Transcription
[Music] Welcome to the book launch of Can Asians Think of Peace? Essays on Managing Conflict in the Asian Century. I'm Diraj Nani, and I'm a post-doctoral fellow at the Asia Research Institute, and I'll be your MC for this evening.
Can Asians Think of Peace is an open access volume published by Springer Nature, and it being open access means that you can access it for free. Indeed, the book has been accessed 46,000 times already, and it features a collection of 61 essays written for the Asia Peace Program by various distinguished scholars and practitioners from around the world.
The Asian Peace Program, or the APP for short, is housed within the Asia Research Institute. And the APP itself, uh, began in 2020, 5 years ago, by Mr. Kishaw Mabubani. And the APP aims to put forth pragmatic and implementable ideas for preserving peace and managing conflict in Asia. So, each of the essays within this volume does precisely that. They propose ideas for preserving peace in major areas of potential conflict in Asia, such as India-Pakistan and China-India relations, the South China Sea region, the US-China contest, and our own region, Southeast Asia.
Today's book launch is therefore about peace in Asia. And in light of that, I would like to introduce Professor Tim Bunnell, who is a professor of geography at NUS and a highly respected scholar of human geography with a research focus on Southeast Asian cities, particularly in Malaysia and Indonesia. He is also the director of the Asia Research Institute since 2019. It was under his able directorship and vision that the Asian Peace Program came to be housed within the Asia Research Institute. Without further ado, may I please call upon Professor Tim Bunnell to give the welcome remarks.
>> Thank you, uh, Diraj. Everyone, welcome to this event to launch the book, Can Asians Think of Peace? As Diraj has said, my name is Tim Bunnell. I'm director of the Asia Research Institute, ARI, or what we like to call ARI, at the National University of Singapore. And the reason why I'm kicking things off this evening is because ARI very proudly houses the Asia Peace Program, which commissioned, collected, and edited the more than 40 essays that comprise this, sorry, this, have my prop here, this very timely volume.
As I think everybody here already knows, the Asian Peace Program was founded and is coordinated by Kishaw Mabubani, who I'll hand over to in a moment as the lead editor of Can Asians Think of Peace. But before I do that, I'd just like to say a few words about the wider ecosystem which has enabled the production of Kishaw's latest volume and why I consider it to be so valuable.
The Asian Peace Program is a small and tightly knit but extraordinarily productive unit within ARI, which since its inception in 2020 has published monthly policy essays to document ideas for peace in Asia. And I note that the subtitle of the volume very importantly is "Essays on Managing Conflict in the Asian Century." Partly because of Kishaw's own preeminence, it's been possible to attract contributions from established policymakers and scholars, as well as to give voice to contributors from a range of other career stages. Two of the Asian Peace Program's team who are here this evening, Quesha and Kristen, are early career researchers and co-editors of the volume. And I think this in itself is a kind of intergenerational contribution to thought leadership on peace in Asia.
More widely, and without wanting to take too much undue credit, I'm pretty confident that the wider institutional milieu of ARI at NUS has provided a supportive base for the work that's gone into this volume, amongst other high-impact outputs of the Asian Peace Program over the past 5 years. More widely, and I have to say this in my, wearing my marketing hat, is a world-leading academic research institute on Asia, and so is a great place to continue to house the Asian Peace Program.
We're all very fortunate to have some highly experienced event staff, including, uh, Taming Hua and Valerie Yo, who have provided logistical support here this evening, alongside Fanny Chang from the Asian Peace Program. My thanks to you. Um, but the ecosystem, this ecosystem that I've talked about, also extends to many of you here looking at me, uh, on the stage here this evening. Many of you, of course, have supported Kishaw's program in other ways, including in terms of, of donations. Thanks to all of you, too.
So that's the supporting ecosystem side of things. Now, on to the matter of timeliness and enduring value, as, as concisely as I can. The original rationale for establishing the Asian Peace Program, against the backdrop of military clashes between Chinese and Indian troops in 2020, was that there was, in Kishaw's words, so I'm quoting here, "a credible peace initiative that was Asia-focused, Asia-centered, and Asia-led." This volume here, it is again, in case you've forgotten, this volume is one piece of evidence of the important work that the Asia Peace Program has done in responding to that need. And recent events, including along the disputed Thai-Cambodian border, are just one reminder that such work is as valuable as ever, including here in Southeast Asia.
In addition, and connecting back to the India-China skirmishes that formed that immediate backdrop to the establishment of the Asian Peace Program in 2020, it's also wonderful and apt to have Mr. George Yeo here as guest of honor. The Nanda Professorship that Mr. Yeo recently brought to ARI supports work both on historical connections between India and China, as well as prospects for their peaceful future interrelations.
But returning to the main topic today, the volume in hand, literally in my hands right now. I have a PDF version at home, which is downloading fast, and it's freely available. Um, there is no doubt that this represents a highly valuable resource for policymakers involved in efforts to generate and preserve peace within Asia and far beyond. My congratulations to all involved in the production of the volume. I know that the, uh, uh, the publishers are here this evening as well, but especially, um, congratulations Quesha, Kristen, and of course, Kishaw. And my thanks, last but not least, to Mr. Robert for hosting the book's launch in this wonderful venue, uh, here this evening. Thank you very much, everyone.
>> Thank you, Professor Bunnell, for your opening remarks. Um, so, Mr. Kishaw Mabubani certainly doesn't need any introduction. I'm going to make a vain glorious attempt to try and cobble together something. Anyway, um, he's a veteran diplomat. He's a president, what was the president of the UN Security Council, founding dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, distinguished fellow at the Asia Research Institute, author, and foreign policy thinker. And these are just some of the hats, uh, he has worn over the years. So, may I now please call upon Mr. Mabubani in his avatar as founder, head, and coordinator of the Asian Peace Program to give some remarks. Please, Mr. Mabubani.
Mr. George Yeo, Professor Tim Bunnell, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, and most importantly of all, friends. It's such a joy to see so many of my friends here, uh, in this room. And I want to begin by saying it gives me great pleasure to join, uh, Professor Tim Bunnell in welcoming you to this, uh, book launch of Can Asians Think of Peace? Some of you may know my first book was called Can Asians Think. So, my 11th book, it's Can Asians Think of Peace. And we are greatly honored that you have taken time off your busy schedules to join us on a Friday evening. This is a signal, uh, of your commitment to peace in Asia. And in my brief remarks today, I would like to explain why peace in Asia is important and yet, to be completely honest, fragile.
So, in the old, good old tradition, please let me make three points. The first point is that the past three decades of Asian growth and development have been the best three decades in 3,000 years of Asian history. And it's quite shocking how few Asians are aware of this remarkable fact about Asia. And if you have any doubts, let me give you some data of how remarkable the past few decades have been. In 1998, the combined GDP of the European Union was 10 times bigger than China. 10 times bigger. Now, EU and China are the same size. By 2050, EU will be half the size of China. And if you compare India and UK, it's a valid comparison since UK ran India for 100, 200 years. Well, as recently as 2000, the British economy was 3.96 times bigger than India. Today, India is bigger than UK. And by 2050, India will be four times bigger than the United Kingdom. An amazing transition. And even in our region, take ASEAN. As recently as 2000, Germany was three times bigger than ASEAN. Today, Germany and ASEAN are about the same size. By 2050, ASEAN will be two times bigger than Germany. So, these, this is, these are incredible, remarkable growth stories.
Now, there are many reasons for Asia's spectacular economic growth. You all know how complex the story is. I cannot spell out the many reasons here. But there was one absolutely essential condition, and that condition was that Asia remained at peace. Because if there had been major wars in our region, we would have not seen any of the development that I just spoke to you about. And this is why peace is so critical to Asia.
My second point is that even though peace is absolutely critical, there are no strong agencies, organizations dedicated to preserving peace in Asia. There is no Asian-wide department for peace. Hence, when conflicts break out, as they did recently, and we all know them, between India and Pakistan and Thailand and Cambodia, there was no high-level peace squad that descended on these conflicts and suggested and tried to find ways and means of stopping them. Those of you who read my memoirs may remember that I described as a child, some of the most vivid memories I have is of Chinese gangsters attacking each other with broken beer bottles. When that happened, we knew what to do. We called the police. The police came, took care of the problem. But if wars break out, there's no one to call. And so this shows how important, therefore, it is to try and take care of peace. We are very fortunate that none of the recent conflicts and tensions in Asia have escalated into major wars. This may be, frankly, a result of pure luck. But I also want to mention that ASEAN takes a lot of credit for preserving peace in Southeast Asia.
And my third point is that given this absence of peacemaking agencies in Asia, we hope that our tiny, and you're right in emphasizing it, it is tiny, Asian Peace Program can help to make a difference. And as, and you know, it's tiny because only four of us work in it: Quesha, Kristen, Fanny, and I. So, how can the tiny APP help out for such a vast challenge? Well, the answer is that, as we all know, when there's darkness, a small candle can make a huge difference. It can lead us out of darkness. This is what the APP hopes to do: light a small candle. And with its production of essays and podcasts, it is gently trying to suggest ways and means of taking care of points of tension in Asia. Sometimes, some of our suggestions have been implemented. For example, early on, Professor Kanti Bajpai suggested, in one of our essays, that technical means should be used to monitor the borders between India and China instead of having to send human beings to monitor the borders and face each other. Eventually, technical means were used, and we don't know whether it is the result of our essay, but it doesn't matter. If the idea is good, if it gets implemented, if it brings peace, it's worthwhile, and that's what the APP is trying to do. And over time, we hope that our other suggestions will be also be adopted quietly.
And this is why we are delighted that Springer Nature has decided to work with us to publish this open access volume, uh, which is republishing 61 APP essays. And I want to add here that my previous open access volume with Springer Nature, entitled The Asian 21st Century, was supposed to receive 20,000 downloads, but so far, it has had over 4.1 million downloads. This shows you the power of open access volumes. And even this, to this, this volume, it's only been out for barely two or three weeks, and already, in, uh, two or three weeks, it's been downloaded over 47,000 times since its release. That's the power of open access. And we hope that after today's launch and your support, this book will be accessed even more widely after our event today.
Now, before ending, I want to join Tim in thanking several people: our supportive and important donors. Many of them are sitting right here in front of me. Please, a special round of applause for our donors, uh, our essay and podcast contributors, and you will see they come from all over the world, our warm and generous host and supporters in ARI and NUS. But I also want to thank Tim Bunnell and a special vote of thanks for Mr. George Yeo. I'm sure you all agree that this is the most spectacular place for a book launch. So, thank you, Robert. Round of applause. And I can tell you, it's very special for me. I came here as a child to go to Clifford Pier to jump on a bum boat that would take me to the islands of Singapore. So, I've had a physical connection with this place for 50, 60 years already. So, to come back here for this book launch is very special. And finally, I also want to thank all of you, and I mean it from the bottom of my heart. The cause of peace is very important. The more people we can get to support it, the better off we will be. And so, I, we all, we sincerely hope that with all your support, we hope that this tiny candle will shine even brighter in the coming decades. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, Mr. Mabubani, for your remarks. Um, I would now like to turn to this event's guest of honor. And the guest of honor is more than a ceremonial role; it definitely highlights the event. And this evening's guest of honor, Mr. George Yeo, uh, has had an illustrious career that has helped preserve institutions of peace and stability in Singapore and around the world. Mr. Yeo served 23 years in the Singapore government as Minister for Information and the Arts, Minister for Health, Minister for Trade and Industry, and Minister for Foreign Affairs. Mr. Yeo also served in key roles in the Vatican City as member of the Pontifical Commission for Reference on the Economic Administrative Structure of the Holy See from 2013 to 2014, and the Vatican Council for the Economy from February 2014 to July 2020. He is a founding patron of the Asia Competitiveness Institute, a Nalanda Library Fund Limited trustee, and a member of several boards of educational and nonprofit organizations. So, it is really my great pleasure to call upon Mr. George Yeo to deliver his remarks. And Mr. Yeo, may I please request you to have a seat after your remarks in anticipation of the panel discussion. Thank you.
My dear friends, before the Arab Spring, President Mubarak visited Al Jazeera in Qatar. Many Arab governments were tormented by Al Jazeera's criticisms of their policies. And he said at the time, Al Jazeera was a small outfit. You said, "So much noise coming out from this little matchbox." Your APP is a matchbox, and a lot of noise comes out from it. And this book of 61 essays is a trove of perspectives about the challenges confronting us in the region. That a small outfit like APP could do this is remarkable. And it is not cacophonous noise. It has an underlying theme, what emanates from it, which is a bias for peace.
When Kishaw told me he was moving there to start this peace program and invited me to join him for some interviews, I wondered why he was doing it. Then I remembered that when we were colleagues in the Foreign Ministry, he was always looking for solutions to problems. You know, in any foreign ministry, there are hawks and there are doves. It's much easier to be a hawk. It's much more difficult to be a dove. If you have sharp claws, teeth, if you have, you can be a hawk and you can solve problems in a muscular way. But if there are limitations, you have to understand the reality and understand your interlocutors and understand perspectives from their standpoint. So if you have a big meat cleaver, it's okay, just chop up a carcass. But if you have a small knife, you better understand the anatomy of the carcass and know where the joints and tendons are and work your way through, and the result will be much less blood and much better meat. Kishaw has always been like that. Confronted with an issue, it could be Malaysia, it could be China, it could be Indonesia, his counsel will always be, "Hey, can we see things from this perspective?" And when we start seeing problems from the other person's perspective, and we can only do it if we respect the interlocutor, then the possibility of win-win outcomes becomes possible. You don't achieve peace by adopting it as a woke cause. And none of the essays in this book are woke essays. They are in the tradition of realpolitik, but from different perspectives, some of which we may reasonably disagree with, but always with a bias for solution, for peace.
So, in order to achieve peace, there must be a certain Machiavellian cunning. You see, you must understand how people react, what motivates them, what animates them, what's important to them, what their interests are, what their fears are, what their hopes are. You know, when I was going to the Vatican to help in Pope Francis's reform program, we had a, a priest, a Scotsman, wonderful with the English language, but with a great sense of humor. One day after dinner, we had a limited budget, so he was in a cheap restaurant, but never bad food in Italy. He said, "You know, George, Francis is, is cunning." He said, "He's unbelievably cunning." Now, that did not diminish my estimation of Francis, of Pope Francis, one iota, because how could you be a Pope and Argentinian, or be of Italian descent, working in an Italian environment, presiding over a universal church, if you were not cunning? After another such dinner in Rome, he said, "You know, this man is holy. He's genuinely holy." Now, normally, the more you know a person, your view of him becomes a bit more jaded, and maybe when you are long in the job, you become a bit more cynical. So when he said that, I thought it was wonderful. He's cunning, which is a job requirement, but he's also holy, which is a mission requirement.
How is it, and this is a generalization, of course, how is it that in Asia, there's a bias for finding ways out of conflict? I think it's because of bitter experience. You know, my friend, Shivshankar Menon, many of you know him. I think he once did a dissertation comparing Ashoka to Qin Shi Huang. Ashoka, after terrible violence, after the bloody battle of Kalinga, saw the violence that he had wrought on the subcontinent, decided to become Buddhist, and changed the way India was governed. His contemporary, more or less, Qin Shi Huang, who unified China after centuries of bitter internal warfare among seven states, five, five states, many kingdoms, when armies marched up and down slaughtering hundreds of thousands along the way. So, both have learned that yes, you have to fight wars, but never revel in it. And however bitter, never demonize the other. Because when you demonize the other, then you become fearful, you become righteous. And out of self-righteousness arises the greatest evil. Those who are really evil never believe they're evil; they think they're doing right by their people. And a requirement of that is that you must begin to see the other as subhuman, as non-human. Because Asians are ancient peoples, and we have gone through a period when we were like Europeans in the last 2,000 years. There's a wisdom that wars are expensive, uncertain outcomes. You must know war. But the objective of war is peace. And the greatest achievement is to achieve your objective without having to go to war. So, the art of war in Sun Tzu is that if you are a prince, you cannot not understand war, but the objective is peace, and the highest achievement is to be able to avoid having to use military force. But that requires you to be prepared for war all the time.
So, this is perhaps the instinct even between India and Pakistan. Yes, there's, I mean, in India, Hindus want to go back to the pre-Islamic past, and in Pakistan, it is an Islamic entity. But when they meet each other in New York or London, they know they're one people sharing a common culture. They don't really demonize each other. And so, even when they fight, yes, to achieve victories, but in the end, to achieve a peace perhaps more amenable to one side or to the other. So it is between India and China. So it is between Thai and Cambodians. When the recent conflict suddenly burst forth, I immediately WhatsApp a Cambodian friend and a Thai friend. I said, "What's happening? It's ridiculous." And both parties agreed with me immediately that it was ridiculous. And I felt calm because it was a conflict which arose out of elite politics within Thailand and between Thailand and Cambodia.
The European experience is different, and that's perhaps the reason for the firmaments that the European crucible always has, and why it has probably contributed more to world civilization than any other region on earth. I mean, when you look at Ukraine, look at that land over centuries. It's never had stable borders. So there is no final solution. You want to diminish Russia. You may, for a while, but can you extinguish the Russian people? And among the Slavic people, there are Catholics, there are Orthodox, there are Muslims, they are from different traditions. There are Eastern Slavs, Northern Slavs, Southern Slavs, Western Slavs. They carry conflicts in their history, but at the same time, they share much in common. So when times are calm, they relate to each other as human beings. But when they're angry, like now between Russia and Ukraine, that poison will affect relations for at least one generation. But eventually, the longer past will come back. It will bring them together.
I like the Hungarians, you know. I was there, spent five days. I'll be going back there again. They, they got spunk. They're a bit chaotic sometimes in their ways. They call it the Hosa spirit. And they say, "Look, we have to live with Teutonic peoples, Slavic people, Italian people, and assert our own identity." So we have got to be strong, and sometimes unreasonable. So Brussels cannot make them buckle. And the more Brussels pushes them, the more determined they are to be Hungarian. Same thing here, whether it is Catalonia or Portugal or Ireland, each feels passionately its own history, but they know they're European, they share a common heritage. And in the European Union, they came together and created the longest period of peace ever. Then they forgot their history and thought that they could merrily move eastwards and said it was a legal right. And when they look at Asia, it's very difficult for Europeans to shed that perspective of their own experience and to see it from a different perspective, which is Asian.
To me, it's a bit tiresome that they keep on talking about the "Thucydides Trap" in Asia. Because even European experiences of the Peloponnesian War or the 30 Years' War are relevant to today's politics. But in Asia, the historical references are very different. And many Indians, even Pakistanis, in their calmer moments, we go back to the Bhagavad Gita and the reflection between Arjuna and Krishna before a war that had to be fought, but a war that will be fought without bloodlust, even though blood had to be shed with sorrow. To this instinct in us, which suffuses the essays in this book, this spirit is very important, and it should be nourished. But mind you, when we through our own lenses try to understand Western behavior, we will misunderstand them. It's difficult to understand Trump through the Art of War. I mean, you could read The Art of the Deal. It's difficult to understand European politics through the experiences of South Asia and East Asia.
And here in Southeast Asia, Wang Yi has this wonderful metaphor that Singapore is where the mandalas of India and China overlap. Using that same metaphor, Southeast Asia is where the mandalas of China, India, and the West overlap to different intensities in the 10 different countries. But they all fume the aura of those three mandalas. So we have a certain advantage in understanding both East Asia, South Asia, and the West, in a way which we may not find in China, in India, or the West. So the work which ARI, which APP does, in a sense, can only be done in Southeast Asia, and perhaps only in Singapore, which makes it so special. It may be a small outfit, but you know the prayer, the hymn, "Let there be peace on earth, but let it begin with me." Because if in me there's no peace, then all talk about peace is hypocrisy. The wish is the mother of the thought. If in the heart there is peace, the mind will turn to peace, and the actions will follow, always with a certain cunning, with a sense of reality, like the Holy Father was very cunning, but also very holy. This is the world for our objective. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much, George, for that brilliant and inspiring speech. Uh, we have about 15 minutes for conversation with each other, and then we'll throw the floor open for a couple of questions, and we also make sure that we don't hold you back too long from the reception that's behind you. But, you know, George, I'm so glad that you emphasized, as in the case of Pope Francis, if a man like him is to succeed, you have to have this unique combination of being holy and cunning. It's very rare, by the way, that kind of combination. And in a sense, the warriors of peace have to have that, on the one hand, a mission and conviction that peace is important, and yet have the cunning to be able to deliver it, which is not very easy. So, one, one, one first question, my first question to you is, you work with many of these people in the field, and you've seen some, some of them, how they managed to sort of put out some of the conflicts. Maybe one example is your friend Marty Natalegawa, and what he did when he was, uh, as chairman of ASEAN. So, can you give us some concrete examples of people you met whom you think have been trying, in a small way, to try and promote peace in practical terms? What examples would you mention?
>> You know, Marty is a, is a dear friend. We've been foreign ministers together for many years. We still keep in touch. He now chairs an eminent council which consists of former foreign ministers and diplomats from Asia, and we meet every year. Um, we all share a similar bias for peace. The council is called the Emity Council. His wife is Thai. And I think sometimes when you are rooted in more than one civilization, your ability to see situations with a binocular vision greatly improves. If you are purely from one tradition, it's very difficult to jump out of that tradition to see the same problem from the other person's perspective. And they helped say when we were in the Foreign Ministry, that we had, um, diplomats with different proclivities, different biases, and drawing from different traditions, and in the conversation, we came up with good outcomes. I think the key is to empathize, to respect, to be a good listener. Doesn't mean you don't have your own view. Doesn't mean that you don't think you have your own powers of analysis. But sometimes, suspend it. Go to the other side and say, "Oh, how does it look from the other side?" See Kissinger, whose books I read, most of whose books I read, when he embarked on the journey to reconcile the US and China, he did not know much about China, and he wrote about it, and he set out to understand China. So when he wrote the book on China, many Chinese who read that book, after the first two chapters, came to the conclusion that he understood them. But today, many books written about China reflect very little understanding of China. And to me, how do you solve problems that way? I mean, there are those who are, you know, strategic players like Brzezinski. So, how to maneuver, how to move your chess pieces, you need such analysis. But in the end, where is your heart? If your heart is to dominate, to oppress, to expand, to put down, then one way or another, that will affect your thinking, and that will affect your action.
>> Yeah. I'm also glad, uh, George, in your opening remarks, you warned against the danger of demonization. And since you just mentioned, uh, Kissinger, as we all know, in the last few years of Kissinger's life, he was extremely concerned about the deterioration, uh, in US-China relations. I happened to have a couple of, one, one-on-one conversations with him, and he tried his best to, to, to, to emphasize that if, for the US and China to get along, the US must understand China on its own terms, which is what he tried to do, as you mentioned, in chapter one, uh, of his book, uh, on China. But the sad part of it all is that even though Kissinger was incredibly influential, he couldn't stop the tide of, uh, demonization. In fact, you know, the sad part is that even on the 50th anniversary of his historic visit to Beijing in 1971, which was, by the way, the year was 2021, he couldn't go to Beijing to celebrate the 50th anniversary because the mood was so anti-China that he would have been seen to be disloyal. And that was the result of demonization. So the question, therefore, is, what, what do you think we can do in, in, in, in practical terms to handle these challenges of demonization?
Well, specifically on US-China relations, I'm not entirely pessimistic, and I'll give you the reason for this. I was at Tsinghua University just last month for their peace conference. But unlike the Asian Peace Program, China's peace forum is a big thing. I mean, big halls, big dinners at the Diaoyutai, the Vice President turns up, makes a long speech. Um, this is China's approach. There were very few senior Americans. So I asked the Chinese, I said, "How come they did not invite them?" They said, "We did, but they won't come because they'll be criticized back in the US." This to me was alarming because even if China is an opponent, an enemy, you must know China. You must know your interlocutor, you know, your protagonist. Otherwise, you are at a disadvantage. But even for China, it is a disadvantage because the possibility of win-win outcomes diminishes. I'm not so worried because even though in the US there are groups who, at the opportunity, will bring China down. I think China is armoring itself on all dimensions: militarily, economically, cyber warfare, biological warfare, any possible threat that they could identify, they will try to have a response to. Again, this goes back to the Art of War, where he says, "If you assume the enemy will not attack, he will attack. If you assume he will attack, then he may not attack because he knows you're prepared." So this is a Chinese approach. Do they want to displace the US as a global hegemon? The US people in the US don't believe it. But for the Chinese, is it, is it so unwise to aspire to be a global hegemon, to send your aircraft carriers to the Gulf of Mexico, or Gulf of America, to the Baltics, to the Black Sea? I mean, that's the last thing the Chinese would want. Their approach is, "I have enough problems of my own. You have your problems. If you want my help, I'll help you, but good luck to you, and wish me luck with my family." That's their approach. The idea that you can go far away and try and reorder society to your own liking. No, this is completely alien to the ancient wisdom.
So, currently, we have a situation now where, in terms of conventional warfare, Indopacific Command, based in Honolulu, I spent two weeks with them before. In fact, I spent a total of one month with them before. They're responsible for the entire Pacific.
>> What, what year was that?
Roughly in 1976, when I spent two weeks in the 25th Infantry Division, Tropic Lightning. And in 1991, when I attended the Pacific Army's Management Seminar. So I visited the different bases, the big training area, and the big island, and so on. And I mean, the US military is huge. I mean, compared to them, we are just a little drop, you know. I mean, the arena is the world. Every piece of equipment must be battle-hardened from desert conditions to arctic conditions. They have come to the conclusion that in a conventional war, they can't win. But they're not likely to win over Taiwan, which is, which is obvious, because your supply lines are so far away, and for China, it's just next door. And your aircraft carriers, which are your main battle units, will be held at bay by long-range hypersonic missiles, and even Guam will be hit. And I was greatly relieved when we decided, when both decided, that Singapore will no longer base its F-15s on Guam because it would then become a tripwire. So, militarily, it's difficult for the US to prevail. Even though, if the US had its wishes, you would want to keep Taiwan separate from China forever. That would be the US preference, while legally adhering to a One China principle. And if there's war over Taiwan, TSMC will be destroyed. China can do without TSMC, maybe not 100%, but 70%, 80%. The US can't do without TSMC. Europe can't do without TSMC. So if you're planning for war, it's how do I ensure that TSMC will not be destroyed? Because it will be destroyed. And of course, the latest is China has finally played this trump card, which is rare earths. And without rare earths, the US cannot build F-35s, bunker buster bombs, missiles, and so on. But China doesn't want to overplay it. So it's to put a counter-leash on the other side. The reality is, in the US, with every change of administration, policies change. So you have Putin, you have Xi Jinping, and you have agreement with Trump. You say, "Okay, this is with Trump." Who follows Trump? Will there be a change? There will be a change. So if you have a credit there, you better draw it down because it's going to be wiped clean. The reality today is that China understands the US more than the US understands China. And China is managing the US within the powers that it has. And that's more likely to lead to peace because I don't believe that China's ambition is for war.
>> I'm glad you mentioned Shivshankar Menon. Incidentally, in addition to these policy essays, we also produce podcasts. And please go to our website, and you will see that we just did a podcast interview with Shivshankar Menon, which was good enough to get an email from Shashi Tharoor to me saying, "Congratulations on having spoken to Shivshankar Menon." But, uh, clearly, on the most important relationship with Southeast Asia, as you saw implied in your remarks, is the one within China and India. And as you said, China and India media in Southeast Asia, they've gone through a rough period. But in the last couple of months, there seems to be a kind of a gentle warming in the relationship, uh, which may lead, as you know, to probably a visit by Prime Minister Modi to China after a gap of 7 years or so. So, what's your sense about what's happening on that front?
>> I did a Facebook posting when Modi, in a tweet, said that he'll be visiting China after his meeting with Wang Yi in Delhi. I said the qua, and the, you know, the compass fish to fishermen use, you know, I said the qua has shifted again, and this time it's towards normalization of relations between China and India and peace. Um, I was never too pessimistic because while it seemed an opportunity for both India and China when the border incidents happened to get closer together, the US hoping that India could be used against China, and India hoping to use the US against China. That quickly fell apart when the Ukraine war started because the US wanted India to disavow Russia. But how could India disavow Russia when Russia has been the strategic friend for decades? And now the US wants India to stop, stop buying Russian oil, when the US continues to buy various products from Russia. So the Indians are hopping mad. And then you hear Peter Navarro talking about India in such contemptible terms. "They deserve Maharaja tariffs." I say, "God, what's gone into them?" I mean, if you're a chess player, India is a big piece, and you must play that piece carefully. How can you be so insulting? Because their insult is going to be multiplied 100 times in Indian media, and you get the Indians all upset. And the Chinese must, they can't believe their luck, you know. I mean, they say, "Oh, thank you, America. We agree with India. We support India." I'm glad, I'm glad you mentioned luck.
>> In fact, between Modi and Xi Jinping, there's never been any personal animosity. The very relationship was handled with great finesse. You remember Xi Jinping's first visit to Modi was in Ahmedabad, where a Gujarati monk had gone to China a long, long time ago. And then Xi Jinping returned the favor by hosting him personally in Xi'an and brought him to the Dayan Pagoda, the Big Goose Pagoda, where the great Xuanzang, after spending many years in Nalanda and bringing back the sutras, went back to Xi'an to translate the sutras. So, Xi Jinping brought Modi to that pagoda. And later, when he visited Wuhan, and Modi witnessed a simultaneous display on one side of yoga, on the other side of Tai Chi, each ancient art, both equally profound, with overlapping truths, but different truths overall. Then later on, they met in Wuhan. And after that, Modi hosted Xi Jinping in Mahabalipuram, deep in Tamil Nadu. I've been to Mahabalipuram before. Why Mahabalipuram? Because it has a seaside temple. In that temple, there's a frieze with, oh, maybe hundreds of Hindu deities, and somewhere in the middle was one of a Chinese face. Who is that Chinese deity? So they say he must have fascinated India. He went to Kanchipuram, which is where Mahabalipuram is, and from there he went to Sri Lanka, and then by sea back to China. So when they meet each other, it is always beating it is always playing to the rhythm of a long history, when both are ancient peoples, when they benefited each other, and in Buddhism, India benefiting China more than, more than the other way around. But mind you, it was through Chinese records that India recovered a large part of its own history. So when we had the opportunity to revive Nalanda University as a symbol of India-China relations over a long time, we jumped at it, but it took a wrong turn. It will come back. And our temporary replacement is a Nalanda Professorship at ARI. Yeah. But there's no reason why these two ancient peoples will want to be mortal enemies. Does China want to absorb 100 million Indians? Yes, it's obvious. Would India want to absorb 100 million Chinese? No. And the Himalayas are so high, you can concede a few kilometers here, give me back a few kilometers there. Who cares? Russia and China have a longer border than India and China. And they fought terrible wars on the Ussuri River, over Damansky Island, the Zhenbao Island. But when it was finally settled, no one bothered. In fact, you know, Tokayev, the president of, uh, Kazakhstan, he was a Soviet diplomat overseeing border negotiations. And when it was concluded, he was head of the Senate of Kazakhstan. I met him. I said, "What do you think of the settlement?" I said, "Who conceded more to whom?" He said, "Well, maybe we gave a bit more to China, we gave a bit more to China than China did, but more or less what it would be the same thing will happen with India. There'll be a swap for Arunachal Pradesh, there will be some quarrels over the area around Tawang, but that's it. So, as long as you want peace, there will be peace. But if you want to make use of an event for geopolitical reasons, then there'll be no peace. But I think the qua has turned.
>> Well, thank you very much, George. I, I, I must say, I was looking at the clock. I hope you'll accept my apologies if we decide not to have the Q&A from the floor. Instead, we have to proceed with the ceremony of the, uh, launch of the book, and then after that, hopefully, we will be able to mingle and enjoy each other's, uh, company. And I'm sure George will be happy to see you too. So, Diraj, over to you for the next stage.
Uh, thank you, Mr. Yeo. Thank you, Mr. Mabubani, for your remarks. Um, can I please call upon stage, uh, Dr. Varaganda Quesha and Miss Kristen Tang to present a special copy of Can Asians Think of Peace? And, uh, can I please also invite Professor Tim Bunnell on the podium to witness the launch of the book?
[Applause]
[Music]
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much again for coming to this book launch in Asia. Thank you, and good evening.