Transcription
[music] [music] [applause]
Thank you all for coming here tonight. I was just informed that I should keep the microphone literally touching my chin like this, which might look a little bit weird, but it's very important for the quality of the audio later because the whole event will be recorded and then we will be able to share it with all of you later. Why? Because trust me, uh I was I'm privileged enough to now know George for several years. My brother knows him for what is it 10 years now. And uh my experience with George was that you need to listen and then you need to really think about what George said and it's good to relisten it to it again. So that's why I insisted with the team that we have a very well-recorded video and audio session which we'll share with all of you later.
So I want to welcome all of you to Luxembourg School of Business. Of course, I see a lot of students, a lot of familiar faces, but also a lot of friends of the school, faculty or people from all different sort walks of life here in Luxembourg. Uh we really appreciate you coming here tonight uh to listen to really something that I think will be uh quite informative. Today we spent a wonderful day with George showing him around Luxembourg, meeting some of the key decision makers here and uh you know it made me realize how privileged I am to be at LSB and you know to be in the business of dealing with excellent people and learning something every day.
Now [clears throat] for those of you that know me, uh you know I like to sometimes improvise, but this time I will not improvise with the introduction of George. Uh, I will make sure to properly read your bio, George, because it's long and it's very rich and I don't want to miss anything. So, for those of you that are here today, we [snorts] are very happy to have with us Mr. Georgio coming all the way from Singapore, first time in Luxembourg. Georgio is currently a visiting scholar at the Lee Kuwanu School of Public Policy at the National University in Singapore. George was also for quite a long time member of the government in Singapore and held different positions from minister of finance to minister of foreign affairs, trade. He was a very close collaborator with basically people that have built Singapore into what it is today. George has a bachelor's in engineering from Cambridge University and then an MBA from Harvard Business School. He began his military career also as a signals officer in the Singaporean army. Crossed over to the air force, became chief of staff of the air staff and the director of joint operations and planning in the ministry of defense with the rank of brigadier general. [snorts] George or Mr. Yo was also a member of the pontipical commission for reference on the economic administrative structure of the holy sea in the Vatican from 2013 to 14 and then member of the Vatican council for the economy from 2014 to 2020. George is the part which I will skip is George is on many different boards today. George is also on the advisory board of ESA business school. So George has a very good understanding of what business schools are and the value they bring to society. Not just because he went to one at Harvard, but because he's actively involved with one of the top business schools in the world. [snorts] Other than that, George was also the chairman of the Singapore Summit from 2012 to 2016.
So without further ado, George, I hope I did a relatively good introduction. I always feel guilty when I try to introduce you because again it's a complicated task with those achievements. But today I want to explain in what capacity George joins us. We live today in a world that's moving uh you know quite fast and starting to move in quite unpredictable ways and here specifically in Luxembourg where everybody comes from somewhere else and today I was asked how many nationalities there's the LSB. Sometimes I say more nationalities than people because we often have double nationalities, right? So we wanted to try to bring some really actually insightful knowledge I would say to you to all of our students here in the community to really try to a little bit better understand the world today because as a business school you cannot just focus on studying business. business within if you remove it out of its wider context doesn't work. So you can make sure that you you know do your job well but then global political situation changes and you know your whole country's model needs to adapt. So we really believe that you cannot understand what you're doing today unless you have an understanding of the society that we live in. So with that in mind we're going to have today a panel. Well I'm going to actually interview George. It's not really a panel and then uh I'm going to start with some questions and then we will later continue with questions from the audience which is always the fun part. So we can start.
Uh thank you Marine for the introduction. You know there's no direct flight from Singapore to Luxembourg. So my wife and I transited through Amsterdam. So we entered Shenhen in Amsterdam and we were I think we're on the wrong queue because there are number of Africans in front of us and the immigration officer gave special attention to the passports and for the first time I saw an im immigration officer with droolers micro eye eyeglass you know to scrutinize it. It took forever but luckily a separate queue was open. So when it came to my turn, the immigration officer asked, "Where are you going?" I said, "I'm going to Luxembourg." And for what purpose? I said, "Well, to give a lecture." You're a professor. I'm not a professor, but I said, "Yes, just to keep the answer simple." Then they asked, "What are you lecturing?" I said, "Yeah, politics." And they said, "Yeah, I would like to listen to your lecture." That surprised me. The immigration officer in Amsterdam wanted to listen to a lecture on geopolitics. So I kind of mowed over this. You see, we are now in the period of world history where everyone is a little afraid. What's going to happen next? When you wake up in the morning, Israel has bombed Qatar, something happened in Ukraine, something happened somewhere else, the US may invade Venezuela, who knows? And in every boardroom, geopolitics has become the single most important risk factor. How do we make sense of the world today? We are not in the business of crystal ball gazing. But we know where the world is today and 10 years from now we have a sense of what the world will be like 10 years from now. In between it's impossible to predict what will happen precisely because if you could you'd be very wealthy but you have a sense of the direction. So what will the world be like say 10 years from now? Well, for sure it be a multipolar world. Will the trial of strength between the US and China end by then? I doubt it. Will there be a peace agreement on Ukraine where Europeans and Russians are happy with the outcome? I doubt it. [clears throat] Will there be an equilibrium in the Middle East where Israelis and Palestinians walk with ling arms to the rising sun? I doubt it. Will America continue to dominate the world the way it did in the past? I doubt it. It will be a multipolar. Of that we can be sure and perhaps nothing more symbolically important than the recent summits in China where you had Singing Ping, Putin and Modi holding hands and in Beijing where Sitting Ping mashed out with Putin on one side and Kim Jong-un on the other and further on Tokai [clears throat] F and Prao. Why Tokai F and Pragu? Because in 2013 when Singping announced a belt and R initiative, he did it first in Astana and of August and then more than a month later in Jakarta. China has an old state craft and for them symbolisms are very important. The parade is to is to all people, right? Because the marching was perfect. It was ridiculously perfect. I was a soldier before. I had to command parades. I thought, "Wow, how did they do that? You can practice every day and you may still not achieve that." But somehow they were able to do it in the Pentagon. You might have read the report [clears throat] that the orders for pizza from Papa Joe and Dominic shot up four times because they all watching carefully who were there and what were the weapon new weapon systems being displayed? Why did China invest so much time and effort? Is it to intimidate the world? I think for sure Trump was an important audience for them because what they don't want is for the Americans to miscalculate and trigger off a war with China. They have to show some cards so that Americans would hold back. They were hoping that India would be on their side against China. But I remember meeting Jay Shanka the foreign minister in Abu Dhabi. I asked him will India by the S400. I said the US will sanction you. You say by the for S400 and if they want let them sanction us. I had no doubts that India will calculate in his own self-interest. Perhaps there was a time when they thought, yeah, they could make use of the US against China. Then when the Ukraine war happened, the US expected India to repudiate Russia. India would never do that because Russia was a strategic partner for decades. And when after Bahal Gam they had this air war with Pakistan where India was bloodied you know and India wanted the US to support them against Pakistan. The US would not do it. Instead Trump invited the army the armed forces chief to the white house for lunch and he promised to nominate Trump for the Nobel Prize. India it's an adult relationship between India and the US and when Modi went to Tensing for the SEO meeting it was partly to signal to the Americans we will calculate in our own self-interest China has been very careful to keep its relationship with India as much on an even queue as possible because it is not in China's interest to have the rest of the world gang up against it. In a sense, he has been fortunate because the Ukraine war, the Middle East, these are distant conflicts. So the Chinese approach is don't get too involved. Don't be a troublemaker, be a peacemaker, but it's not a bad thing for American and Western attention to be diverted away from China. I think Europe [snorts] is in a very difficult situation because European leaders were charging ahead with the US up front and suddenly the US turned around and said I'll be mediator and they were still charging and they're still charging today and the Americans have decided that hey you you should make peace with Russia. I think this Leadership crisis in Europe will continue for a period of time. But at the end of it, Europe must find its own center of gravity and act in its own self-interest. It will always have a strong relationship with America for historical and civilizational reasons. But Europe has its own interest. This will be Russia, in the Middle East and in Africa. To me, what is most worrying for Europe is high energy prices because energy price, energy efficiency and availability undergurs all economic activities. In fact, it undergurs all biological life and is a key driver of evolution. If you have excess energy whether because you can eat more, you can eat up somebody eat somebody else to acquire energy from that person or animal then you can reproduce and you can defend yourself. And once you move into AI, the limiting factor will be energy because all coding requires energy to reverse entropy. And if you have high energy prices, you'll be in trouble sooner or later. I mean, Libya was going to be a major provider of energy to Europe. It's got enormous oil and gas resources. I always suspected that Americans did not want that. The Chinese were major investors in Libya. Today, Libya is a basket case. Russia supplied cheap energy to Europe. Well, today that's passed. America is now a supplier of energy to Europe and Europe pays a premium for it. I don't believe this will continue for too long because European industry is being undermined. So we look further ahead. Europe cannot depend upon Trump striking a deal with Putin. And even if sitting ping were cooperative, there would be no deal because in the end the deal must be between Europe and Russia and it has to be based upon a knowledge of history because Russia is not going to disappear. Poland is not going to disappear. The Baltic states, the Balkans will always be uneasily at the junction of where major tectonic plates meet. So if you cast our minds ahead the world will be multipolar. It will not be a stable equilibrium. It be a dynamic equilibrium. Some of you might have read the famous Chinese science fiction, the three body problem that if there are three suns circulating around each other, the mathematics is almost impossible to solve. And if you have planet in that system, [clears throat] your days and nights are completely unpredictable. And this is at the heart of the of the science fiction. In a multipolar world, there will be many suns or big planets circulating one against the other. So the dynamics will be complicated and I think that's the reason why the immigration officer in Amsterdam [laughter] wanted to listen to a lecture on geopolitics because instinctively people feel the world is out of joint and they're not quite sure how to react. Where do I live? Where do I go to school? How do I diversify my assets? What languages do I want my children to study? In earlier periods of history, every time you had a kaleidoscopic change in global politics, the future is often to be found in the interstitial spaces. So during the medieval period, you had the free cities like the cities of Hansa which today are still called the free and hansiatic city of Bergen or Leek or Hamburg. Into those cities float money and talents wanting freedom. Now in some ways what we achieve in Singapore foreshadowed the Asia that we see today. The cities of China, Southeast Asia and India, they've all studied Singapore for our successes and mistakes more than we ourselves realize. In Europe after the war, the banu countries played a major role. If we look into the future, maybe the smaller countries in their discomfort with the current equilibrium and wanting to find pathways for themselves in them we may find ideas for the future. you know, Oruban is kind of cancelled in Europe, but I like him, you know, and I'm going to Hungary and I just read the speech he gave recently where he said, you know, Western Europe will be in trouble. The future of Europe will be in Central Europe. Now, after Luxembourg, I'm going to Prague. I'm going to Buddhapest. I'm going to Croatia. And I find these very interesting countries because they're not big enough. They were not former imperial powers who still when they go to Asia the instinct is to to observe, judge and lecture. You know you have all these very bright economists, journalists especially from British and American newspapers. They will go to Asia. They will spend a month interview people and then they'll write a long piece with a prescription to each and every one of us as to how we should govern our country and then we'll be more prosperous, will be happier. Then they will interview me and I I asked myself was so simple how is it in your own countries the problems remain because politics is a complicated matter. Their instinct is to immediately see us through a western template whether it's through a a template of democracy versus otaki or the theidian trap and say ah this is what going to happen to you this is your future they will be wrong because to understand I mean you must first understand history and culture No society can change its nature overnight because every day how we treat one another, our presumptions, they have to be replicated every day because otherwise life is not possible. When the Europeans went to Australia and they saw how primitive the aboriges were, they thought the best way is to take their children from their parents, educate them in modern schools and provoke them into the modern world. The outcome was completely different from what they anticipated. I still can't forget what I saw in Western Australia in Pubra where you have the largest iron deposit in the world. The sun was setting and I saw all these Aboriginal people gathering in the open field. So I asked my host, what are they doing? He said they're gathering now. They will drink alcohol into the night till they're peace drunk. They do that every day. He said, "Yes, you cannot take a people, cut them off at the knees and transplant them as you would marot a plant. It's not possible." The same thing with the Aboriginal people in North America where the incidence of drug addiction, alcoholism remains very high. Begin with where people are and from within themselves help them. And to me the best example is what the Jesuits did when they went to China. You many of you will be familiar with Matthew Richie. I mean Ignatius Loyola he was a because of war but he wanted to convert China. So he said who would do so and Francis Xavier put up his hand. I mean the audacity you know. So he went to Japan in the end he died in the Pearl River Delta. He never really set foot on mainland China. But when the Italian Mati went to China, [clears throat] he thought, well, the Chinese would respect monks the way Europeans did. So he he dressed as a Buddhist monk and they scorned him because the Chinese look down on monks, you know. He said, "Ah, but they look up to scholarship." And Matthew Richi had an an encyclopedic mind and a photographic memory. So he learned the Chinese language. Recently I attended a lecture from a priest and a professor from Boston College, a Jesuit institution where they where they have archives of Matthew Richie's handwriting. He learned calligraphy. He developed his own fanatics to study Chinese and he impressed the Chinese by scholarship. And one of the most difficult things to do was to translate deos into Chinese because the Chinese did not have a European conception of God. [clears throat] They have a conception of heaven. [clears throat] The emperor was the son of heaven. Tinsu. The world was below heaven. Tensia and the legitimacy to rule is tenming the mandate of heaven. So he translated deos into tinsu the lord of heaven in other words not to interfere with secular political matters that's for the emperor but what is above the emperor until today the translation of the catholic religion in Chinese is tenu the religion of the lord of heaven [clears throat] the catechism books of that period they all had Jesus, Mary, Joseph the apostles, Moses, Abraham as Chinese people because you cannot persuade highly intelligent people that their gods are foreign. They have to be off themselves. And little by little, they indigenize the Catholic religion in China. But of course, they failed. The Vatican is still trying. It's an old civilization. [clears throat] It's like millions of lines in the operating system. You can't just alter one part and expect it to function. You can't do to the Chinese what the British did to the Aborigines or the Americans did to the American Indians. You can't do that. So when Cinping said Christianity must be cynicized, the western view is cynical. Oh, he's trying to corrupt the Catholic religion. No, what he's saying is for it to take root, it must emerge from their very being. So when we talk about multipolar world whether we're talking about India or Brazil or Africa or China or Russia first understand their history their intellectual and philosophical underpinnings and if you seek to change them assuming you you have right on your side work from within themselves and First be prepared to also learn from them because if you don't don't learn from them, you can't teach them. I mean as teachers we know if we arrogate to ourselves a monopoly of knowledge our students will lose their respect for us immediately. They've already Google they've already somehow have a sense of the subject. If you see a doctor and he dismisses what you say which you found out from Chad GPT, you lose respect for the doctor. He must say yes Chad GPT says this, the books say that, but there are these considerations. Then you'll be persuaded. But if you are not prepared to learn, you cannot teach. But it takes time. It takes effort. China, China is a big subject. Russia is a big subject. India is a big subject. Africa is a big subject. Of course, we can master everything. But the key is attitude. There must be a humility that what I know and my perspective is limited by my own past and someone else observing the same phenomenon might have a very different view. And once the attitude is centered in this way, communication flows and the world becomes more comprehensible and the possibilities for win-win outcomes much improved. What is worrying today is almost a refusal to understand each other. I'm very sensitive now when I'm Europe. I mean in in East Asian circles, Singapore is S, Russia is R. So we're we're permanent neighbors. So I've seen Putin many times. I've seen Lavro many times. I count Lavro as a friend. But when I come to Europe, I'm very careful not to say that because my European friends may get angry with me. But why should they be angry with me? If you want a solution, your approach should be you know Lavro, tell me about him. What animates him? What are his fears and concerns? Knowledge. I attended a peace forum in Singua University. I saw I did not see a single senior American. [clears throat] I asked my Chinese host. I said, "Did you not invite them?" I said, "We did, but they won't come because they were afraid of being criticized at home." Can you imagine that? How can you seek a solution if your starting point is I do not want to talk to the other side? And if you will not talk to the other side, you will begin to demonize the other side. And then you think of harming that other side. you demonize, you dehumanize, you work yourself into a loose loose outcome. Whereas if we understand one another and almost be curious about the differences that that separate us that make each of us unique, then the possibilities for collaboration for win-win outcomes becomes much greater. Thank you.
>> [applause]
>> Thank you very much George. So for this uh now we're going to start with some I'm going to start with some questions. We will also open to the audience. I would just ask you try to keep the thing on your chin uh so that we have proper sound.
>> Uh let's start like this. So my my first question is when you look at the big countries the way you would manage big countries let's keep that aside you have been involved and were quite instrumental in developing Singapore's foreign policy in a very interesting period of time you were also quite close to Lee Kuwanu the founder of modern Singapore as we know it so here we are in Luxembourg and there's a lot of people from all over the world whose interests are in Luxembourg in the success of this country what can we as small countries Singapore Luxembourg but I would even include any country other than the large superpowers let's call them what how can small countries best act in this world that is shifting that some say is going towards multipolarity others maybe disagree doesn't matter so how how can we protect our interest how should we think about existing close to our larger neighbors that have interests that are not always necessarily aligned with ours.
Henry Kissinger and Lie Kuanu were good friends and I think they spoke every month right up to the final days. Kissinger was fond of describing Lie Kuanu in Singapore as being cold bloodooded. He said they're so clinical in analysis. There's no emotion. If there is a genocide, if there's a war, if there are conflicts, they just analyze the forces at play. Almost no illusion of our ability to change the world. You're a price taker. This these are the prices. How do you respond? Because as a small country, we have to be realistic. We cannot change the world. We can't change China. We can't change Europe. We can't change America. We can't affect the relationships. We may have some agency in our own little neighborhood maybe in Assean a limited agency. That's all. First have no inflated view of our own capabilities and be cold blooded. Be utterly realistic. So you cannot afford to have prejudices because prejudices blind you. Which is why whether you whether you are from Japan or China or Europe or Africa or America, you go to Singapore, you find that okay, it's a it's a fair platform. You know, people will accept you for what you are. And Luxembourg is in the same situation. People come here because they say, "Look, if I go to Germany or France or Britain, I'm a minority. But here, yeah, I get a fair shake. So as a small country you cannot afford to be subjective. You have to be objective and given the environment ask yourself how do I position myself? Where do I add value? How do I serve others so that I can make a living? Because no one comes to you out of charity. I mean Singapore is quite clear if we don't serve others we don't eat. So the mentality is that of servicing the customer. You know in most countries airports are a monopoly and so you get badly treated. You're intimidated. You are you have no power in the transit lounge. People can rough you up. You can be detained. They can rummage through your your computer or phone and you have no say about it. But no one has to go through Singapore. If they come to Singapore, it's because they can buy cheaper, they can sell dearer, they get lower energy prices, the bits and bites travel faster, they get better information. So the moment you land at Changi airport, you have a sense that it operates like a departmental store. We want footfall. We want you to come in [snorts] to spend more time and we don't give you the a sense that we're doing you a favor that the moment you leave the airport you feel a great sense of relief that I've cleared an obstacle course which is the common experience in airports around the world when you have monopolies. This is the attitude small countries should always have.
Thank you. Tell me this uh how do let's say in this case Singaporeans but I would say Southeast Asians in general how do you view Europe and Europeans except for Thailand all of Southeast Asia was colonized by European powers and their imprint remains profound whether it's in Indonesia or Indochina or Singapore Malaysia but Europe today is no longer a a major power in the region. [clears throat] Their historical memories, they are not all negative because when the Japanese came to Southeast Asia during the war, they were so rough and brutal that local people looking back to an earlier period of colonial rule felt that western colonial rule was much better than being under Japanese occupation. But the metropolitan powers arranged for people friendly to them to take over power. So lieu for instance was supported by the British. But in some countries there was revolution in Indonesia in Vietnam. So they had to fight bitter wars to achieve the independence. So their view of European powers are still colored by that. But on the whole when they look at the world now what concerns them most is the battle royale between the US and China. That concerns them the most. The China account is growing for everybody because China is not the biggest trading partner of every country in Southeast Asia and people do not want China to have too much influence over them. So they seek diversification. They will want the Americans to be around, but the Americans often arm twist you to choose between them and China. And that's very unpleasant because we don't want to choose, you know, we want to have to be friendly to both. The Chinese are prepared for us to be friendly to the Americans provided we don't gang up the Americans against China. But the Americans want us to gang up with them against China often and that makes us uncomfortable. I tell my American friends, if you don't take that position, [clears throat] if you don't force a choice, then you will be welcome everywhere. Every door, every window will be open to you. But if you force a choice, you may not like the answer. But to create more room for maneuver, we want Europe, Japan, India, Australia to be present in Southeast Asia.
So tell me um we [clears throat] we during some of our discussions in the last two days with people, we've noticed uh that uh several people were asking what's your take on the military parade that you already mentioned in Beijing? uh how should we in Europe that are now experiencing uh war uh on the continent uh you know and which came as a surprise to many how should we think about this prospect of potential war in Southeast Asia and the question of Taiwan what's uh what's Singaporean view on that
China is a huge polity. It's got a vast population and to govern such a big country, you can't just depend on laws and regulations. You need symbols. So the governors of China have always required the management and manipulation of public symbols. So this idea of rituals involving thousands of people and sometimes across the length and breadth of a vast country [snorts] is a necessary part of governing China. This is confucious confusionist philosophy. You know if a group of Chinese take photographs, take a group photograph, they know where to stand. If you are not senior, you stand on the side. You avoid the chairs. It's for senior people. And among the senior people, they've already done a mental ranking of who of who is the most senior. So when they exchange cards for many in the west it's just well just information but for the Chinese when they exchange cards they are doing a mental ranking of who are in the room who are senior who are less senior and it affects protocol. So the idea of protocol lei in organizing Chinese society is very important. So when you watch a big bury in Tanan it is all protocol is to establish a system of governance and infuse a people with a sense of pride. Then there's a foreign audience and they need to all their neighbors so their neighbors will be well behaved towards China in their view and the Americans and the western powers so that they will not embark on misadventures. You see, but it's not easy if you're not from that world to understand the full meaning of that parade. I attended the same parade 10 years ago. It was not that much different from the last parade. But being ethnic Chinese, I kind of have a sense of how it's done. You know, to be invited is of course already a high honor. Then where do you sit? Well, that's your place in the pantheon. What time do you have to wake up to be cleared by security? What time do you have to arrive? All that is part of an elaborate protocol. And very often when you attend an event in China, they will not tell you where you sit or stand till the last moment because somebody may fall sick, somebody may be absent, an additional guest may come and like a game of Chinese checkers, suddenly everything has got to be rearranged. Then a few hours before they tell you, oh please stand on the second row on the left hand side, third place from the corner or something. They will give you precise instructions. So when the photograph is taken, everything is in the right place and everybody looking at the picture will scrutinize it carefully who's standing next to whom. Ah okay this is a pecking order. This is Confucious and is upon this that an empire has been governed for many centuries. Okay.
And what about the direct potential prospect of actual war with Taiwan? how you know that's a topic that in Europe you don't often hear discussions about Southeast Asia or almost at all but if it comes up this comes up and people sort of take it almost as a I wouldn't say for granted in a sense that it will happen but they take it for granted without there's not that much deep discussion about it so tell us uh you know as a small country in Southeast Asia Singapore how do you look at uh the potential of another small country.
>> Kissinger has often said that in his negotiations with Tuan Lai and with Mong, they always come back to Taiwan. So in the end, the breakthrough in relations when was when the US recognized a one China. It was f initially when Kissinger very cleverly came up with this phrase that Chinese on both sides of the streets recognize only one China. In 1979 when Carter established diplomatic relations with China that one China is represented by Beijing. In fact the idea of one China was first proclaimed in Cairo during the war when Chanka which Changik attended together with uh Roosevelt and Churchill and this was confirmed in Postam. So the legality of China's claim over Taiwan is internationally recognized. It's not in doubt. No one no one questions it. But America would of course want China to be divided forever if possible. But that's not going to happen because the correlation of forces is shifting. The Indoacific Command headquartered in Honolulu, they've done many exercises in the Western Pacific. The US depends on the aircraft carriers for the projection of power. Today, Chinese hypersonic missiles. Every one of those aircraft carriers are at risk. And Peter Hex, the defense secretary before he became defense secretary talked about it. So they had to be far away. But even Guam is within striking range. So the Americans will have to use cruise missiles and ballistic missiles. But China has many more of those missiles or potentially can produce many more of those missiles. A nuclear exchange is too dangerous because China has enough warheads to effectively destroy American cities. Furthermore, if there's war over Taiwan, DSMC will be destroyed. If TSMC is destroyed, America will be deprived of its chips. Europe will be deprived of its chips. But China can carry on maybe at 70 80%. But China has a quite a formidable chipm capability which is improving by the month and China now has played it most important trump card which is rare earths to which the US has no response because without the magnets you can't build F-35s you can't have your bunker buster bombs you have no defense industry and the Chinese do not want to overplay that card. So they keep the US on a short leash where they supply every six months with end user certificates. The US keeps China on a short leash on chip technology. So each has leashed the other. So I don't think there'll be war over Taiwan.
Thank you. So by the way, now I would like to open also to questions. I have some further ones, but great. Uh so I saw a lot of energy in that hand going up. So um if you don't mind uh we will we don't have another mic to go around. You can ask I'll repeat then your question to everybody.
>> Yeah I would like to thank you for sharing.
>> Uh sorry also present yourself just
>> I'm Natalia I'm from Ukraine and I'm here for three days. Thank you to give opportunity to us to say it. Thank you and I thank you for sharing and you told a very nice uh thing about the history and um that we should learn from history but you think we do not um you told that we should speak to Russia and Putin but uh I we all remember how it finished when Europe tried to to speak to Putin uh to uh uh to Germany and while while the uh second world war and it finished crucially uh and I think that nobody learned from that history and uh as a participant of the events I live uh close to them festivities and I feel every day uh the bombing and drums and attacks and I can say that I can't see how we can speak now with Russia without whole world supporting us uh with a force because they do not understand the worlds and they do not want peace with us they want to create us and uh do not have such a nation that's why I'm trying to understand why the world doesn't uh understand and don't think
>> thank you very MUCH did the back of the room hear the question. Yeah. [snorts] Okay. Good. So then I won't repeat. So George, what is the question?
>> Why the world doesn't learn from the second world?
Well, let's play back to before 2022. If we can play back and start again, what will we have done? to 2010 to 2000, what will we have done? I have a great admiration for Chancellor Helm Cole because he achieved German unification in 1994. I was a minister in attendance to him. So I had some quiet moments with him. I spoke to an interpreter and he told me how he dealt with Gobbachov. They were on the phone all the time and anything he needed they will supply. And at that time the west promised Russia that NATO will not expand eastwards. But NATO expanded eastwards relentlessly. And many western strategic thinkers including kininger and cannon and many others said Ukraine must be a buffer state and many Europeans thought that way. But there were elements in America and maybe people in Europe who felt that Russia is can never be small enough. So he kept pushing. I know how the resentment built up over Kosovo because I was sitting next to Lavro. It was building up inside. No, Maidan. I mean, the Russians thought it was a cool, but the Americans is more complicated than that. I was sitting next to Yanukovich before it happened. I was still a minister. I didn't know he he's a poker player, you know, and he's got a cut reading photographic memory. Then in the end, he had to run for his life. Before that, Kushma through his foreign minister Hin wanted a free trade agreement with Singapore. I said, "What do you want a free trade agreement with Singapore?" I said, "We will have all the advantages. You will get nothing from us. We're already tariff-free." He said, "No, no, no, no, no. We will benefit by an association with Singapore." I had long conversations with the Ukrainian ambassador in Singapore, Pavlo Sutanski. He said, "My wife will cook you Bosch." But he left before I could take up his his invitation. When the war started, I called him up. He said he evacuated to Poland, [clears throat] often within years short of machine gun fire. And since then, hundreds of thousands of people have died. So we play back. If we could start again, how would we have played it? Because if we don't conduct this exercise, we'll never be able to achieve peace because there's so much hatred, so much anger, so much pain, so much sorrow. How do you overcome this?
>> [snorts]
The Ukrainian ambassador kept on telling me that Russia will collapse internally. I said, "You cannot be sure about that and you've got to work with a Russia, they'll be around and without Western power supporting you, you're at risk. And Western power is contingent upon their own domestic politics." And now we have Trump who decided that he will no longer be leading but be a mediator. So this is a new reality. I mean if I if I'm Ukrainian I'll be very angry but what can I do? So my Alexander Stoop the the president of Finland. I knew him when he was foreign minister. He plays golf with Trump. So Trump invited him to the White House and he talked about 1944 when Finland achieved peace by giving up territory and the word Finlandization came from 1944 where you will be neutral like Austria is neutral. Now Finland has joined NATO. So Matt V is very angry. But I thought for two to make that remark in Washington given the current mood in Europe was very brave. So I dropped him a a message. I said it was a courageous statement that you made. But I think he was being hard-headed. You know in the end these are the cards. How do you play? Whatever the pain, the sorrow that's happened to achieve peace. What shape would that peace take? You know, there could be a ceasefire in the next one, two years, but I [snorts] don't believe there'll be peace for decades to come. In the same way as there's no peace in Cyprus, there's no peace agreement in Kashmir, there's no peace agreement in the Korean peninsula. And for that for all for the poison to be extracted from the soil so that people can look at at one another as fellow human beings that will take a long time. That that that's that's that's my my my response and I'm I'm very pained listening to you as I'm very pained when I communicate with the former ambassador to Singapore. But I keep on thinking back could it have been avoided? I think it could have been avoided and thank you. Thank you for the question.
[applause]
So I thank you George. I would like to give a question to our dean Patrick Van Hoot here. Patrick you're here so I'll give you the mic. Chin Mr. Joe nice to meet you. Uh glad to have you here. Um I'm a macroeconomist by training and so my question um is also going to be in that direction. Um Singapore has a trade deficit with the US. Um but still Singapore was slammed by a 10% tariff by uh Mr. Trump. Singapore chose to remain silent and to not retaliate to do nothing. My question is is that a um successful strategy looking backward? Is it paying off? What can Europe learn from that? Um and what do you expect or by when do you expect um that it's going to be beneficial for the Singaporeans?
We we take a very different view of um trade flows. When I was trade minister, I didn't care whether we had a surplus or deficit because so long as there's movement, there's [clears throat] money to be made. And Singapore, remember, at the heart of the Singapore economy is arbitrage. If the world were in equilibrium, we have no business. But there's no danger of the world being in equilibrium. It's always in this equilibrium. And sometimes in conflict, there are more opportunities because barriers will be established. The possibilities for arbitrage will grow. But if the arbitrage is too slim, we're out. It's just not worth it. Remember, we must always be a place where you can buy cheaper and sell dearer, where you can get to a destination faster by going through Singapore than if you fly direct, where you can process your data more efficiently through Singapore than through any other way in the region. That's how we make a living. But of course others will want to [snorts] compete with us. So the margin will shrink and if it shrinks beneath to a certain level we're out. So there must be no emotional commitment to any product or service. That is a mind of arbitrageer and it cannot be emotional. It cannot say oh I've been in this business. My father has been in this business. I want to remain in this business. Well, we can't afford that. That's that's a luxury. So that's that's Singapore's approach. And in some ways, but you're in the EU, that should be Luxembourg's approach. In other words, you have France, you have Germany, you have other big powers. They do certain things. Some are clever, some are not so clever. So you think through say, okay, there's a new niche for myself because they have decided to be emotional. So I will enter that niche. And that's how we approach it. in Singapore.
>> Thank you. Okay, VJ. Thank you, Marin. So, my name is Vijay Goel and I work with Arsel. Among other responsibilities, I have also responsibility for Ukraine and I'm I'm very proud of my team in Ukraine. Uh what they are doing is absolutely wonderful to stand up for their honor and right and I said they do miracles in the situation there. But my question to you first of all I'm mesmerized by uh your whole speech it's amazing but my question to you who have lived your life in politics and have met all this great politicians all over the world what do you see as a purpose of politics and geopolitics that's my first question and I say this with some some context that uh what I see now is mud wrestling that's going on.
>> It's what?
>> Mud wrestling.
>> Mud wrestling.
>> It's open. It's only with with or sometimes without underwear. Sorry. Um it's it's all in open now. Okay. Leveraging power making it a business equation or a model. I have this power, you have this power. I am I have chips. Uh you depend on my rare earth, but you depend on my chips. And so on and so forth. It's going on and on and on. Leveraging of power. Was it always like that or do you think it's become completely naked now and become completely inopen? This is my uh first part of the question. And my second part of the question is that given the
Genie index, or the difference in rich and poor, is growing as time is passing on. On one hand, on the other hand, there is AI coming in, risk of singularity or AGI. [snorts] There is change in the whole geopolitics, as you said. Also, multipolar, uh, dimensions are coming in. What is your hypothesis for a common, and who wants peace and happiness? What is your hypothesis? Where are we heading to? Two questions. Thank you.
If we're a student of history, then we'll be pessimistic about how human beings treat one another. And every time there's a new technology, we use it to kill each other until the slaughter is so bad, we begin to restrain ourselves. And this will happen with AI. The Israelis are using AI to decapitate leadership. It's scary. You listen to Alex Karp from, uh, Palantir. He celebrates it because this is clever. You see, but in the end, where does it lead to? Because you can remove the tip of an iceberg. A new tip will pop up. You can remove it again. For as long as the iceberg is there, there'll be a tip. Maybe not as sharp, maybe not as structured, but there'll be a tip, and eventually you'll be sharpened and structured. Can you get rid of the iceberg? You can try. But always remember that by 2050, 25% of the world's population will be African. [clears throat] 40% of babies will be African, and 50% of babies in the world will be Muslim. So these are the icebergs we're talking about in demographics.
So how do we deal with each other as human beings? For a brief period, this collection of atoms becomes you, becomes me, and then we return to dust. During this period, have we added or subtracted? If we see life as being zero-sum, for me to take from you so that I will enjoy life more, I'm not sure you enjoy life more because you'll die unhappy. The greatest fulfillment in life is that during that brief period when that collection of atoms becomes us as an individual, we add something to the entire field. In other words, blessed are the peacemakers because they try to achieve win-win outcomes. Of course, when we are in business, when we are in politics, we've got to work through all the game theory quadrants.
You know, I was helping Pope Francis for seven years. Usually, after a meeting with the cardinals, we will have lunch somewhere in Rome. We're on a budget, so it was a cheap lunch, but in Italy, you always get good food. Even the cheap wines are very serviceable. So we had a secretary who was a world expert in medieval canon law, a Scotsman, had a wonderful way with the English language, wrote beautiful notes and minutes. So one night he told me, "You know, George, he's very cunning, you know." I say, "Who is it?" "The Pope." "Oh," he says, "he's he he's unbelievably cunning." I was not surprised because how can you be a Pope in Italy if you're not cunning? I mean, he may be of Italian descent, but Italy is a complex environment. So I was not too concerned. I thought, it's okay, he'll be effective. A few years later, after another such dinner, he said, "You know, George, this man is holy. He's really holy." You know, normally when you know a person, initially, you may be impressed. After a while, you have a more jaded view of the person. You become a bit cynical. A person who appeared very blank turns out to be gray. A person who appeared white also turns out to be gray. But it's rare that his view became whiter. You know, from being very cunning, he said he was unbelievably holy.
So to be effective wherever we are, whether it is in the family, or in a company, or in government, if we don't understand market value, we cannot be effective because that is an important part of human behavior. But if we are not also holy, we will lose our mission, and our life will become meaningless. It is a bundle. If you read the Chinese Art of War, it begins by saying that to govern a country, you cannot not know about warfare because then you're being naive. So you have to be cunning. You have to understand the ways of the world. But he says the first factor is to understand the moral way. In other words, if what you do is not in accord with the times and does not lead to a better humanity, then in the end, you will come to grief. And therefore, the greatest victory is when you can achieve your objective without fighting. You see, the Chinese put on a parade. They show off their missiles, their drones, their tanks, and so on. I think their purpose is to tell the Americans, "Let's not fight." Then they would have achieved their purpose. Because if the objective is to fight, you end up with a Ukraine, with a Gaza. It's not only zero-sum, it's negative-sum. So I would say wherever we are, without that moral compass which makes us holy, but without at the same time having that understanding of the ways of the world, we will not be effective.
So I would like to thank you for this answer, and I believe it answers the question also, because I think one of my questions was going to be, what can business students learn directly, something applicable to their lives, to their business? But I think this answered very well. Right. Uh, next question, please. Stand up, present yourself. >> And speak up a lot. Yeah. >> Good evening, Mr. George. Thank you for giving such a wonderful insight. >> My name is Nha. I'm a student of, um, I just wanted to get an insight. H I just wanted to get an insight. Israel bombed, uh, Qatar, and, uh, in June, Iran bombed, uh, US military, uh, base in Qatar. So speaking of small countries, Qatar being such a strong economical country with great GDP, so much oil and gas, what, what is your take that why hasn't Qatar retaliated or allowed the battle to be fought on its soil? And is it an influence of American imperialism? What would be your take on that? Thank you.
I think the circumstances of Israel's attempt at decapitating the Hamas leadership in Qatar are still unclear. Remember, it was the Americans who asked the Qataris to allow Hamas to open an office there so that there is a point of coordination when you want to talk peace and negotiate. So, was America really uninvolved in this strike? I don't know. Trump denies it, but Trump may not know everything. You remember when the daughter of the founder of Huawei was arrested in Vancouver? At that same time, Xi Jinping was hosted by Trump in Mar-a-Lago. Trump was not informed beforehand. So I don't know if Trump was informed, because there are many, the US is a big government. There are many departments and and and some are involved in secret operations. But in Qatar, there's a huge air base called Al Udeid, which is the most important American facility in the entire Middle East. It is bristling with air defense systems and radars and so on. So for the Israelis to be able to fly close to Qatar and let off those missiles without being detected, it's hard to believe. Did the Qatari government know? Probably they didn't know, because the Qataris... Are you from Qatar? >> No, I used to work there. >> Okay. They are very proud people. I had dealings with them before. In 2001, [clears throat] after September 11th, the Americans wanted to shift the WTO meeting from Doha to Singapore. So one night, the Americans called me up at home to ask if Singapore can host the WTO meeting, which is only a month away. WTO meeting, hundreds of ministers, security nightmare. I said, "I have to discuss this with my Prime Minister." So my Prime Minister and Lee Kuan Yew said, "The new round is important, and we should be helpful, but we will not host. Qatar will host. We will provide the facilities, tables, and chairs, and security, but it will be attenuated. In other words, the delegations will have to be smaller." Then the Americans put pressure on the Qataris to agree. They were angry with the Americans, and they were very angry with Singapore for even agreeing to the possibility of Singapore hosting the WTO meeting. The meeting did not shift. When I went to Qatar, the minister greeted me with an iciness which left me frigid, you know. But I was very helpful to him. In the end, we launched the round, and by the by the end of the meetings, we became very good friends, and they say, "Come visit me later," which I did two years later. And the Amir gave me a four-hour lunch. My meetings had to be cancelled because he would not end the lunch. I was wondering, what the hell is happening, you know? And I couldn't just say, "Thank you, Your Highness, bye-bye." So I sat through it, wondering what was happening. And as we left, he said, "Do you know what happened?" I said, "What?" "No, about the WTO meeting." He said, "I called up Cheney, the then-VP Cheney, and told Cheney, 'If Qatar were not safe enough to host a WTO meeting, how can he be safe enough to host a US air base?'" Cheney called up the US representative and told him, "You go to Doha." And during the negotiations, the Indian Commerce Minister, Maran, Murasoli Maran, was very difficult because in India, you misplay trade, especially in agriculture, you lose an election. [clears throat] The Qataris threatened him that if you don't come on board, I will be expelled. So when this attack took place, my mind went back to the Qataris and my dealings with them. They are a spunky people. When the Saudis and Emiratis wanted to blockade them, who saved them? The Iranians and the Turks. They remember this. They remember their friends. They also remember their enemies. So I think there'll be consequences. And what the Israelis have done is very foolish, because if you kill your negotiators, who will negotiate with you? So in the end, you'll be left just to force. And one day, the Americans will not be as powerful as they are today in relative terms, and younger Americans are turning against Israel. The correlation of forces will change. And if you do not make use of this period when you have a strong position to negotiate a good long-term position, when the time comes, it'll be much harder. So to me, it's it's like a Greek tragedy, and the audience sees it coming, but the people on stage can't. Thank you. Uh, we have a question here. Wait, take the mic. [snorts]
Hello, Mr. Thank you for your amazing speech. I'm Winson from Côte d'Ivoire, West Africa, and here I'm a full-time MBA student at LSB. And I wanted to really thank you for the speech. And also, during your speech, you emphasized that solutions are only possible when we try to understand, uh, perspective, fears, and motivation of others. In West Africa, we have a regional organization that calls ECOWAS, who often mediate conflicts with neighboring countries or external powers of competing interests, like what we saw in DRC, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Rwanda. And from your experience in Singapore and, uh, with ASEAN, how can regional organizations foster dialogue and understanding to prevent dehumanization and conflict, and to pursue win-win collaboration? That's my question.
You're from Côte d'Ivoire. So you would know Obasanjo, who when he was president of Nigeria, he relinquished power voluntarily, and he became a very well-regarded senior African leader. He was a good friend of Lee Kuan Yew, and he wanted Lee Kuan Yew to visit Africa. Lee Kuan Yew visited Africa in the '60s. He was not optimistic for Africa, so he didn't want to go to Africa. So he told Obasanjo, he said, "Why don't you bring your friends and come to Singapore instead, and you asked me to organize a meeting?" So I got to meet Obasanjo and to like him and to respect him. Last year, Obasanjo, in a speech in Addis Ababa, he's now quite senior in years, he said, "Let us be realistic in Africa. That Western institutions do not work." What did he mean by that? That if all you do is count votes, but the primary loyalty is to your tribe, then politics is just a game to be played on how the pie should be divided among the different tribes. It becomes a game to collect rent. So you have democracy, then you have corruption, then you have unrest, then the army comes in, and the army becomes corrupt, and then you throw out the army, then you have elections again, and you go round and round. It is not a debate between autocracy and democracy. You've got to work a system which is in accord with the nature of African society, which is different in different parts of Africa. So in Ethiopia, under, up to Zerai Malis, they had a coalition. So tribal disputes were resolved centrally, and then a common policy applied to the entire country. That broke down. The Tigrayans became disaffected, and you have a festering wound. And now even the Amharas and others are not happy. In South Africa, what held them together was the ANC. But again, that is corroding. The new hero is Traoré, right? Young man. He's always in his military garb. I don't know how long he will last, but he's one of the young military leaders who threw the French out of Africa, West Africa, because the French were, they were neo-colonialists. When Gaddafi was in Libya, he fed everybody, right? So he kept the peace. The Tuaregs were all feeding from him. He kept the peace in the entire Sahel. So you remove Gaddafi, things broke down, and now there's no equilibrium. So Africa must somehow, each region must find its own way to the future based on its own nature, which is tribal division and to some extent religious division. The Americans separated South Sudan because it's Christian from the rest of Sudan. He's not brought peace either to the south or to the north, because you have not addressed the fundamental problem, which is [snorts] tribal affiliation. The army can hold the ring, but you need a political group, which at the elite level, which unites the tribes and agrees on a common policy. In effect, you'll be like a communist party, but you can't call it a communist party. It has to be African. So to me, African political development is still in a period of fermentation. But what is clear is the model cannot be Western. It cannot be Chinese. It cannot be Indian. It has to be African. And we have to vary from region to region.
>> Thank you, George. Have a seat. So Arco, uh, so one question, and then we have after your question, last two questions. Okay. So thank you so much for this, uh, great insights. Uh, I'm, I'm a student here. My name is Orco. I just wanted to ask about >> I'm from India originally. I, I just wanted to ask about Myanmar because, uh, given this year it has been a turmoil for all tumultuous year for all ASEAN countries, but Myanmar has been a bit of a riddle for almost all ASEAN countries. And as we, the year unfolded, we saw, we saw quite a lot of surprises. Mr. Trump has normalized relationship with the country, or is seeming to approach that goal. There seems to be, uh, a dual-track diplomacy going on with India engaging the Arakan Army and the junta parallelly. And the Chinese also engaging the TNNA and the MNDAA, for forcing even forcing them to give up some territory to the junta. And ASEAN staying away still from inviting Min Aung Hlaing. So in light of all these developments and in your experience dealing with Myanmar and the greater ASEAN dynamics, what would be your advice to, in the as the upcoming summits are coming up, ASEAN summit is coming up? What would be advice to, uh, the the ASEAN body and to let's say, Mr. Balakrishnan, on how to proceed with Myanmar with all these, uh, very contradictory aspects going on in the country?
No, because it's very bright. Yeah. Okay. The reason why I'm standing on the side is because it's too much light. >> The light is blinding, and I can't see the audience. Yeah. And I don't want to be turning away from you. Um, no. Myanmar will remain a festering sore. You know, you'll be at a certain level of homeostasis. There'll be no peace, no war. No one wants a country to be divided, but no one wants too strong a central authority. The army, which created modern Myanmar, is part of the problem, but we have to [clears throat] be part of the solution. In the end, it will have to be a federal polity where different regions have their own armies. They'll trade with one another. They'll fight each other from time to time, and the neighboring countries will find their own solutions where it matters to them. So China has close links with all the ethnic groups on their border, India with hers, Thailand with hers. There'll be no unitary state for a long time. But it's okay, because they don't really want the country to dissolve into civil war, and none of the neighboring countries want that to happen either. So I don't think Myanmar, the problem there will get too bad. We are affected. We don't like it. It's an infection, but it's a low-grade, continuing infection, which should remain like that for a very long time. We'll apply some salve, we give some antibiotics, and maybe the wound will improve a little bit, but it's a chronic condition. That's Myanmar. I don't think you should be too concerned that Myanmar will somehow upset the equilibrium in Southeast Asia, or between Southeast Asia and China, or Southeast Asia and India. What I'm not comfortable with is the Americans don't want the Belt and Road to succeed, and the Chinese want to bypass the Straits of Malacca by having a port in Kyaukpyu, but they have got to go through Rakhine State. The Chinese have a vested interest in peace, but the Americans don't mind trouble because that would disrupt the Belt and Road. In the same way as they don't mind Balochistan upsetting China's road to Gwadar. But in the end, I think it's for the local people to decide between peace and war. And China, in its own interest, will be on the side of peace. But distant powers looking at it and not paying the price themselves may not be as supportive of peace as those who live next door, like India and China.
>> Thank you. Actually, uh, yeah, I, I, if you don't mind, I will actually take the opportunity to ask the last question. So, sorry for those of you that were raising the hands. My last question is about probably the man that is probably the most Googled man on the planet, and a man that everybody has an opinion on, which is the American president, right now. I want to just say, obviously, in Europe, in the US, we have a different political tradition, different political culture, and to be honest, different political philosophy than in, uh, Asia. So from your perspective, and I'm not saying from China's, I'm saying from the perspective of Singapore and everything you've done in your life, how do you read the current American president? The reason why I stand up is because I want to be able to see all of you, and for you to see me.
Trump is an agent of history. In fact, he's fast-forwarding the future. He's the first American president to take a realistic view of the limits of American power. So he wants to disengage from different parts of the world. And if he doesn't say it, but if you watch him, he's trying to consolidate around North America, to include Greenland, to include the entire Caribbean, which is why he wants the Gulf of Mexico renamed as the Gulf of America. [snorts] And if he can, to bring Colombia and Venezuela under his heel. So that will be his hemisphere. Brazil, he cannot. He knows that. And if he can achieve that, in terms of the command of resources, America will remain very powerful. The budget deficit has got to be addressed one way or another. Without the US dollar enjoying its exorbitant privilege, that budget deficit cannot be sustained. One day, Americans will have to decide how 700 to 800 military bases all over the world, including many in Europe, are to be financed. Trump says, "Germany, Poland, you pay." But America still pays a lot. But if you can print a dollar, that's okay. But one day you can't print the dollar, then it's a choice between guns and butter. And the choice between guns and butter, it's quite obvious how voters will vote. Then their bases will have to be shut down one after another. And once bases are shut down in every region [clears throat] where bases are shut down, a new equilibrium will have to emerge. So Trump is fast-forwarding the future and accelerating the crystallization of a multipolar world.
>> [snorts] >> So, I mean, ignore his antics, you know, but look at him as an agent of change, like a Shiva destroying in order so that the future can be born. And all of us will look 10 years ahead, trying to predict. Trump is very difficult. Trying to predict what will happen in Myanmar or Ukraine, or I mean, you can take your best bet, but 10 years from now, the direction, I think that is clear. And Trump is hastening us in that direction. That's how I view Trump.
>> Thank you. So, nobody would like to stay here for another five hours more than me. Uh, it's incredibly interesting. It, it almost feels like you've come all this way just to talk to us for so brief, uh, so brief a period. But everything good, uh, has a beginning and an end. And, uh, today we'll stop here. I want to thank everybody, really, for coming here tonight, uh, taking your time to hopefully listen to something new and get some new insights. George, uh, I want to thank you. I hope you enjoyed your trip to Luxembourg. I'm pretty sure you did. It was quite good. Uh, I think you also had tremendous hospitality, especially today. Uh, George spent some time with the Prime Minister and also with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and I think some very interesting discussions arose out of that. Um, with that, without further ado, you know, we will keep you informed on, uh, future similar events. A couple of months ago, we had an event about defense investment in Europe. Today, we have a perspective that is, uh, quite unique, that I think Europeans are not really exposed to. So thank you for that. Thank you all for coming. Uh, see you in class for those of you that are students. Uh, welcome. Not welcome, but thank you for coming, and see you again very soon. That was a weirdo.