. But if there's a sense of danger, a sense that things may turn against us, then big things are big, small things are small and that keeps us closer together.
>> Mhm.
>> You know, in a family, if there's a lot to eat, a lot to wear, little things become big points of friction. But if there's a sense of danger, the small things are small. Just ignore them. So when Singapore says it does not want to take sides, do you think this is something that is shifting or this is a a path?
>> Taking sides is a dynamic thing because between China and the US, it's a it's a dynamic game. We cannot say I just stay put. You know, in Tai Chi, if if you're not if you're not moving, you're unstable. If you think that you can be stable by not moving, you are very unstable. You are stable only by moving all the time and that is politics, foreign politics and domestic politics. We must move all the time to maintain stability because the world is changing.
Are you still a very firm believer of the multipolar world like what you mentioned just now that the world is moving into multipolarity and it is a path that is a trend that will not reverse itself.
>> Yes, I think that that that is clear. But what is a pole may not be just countries. It could be networks within within a country. Citizenship is no longer what it was in the past. Patriotism is no longer as strong of force as it was in the past. people today shift citizenships. They shift their places of doicile. I mean so many Singaporean families would have members of the family who are non Singaporean but still maintain links of family of ethnicity of religious ties. So when we talk about multipolarity there are many dimensions to it not just westfillian.
But what if some commentators they argue the term is used by coercive powers to justify spheres of influence while presenting them as multipolarity? I mean some Americans I mean you see them writing such kind of essays that's criticizing the idea of multipolarity itself. You know, the Canadian prime minister Khani in Davos, they said they were pretending that there were rules when in fact there were no rules. He said we should stop living the lie. The reality is in all matters force is a factor. And when Mung said Chang ultimately force decides. But if you only use force, you can only succeed for a short period. In the end, you need moral force, not physical force. And moral force requires you to do the right things and have a sense of values. Israel today may have great physical force projection in the Middle East, but it has lost its moral standing. And that's a great weakness. And a society to be strong must be both physically strong and morally upright. You can't have one without the other. So do you see the US as losing its moral standing now in all
>> Oh, in the last few years the US has lost a lot of it moral authority he's become openly selfish almost rebelling in his selfishness and um it's very sad because many of us grew up with a very deep admiration of American society American institutions and American values but now when you look back maybe all that was just the outer layers but we have to be realistic when it comes to all countries, all societies, interests are important. So the Chinese are very realistic. They say don't talk about good relations if they're not founded on common interests. If there are common interests, yes, we can have good relations. If there are no common interests, then good relations are superficial and fragile.
I want to come to the last question for this interview. Living in Singapore, we are very lucky to enjoy some stability amid a really rapidly changing world. Globally though, uh challenges are mounting including like what we discussed, you know, tech and wealth gaps at widening, regional conflicts, over 120 million forcibly displaced people, stalling economy, slow population growth, um increasing military spending. Now with all these in mind, are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future?
I just came from a Chinese New Year lunch hosted by Prime Minister. It's an annual event. It was nice to meet old colleagues, some on walking sticks, some on wheelchairs. But wonderful memories of working together, struggling together. But there was no complacency. When we sit down and talk to one another, it's always about our worries for Singapore. The day we stop worrying, there will be no Singapore. So the fact that we're always worrying about technology, about social divisions, about the neighborhood, about big power confrontations, that is a sign of our health.
So you still have a lot of faith in the Singapore administration and the Singapore government and the path that we are taking.
>> I have some faith but tinged with a lot of worry.
>> Are these worries are mostly because of external factors or
>> Because the world is changing
>> Mhm.
>> So quickly. It's almost as if the world is changing overnight. Every morning we wake up, you check your mobile phone. Oh, this has happened. Trump has said that bombs has been dropped, missiles have flown. Let us look at the markets. Oh, gold price is shooting up. Silver has dipped. Why? This is the world that we're now in. History is accelerating. And if we are complacent, if we think that everything is okay, then we're in serious trouble. So, anyone who gives a pleasant reply to that question, that itself is a big problem.
Thank you very much. Thank you Mr. Yu for sharing your insights with us. I think we have a lot to think about. At the end of this uh interview uh we would like to present you with a small gift. It is a portrait of you.
>> Thank you. Who knew this?
>> Yeah. As a colleague and she's an artist. Yeah.
>> You made this portrait of you using Yeah. digital.
>> Thank you. I like it. I like it very much.
>> Yeah. Thank you.
>> Please thank the artist for
>> Yes. Yes. Right. Thank you.