Kishore Mahbubani Speech

Distinguished Fellow at the Asia Research Institute (ARI), National University of Singapore(NUS): Kishore Mahbubani Ladies and gentlemen it is truly a great honor to be recognized for my efforts to promote the greater understanding of China in the global community I'm truly sorry that I cannot be there in person with you today to celebrate this award.sadly prior commitments have prevented me from joining you The need to develop a better understanding of China in our global community especially in the West, has never been greater. The return of China, the world’s oldest continuous civilization is a perfectly natural development. It’s an undeniable fact that from the year one to the year 1820. The two largest global economies were always those of China and India, so the real aberration in human history, was the past 200 years of western domination. All aberrations come to a natural end. This explains the natural resurgence of China, India and the other great Asian society. Sadly, western leaders and policymakers exactly and policymakers have not prepared themselves, intellectually and emotionally to accept the ancient 21st century that is unfolding before our eyes. Fortunately most of the 88% of the world that lives outside the West accept this. Most societies in the world especially in Asia have had strong relations with China for centuries, if not millennia; hence the deep respect for the deep pools of wisdom in Chinese civilization. By sharing its wisdom, China is helping us to create a better world for humanity This is why the greatest global imperative today is to promote a deeper understanding of China even a brief study of the history of China with this record of zero overseas colonial expansion, could help American policymakers lay to rest their deep fear that China is threatening America. It isn’t. Instead, China's willingness to work with America and other global power to address pressing global challenges, should be seen as a massive opportunity to create a better world for humanity which now shares a community of common destiny for mankind. With this award in hand I will redouble my personal effort to promote a better understanding of China; like the late Ezra Vogel, a good friend of mine, who received a similar award. I wanted to echo what he said,and I quote “I'm deeply moved to be recognized in China as one who is seriously endeavored to interpret China to the West. 2 Seems to have civil war 1949 so my first question is people are so interested in maybe curious like why did you think of for and what you think about playing such a key role because regulations it's because of Chinese heritage report type number one very historic i must say you know many people in the world future especially on the national relations then you have a meeting that brings in our sunshine into the world so with the meeting between she Jinping and why in June is going to bring a lot of sunshine in the world because it shows that you can have a very intractable problem like the one cross the Taiwan straits and many people have given up hope and you could have happened and now you can hear demonstrating that we can take an intractable problem and try to resolve so I give a lot of credit to both teaching the pleasure of meeting in person hmm and that's about singapore's role I think it's a very complicated story I think it started with the role of Mr. Lee kwan you after whom I was school is named because I think Mr. liquor knew was a good friend of the leaders of China and a good friend the leaders of Taiwan and so as a result of that he developed the trust of both the leaders and therefore it's quite natural that the first ever meeting with China and Iran took place in Singapore over 20 years ago and since then Singapore has maintained its position of trust with both countries and therefore when the time came for a higher level meeting was perfectly natural so as you mentioned this truly ponyo is a leader that highly respected among the world community so actually when talking about this Xi Jinping online just meeting this time many people across both sides across street will think about 1993 that's a very important from coming here yeah so this really ponyo was very important at that time so he actually attributed to that historical meaning and that was the groundbreaking meeting at that time so why was this her late from you so concerned about cross what was his explanation I think of course was very concerned about primarily about the development of Singapore but he saw that singapore's future was tied to what happened to the region at large also what happened to the major powers in the region and as you know in around that time sometimes relations between US and China will go up and down and one of the core issues in the US China relationship was the question about what to do what I want and there was even a danger and war breaking out so go last week to avoid a wall of conflict or tension in the United States and China was to find Ways and Means of diffusing the Taiwan issue I think we have accomplished that starting of course from the meeting in Singapore there are lots of other factors at play obviously but often the most difficult step as you know the when you take a journey of 1000 miles the first step is very important exactly so we are 1000 mile journey and you see that haven't got there by the way this meeting not everything but you certainly changed the chemistry and demosphere significantly but you would have to start the process on the road and that was the contribution that Mister so many people have so much many expectations on this xinping among this meeting for example in Taiwan people mentioned that if there is a possibility that it touched the issue like China might be considering the possibility of withdrawing missile and the Taiwan or letting Taiwan has more room participating in the international organization so in your personal perspective do you think that this meeting is more symbolic than substantial or actually we can really touch something substantial I'm learning diplomacy that symbolism and substance school can I mean for example if symbolically I'll give you a very dramatic example there was a time when in theory The United states recognized Taiwan as a legitimate government of China mainland China was considered illegal OK and then Henry Kissinger yeah that was 1972 that was never symbolic meeting substantive ohh OK symbolic meaning showing that a major change I've taken place Clear Lake to very substantive changes and the eventual recognition of mainland China by the United states America so essentially number that that's an example of how symbolism and substance called so in the meeting dress and she and lying doing Singapore there will be a lot of symbolism if that leads to greater trust and understanding and clearly things are greater space for firewall in terms of participation in international organizations in fact I was in Taiwan having a meeting we are either lying you on the day when China gave their agreement that Taiwan could participate in the World Health Organization wow amazing so I've I've seen our history has changed within China and Taiwan and I also believe by the way very important we emphasize this in international relations you take 2 steps forward sometimes you take one step back still moving OK and I think the long term trend can continue to be positive within China this time in Taiwan some people are concerned about the negative effect of this meeting for example like DPP the opposite party in Taiwan the chairman of this timing word who might be the next president of Taiwan because this front runner of the pole right so she is kind of concerned that the meeting will be like a friend to limit the future development of the crash rates because the one China policy now China conducts it's not like totally accepted by the hotel people how do you see from that I'm not gonna come in sure is that the Singapore politics but I I do believe that even if you are with the DPP you have to deal with international realities you cannot change international reality when you change political parties OK and China's standing in the world you so you have to much more powerful in 1980 in P terms China's GDP was less than 10% of United States today PPP terms Chinese GNP is bigger and you had States and in 15 years time you may be twice the size of the United states this is a new reality so no matter what party you come for you have to deal with this reality and every bridge that is built within China and Taiwan but help the people of hi this sense in the long run I believe that even the DP would have to be realistic and acknowledged that the world has changed OK so Singapore is the small country but it's very influential and very powerful around the world among the world so compared to Taiwan Taiwan is small but we also want to be powerfully so the Singapore experience and the single module what will be your suggestions to town one that we can learn or borrow from your experience you know I gave a lecture to the students of the liquid new school of public policy in which I give away the secrets of Singapore success and I bought it down to a three word formula let it docs pragmatism honesty meritocracy is about serving the best people who run your government pragmatism is always about being realistic and adjusting your policies to deal with real world and honestly meaning there should be no corruption and in the area of international relations no country in the world has been more pragmatic than singaporeans we accept the fact that is a small country we have to we have price takes you know price makers even international relations change we have to change and adjust so if we try to go against international reality it's about taking your head and knocking against a brick wall different so I noticed that the culture of pragmatism hasn't become as strong as it should be and I would recommend you bring it back that this is. Jan Oberg Political science academic, peace researcher, the director of Transnational Foundation for Peace & Future Research He probably doesn't like imagine I mean I it's not completely comparable but imagine that China was obsessed with farming away to become an independent state I wonder how Washington would we have to something like that I'm a PhD in sociology from way back in time at the university in South Sweden so I'm a social scientist and I have specialized all my academic life on peace studies that is a branch of social studies where we deal with reducing violence exactly as a doctor reduces diseases if he or she can and then disseminating this through research public outreach and activities on the ground I worked in a lot of war zones invite to heal wounds afterwards it's always very difficult to find in reality we've we beneath those types of personal meetings my quick reading on CNN and BBC and others are what happened yesterday was benevolent Chinese president to emphasize cooperation who emphasize that we must solve humanities problems together etcetera and abiding who if he's clear in his brain for some short. And tries to say the same the whole immediately after he gets a question at the press conference do you still think that she Jinping the Chinese president would you still call him a dictator well I think it was fully nice here's I spent more than 60 hours with the Chinese president and yes I would and the answer is why and the question is from Biden because he runs a communist country that is different from ours dude you thought you were intellectual level that somebody who writes a punch you according to different principles definition the dictator I mean if you think somebody is a dictator you will treat that person his country in a different way from if you think he's just a different kind of leader from us but he's OK The United States of America and much of the Christian world cannot live without without somebody who is different threatening non believers don't do what we tell them to do and who do not accept mission so I believe that that has been speed up let's say since the last five to 10 years if I give you an example I think is now five years ago that the Congress passed a law and listen carefully a law which set off 1500 million dollars $1.5 billion / 5 years to train western journalists in writing negative stories about China I started done by the state agency or media in the United states now those of us who go to China or westerners who live here and see the complexities and the brothers and try to understand China and Chinese premises see it differently but that is where they are they need desperately to have enemies and if you don't have enemies and I don't see anything in China's foreign policy that is a threat to the United states it is not China that has its vessels outside California's coast or florida's coast it is the West that has all these vessels around China and the alphas all cooperation with Australia and the submarines that are there and they're Germans were in the in the in your waters or really international waters around you too and the Taiwan issue I don't see China doing these things to the West imagine I mean I it's not completely comparable but imagine that China was obsessed with arming away to become an independent state I wonder how Washington would character something like that and therefore you invent you are enemies if you want enemies it's easier to make it you know how Russia you're not part of the African world and it's the global S you have China that you declare don't follow us are different from us think differently and therefore they are our enemies this is very dangerous and very sad because we could thanks so much for working together and I can still only hope that there will be somebody who comes to their senses and it will not be viable and it will not be trump and change America from the inside because the moment America with all its resources creativity and ideas and history and knowledge the door to become apparently in the world not somebody who insist on dominating over everybody else there will be much better place than the United states will be a much better place so I'm looking for a peaceful revolution where the Americans will arise to say enough is enough with your empire and militaries we want a good society here and we want to be friends well the only candidate who say that at the moment is Robert Kennedy junior Robert F Kennedy junior but it remains to be seen whether he will have a chance to become a president I doubt it but we'll see well if you look at what I would call the social cosmology of the West it's very much made-up of centerpiece one God one kings either or thinking male or female left or right not both end all of it is handicapped by being a culture of mission or missionary you have the French word civilizational Michael simplicity is the idea that we are supposed has #1 bold you remember it was one called the first word of the Second World the third world and the 4th world that by the first one there's this idea that we shall all move up to become like the West Europe and the United and that idea of course is everywhere willing colonialists at times in Africa or elsewhere but the liberation movements in the 60s they said we do not want to be we don't want to have your system whether it's Christianity or it's your way of thinking of human rights or whatever and you have the same question here in in China with the opening up of Nixon and Jewelers and meeting via the collection of chess freeman and Kissinger that the hope was that if we open up to China we will actually change two things one we will see to it that China and Russia will not be the ganging up against us we will split you and secondly we hope China will go our way become a multi party system where the capitalist economy and they'll be like us this be like us is over this would be like also become like us is over and that's what the Americans cannot understand they still believe that they have to lead the world is must be led by the Americans and the reason they can't see it and they are in denial is that it's going down not the US state or society but as an empire and all empires go down there's no empire that hasn't existed forever so you may say the United states today is Titanic the West is sitting as restaurants in Titanic and the water is coming up around the windows now instead of them reaching out and say OK our time is over we will be one among many and we will cooperate with you what they do is they insist on one thing and that is to dominate by means of deception the Americans don't do diplomacy diplomacy anymore they sent weapons and pouring weapons because that's what they are best at but no country can survive with just being strong in one sense for instance military if you become politically weak you become economically weak you become psychologically weak you become weak in terms of international law and legitimacy then you are on your way down a strong country is 1 which has high level on all power indicators and do not over militarize and neglect the other power scales the United states has you can say being that military industrial media academic complex these are in needs who have common interests with each other such as producing weapons selling weapons using weapons destroying countries rebuilding countries again but they do not have any common interest with the people in their countries outside democratic control and who said that possible Dwight D Eisenhower in 1960 or one or two whenever he made his farewell speech it's a very famous speech by a man who was a general himself who set the United states has developed a military industrial complex he didn't call it remark as I do and we need to put it in the control to remain a democracy what is undermined very very clearly now is pluralist open media and our democracy in the West because everything is now geared to warfarin militarism more more more there's nobody who stops to think there's nobody who stops to think about the long term consequences of pouring in weapons and never solving the conflicts you just look at what goes on now and you smell the country that had so much weaponry already had nuclear weapons have had a special agreement with weapons for the United states $5 billion a year I don't know for how many is what is the first reaction in Washington we must transfer each transfer even more as to Israel this is a sick society it's a sick way of thinking and of course this whole thing has to do with as I said before the brown the unrealistic dream illusion that if we can get rid of Russia as an opponent and we could we created that opponent ourselves because they're never invaded a NATO country they hope that they can concentrate all natural resources on a Cold War or God forbid a hot war against China you just got to later front page and you look at these threat perception nature is not characterized to be something like a church you either believe in this nonsense or you don't there's never an argument for natural language the text is China is a threat or a challenge because China is different from us China has different interests from us in the West now if that's how you define a threat, anybody around the world basically is right so the whole thing is the military industrial complex lives from finding enemies because if you don't have enemies or say you have enemies or point somebody or make enemies you can't legitimate your own arms development and the military industrial media academic complex will fall apart. Long story short here I think is that I wouldn't trust that the Americans are going to change much unless there is a people's revolution and nonviolent not the stupid thing that that we saw on 6th of January 2 years ago but if there is an uprising in the United states saying no more militarism we want a good society here we want cooperation will China and everybody else in the world we need to cooperate to solve managers and my mental problems poverty problems infrastructure problems all these things we're wasting every hour for humanities and our children's future by militarism and warfare now I know that China is the second largest military power on earth and it has nuclear weapons I have a problem with that but that's my problem story short is that China wants cooperation it works in Belton Rd. initiative it won't keep good for relationship with the US you're welcome do things we don't like in the West but is not a reason to have a Cold War against it it's a reason to talk with so therefore these meetings are important but we need much more dialogue in terms of online thinking we need in NGO's working together we need cultural people working together in parenthesis I'm also not photographer and trying to do an exhibition in China about dialogue and those types of things that can soften the hardliners undermine the hardware school and if you ask me Taiwan it's all simple it's China it's tall and it's very clear in the communication between July and Nixon I think it's #12 is a very large document very clearly saying the United states will not interfere in this issue and so we have a one China policy it does all the things that you can do in Taiwan and I have a huge problem with that I'm not going to talk about saying that in the West but if we keep on doing this we can only hope that China will be patient enough for long enough for the United states to sink on its own in that destructive self militarization but I would wish as somebody who has never hated the US I've never been anti US or mentally American as they say and the column for them you know I work with American scholars every day that the United states will come to its senses and begin to see itself as one partner of the world and not a dominator and imperialist and militarist I think it's possible possibility of rising from below in the western world and say enough is enough I'm looking for democracy to work that way you're not looking for Biden or or plump think Logan changed the system we need a system change in the West well they can't be peace in the world without the two biggest countries in the economy is working together again I would have hoped that the European Union would be helpful the European Union could have been in the way between Americans hardline anti China policies on China but with from the lion obviously being more or less you know propagator of Washington having no independent mind or thinking of the ocean union with Mr. Burrell who's basically a racist remember his statement about the paradise in Europe and the jungle outside that is dangerous there's not much out there either I was unbeliever in the European Union because I thought it could be another West with the more intelligent dialogue policies east West North and South than the empire over there were in Washington was but I was wrong so I'm not hearing optimistic on the short run in the long run I'm optimistic because the day the US empire has fallen nature wouldn't fall apart there's no NATO without US leadership militarism to create a multipolar peaceful cooperative world I hope I live long enough to see that materialize.

中吉号

泡一泡好茶 On May 20, 1947, the Nationalist Government revised the total number of casualties of the War of Resistance announced in 1946, with 3,227,926 military casualties, 422,479 military deaths due to illness, and 9,134,569 civilian casualties, for a total of 12,784,974 casualties. After the founding of the People's Republic of China, a preliminary estimate of the losses caused to China by Japan's invasion of China was 10 million people and more than $50 billion in property losses. On 7/4/1946 full independence was granted by United States, they elected the first president First Opium War, armed conflict in 1839–42 between China’s Qing dynasty and Britain over the dynasty’s restrictions on British trade and, more broadly, Britain’s dissatisfaction with its diplomatic relationship with the Qing. The catalyst for the conflict was the dynasty’s efforts to suppress the smuggling of opium into China by British traders. The result of the conflict was a British victory and the signing of the Treaty of Nanjing, the first of the unequal treaties imposed by Western powers upon the Qing. The conflict and its aftermath helped weaken that dynasty, which would be replaced by a republic in the early 20th century. Prelude to war How did people respond to To Kill a Mockingbird? How did people respond to To Kill a Mockingbird? Learn about the top questions and answers concerning the First and Second Opium Wars. See all videos for this article The First Opium War stemmed from Qing distrust of Western powers and from Western powers’ unhappiness with the limits that the Qing imposed on their trade with China. In 1757 the Qianlong emperor (reigned 1735–96) restricted all Western sea trade to one port, Canton (Guangzhou). The Qing further restricted Western trade by keeping Western traders outside the city walls. D-Day. American soldiers fire rifles, throw grenades and wade ashore on Omaha Beach next to a German bunker during D Day landing. 1 of 5 Allied beachheads est. in Normandy, France. The Normandy Invasion of World War II launched June 6, 1944. Britannica Quiz A History of War British merchants were especially dissatisfied with their situation, as there was a great demand for Chinese tea, porcelain, and silk in Britain. The attempt to meet this demand resulted in a large trade deficit for the British, because China did not import many British goods. The difference was paid to China in large amounts of silver. To reduce the trade deficit, the British East India Company and other British merchants turned to opium. The nonmedical use of that drug had been illegal in China since the early 1700s, though this prohibition had not been successfully enforced. Over the next several decades, China repeatedly tried to ban the opium trade. In response, in the early 19th century the East India Company agreed to stop selling opium in China. In reality, however, the company aided other British merchants in smuggling opium into China, primarily from India. The trade was so profitable that not only did it eliminate the British trade deficit but vast amounts of silver now flowed out of China into British hands. The growing number of Chinese addicted to opium as well as the growing amount of silver flowing from China caused the Daoguang emperor (reigned 1820–50) and the Qing court to take action. In 1839 the court sent Lin Zexu, the special imperial commissioner, to Canton to end the smuggling of the drug into China. Lin arrested several Chinese who were involved in the smuggling. In addition, he forced Charles Elliot, the British chief superintendent of trade in China, to instruct British merchants to give up their opium inventory, which they did. More than 20,000 chests of opium—about 1,400 tons of the drug—were then destroyed. This represented a massive financial loss for the British merchants that the British government could not, and the Qing would not, make good. In July 1839 tensions between Britain and China increased when one or more British sailors killed a Chinese villager. The British government refused to turn over the accused men to the Chinese legal system, which the British considered to be barbaric. However, Elliot did pay reparations to the victim’s family, set up a court of inquiry into the incident, and eventually tried several sailors suspected of being involved but on the lesser charges of rioting and assault. His actions did not appease Lin. War breaks out First Opium War First Opium War British warships attacking a Chinese battery on the Pearl (Zhu) River during the First Opium War, 1841. The First Opium War began in late 1839 when two British warships broke the Chinese blockade of the Pearl (Zhu) River delta. They destroyed 29 Chinese vessels, setting the tone for a war dominated by the vastly superior British navy. The Chinese did have an advantage on land, but land fighting was limited. In early 1840 the British government sent a large naval fleet to China, which arrived in June. Joining that fleet later in the year was a new and advanced warship called the Nemesis. Special offer for students! Check out our special academic rate and excel this spring semester! After British negotiators’ peace proposals regarding compensation for the destroyed opium and the opening of additional trading ports were rejected by the Qing in 1841, hostilities continued. The British navy advanced up the Yangtze River (Chang Jiang), capturing forts and eventually cutting off the Grand Canal. In August 1842 the British captured the city of Nanjing (Nanking), and the Qing were forced to resume negotiations. The end of the war and the aftermath The war was ended by the Treaty of Nanjing, signed on August 29, 1842. In addition to having to pay heavy war reparations to Britain, China had to open five trading ports. One of these ports was Shanghai, which would be transformed into one of China’s major commercial entrepôts. In addition, China ceded Hong Kong to Britain, and the island would remain under British control until 1997. In 1843 the Treaty of Nanjing was supplemented by the British Supplementary Treaty of the Bogue (Humen), which gave British subjects extraterritoriality in China and gave Britain most-favoured-nation status. Soon other Western countries, such as France and the United States, forced China to give them similar privileges.