主持人：So, hello, welcome to the session on Trade Wars, Conflicts and Global Governance.
My name is Teery Martin. I am a news anchor with German’s Foreign Broadcaster Service Deutsche Welle.
我叫Terry Martin，来自德国广播公司 Deutsche Welle。
And it’s my great pleasure to moderate thise session. There are my thanks to German Marshall Fund of BucureştiBudapest for having me.
So, we are talking about Trade Policy. Trade policy is also foreign policy of course.
It is used as a foreign policy tool. and Ssometimes it is used as a foreign policy weapon.
Just ask anyone who lives in Russia or Iran, w. When it comes to sanctions or tariffsterrors, and how these affects countries and people and businesses who live there.
So trade policy is foreign policy, soon so we’re going to will be talking about that over the next hours.
So I have been told to keep this a little a little bit shorter. I was taken to lunch, all against my will, but it is also a fruitful experience, I assure you.
Anyway, right now we are all witnessing a conflict of monumental proportions.
We know exactly what we are talking about. It’s a topic was talked against at the lunch again too. It is the topic in at these forums all around the world right now.
That is the confrontation between the United States and China, and to some degree, that conflict, is a systematic geopoliticalconfrontation, but its most prominent manifestation right now is the Trade War.
I would call it a Trade War. Some might prefer to call it something else. But it is essentially a Trade War.
And that Trade War is affecting the world economy already.
Countries around the world, governance governments around the world are already, and institutions who tracking the global economy are already adjusting their forecast has been fault felt in different ways like peanut butter.
I love peanut butter. We will see just even in the conflict between the US and Europe, peanut butter is on that list, so on the sanction item.
So peanut butter is becoming more difficult for me to get. So that is a serious thing indeed.
So, we are talking about the Trade War affecting world economies, disrupting supply chains in ways, I hope we can hear more about it over the next hours.
And when you disrupting supply chains, a lot of things happen.
It has lot of knock-on effects. It doesn’t just affect the businesses involved of course. It affects everything that is depend on these businesses, like people who work for example
And it creates an atmosphere of deep uncertainty and anxiety which is what we are experiencing right now.
This whole forum kicked off with the notion that we are still in an even deeper than a year ago into a pattern of disruption and uncertainty and we don’t really know where this is going.
I hope we are getting a little bit of clarity today, not just on the conflict between China and the United States, but also on other conflict and other trade conflicts
We have representatives from the UK, from China and Japan.
With these this, I am going to introduce them now and we will get things kicked off.
Just one little warning of something to have a bake in the back of your mind.
We will be inviting questions from you toward the end, last 20 minutes or so. One open question or so.
So you can begin already to ruminate about what questions you may want to put to the panel.
So let’s get it under way.
It is my great pleasure to introduce the three panels.
I just to invite you to here whatever order you wish.
Starting with Shinichi Nakabayashi, he is the director for Japan at the European Bank for Construction and Development.
We also have visitor with us Kerry Brown, director of the Lau China instituteion of at King’s College of London.
其次是Kerry Brown，伦敦国王学院Lau China研究所所长
And our third panelist is coming all the way from China, is Jin Canrong, who is associate dean of School of International Studies of Renmin University in China.
First of all, a warm round of applause for our panelists, thank you for being therewith us.
Now we haved a bit of correspondents before we showed up here in the Budapest, and I will give the panels a few questions to reflect on.
And I’d like to begin by putting the first big picture question to our panels, and you guys can take about 5-7 minutes each, maybe to answer these.
The first big question is what do current Trade wars and conflicts tell us about, what about economic and political order and about global governance?
This is basic what our titles are. You can go on whatever you want with that.
Why don’t we start right here to my right, if you don’t mind Professor Jin.
金灿荣：Thank you Mr. Martin, and thanks to the host of the event as a great pleasure for me to be here. And it is my first time to be here.
And I used to be trained as a student of American politics. So next year I will get a lot of interviews to predict who will be the next president of the United States. Hhhhh
For me, I think the most important challenge for today world is that we are facing the deficit of global governance.
China benefited from globalization a lot in the past four decades.
Many people believe that China is the one of the countries benefit most, and we appreciate these processes.
But very unfortunately now, these processes reverse to some extent.
The fact is that more global challenge occurred now, including climate change.
So the demand for global governance keeps rising.
But on the other side, the supply of global governance, to some extent, is decreased.
The one reason is that, the US doesn’t want to offer that supply.
US still own enough resources, but become very selfish.
The US administration now dominated, you know, by nationalism, American First, Buy American, Hire American.
Just like, you know, third world political leader.
So US still own resources, but they don’t want to spend money.
So US become selfish.
And EU still has a very strong will to offer this global governance.
But EU has its problem. EU becomes weak after the Brexit.
So these are the problems.
It used to be the world benefit from the supply of global governance, many from the US and the EU.
But now, we see on the supply side, they don’t want to supply.
And China wants to supply.
主持人：So what do you try to supply, global governance?
主持人：They are not supplying, ok. Just want to clear about that.
金灿荣：You see the problem of logic: the demand keeps rising and the supply very hesitates.
China wants to join in, so we offered the “One Belt One Road Initiative”. But you guys are very hesitates to support China.
主持人：When you say “you guys”, you mean…?
金灿荣：EU and US. Hhhh.
And some people even demonize “One Belt One Road Initiative”. That’s ridiculous. That is irresponsible for the global governance.
So that is one concern of mine: the deficit of global governance.
The second concern definitely relates to the US-China relations.
I have to say, now and in the future, the US-China relation is the most important bilateral tie for China.
We do appreciate and benefit resulting from US-China relation for the past 4 decades after the normalization.
We benefit a lot and we appreciate that.
But unfortunately, the US-China relation will enter a quite long bumpy period, at least last for one decade.
We have to face this new reality.
Because US now define China, you know, as the revisionist country, and they consider terrorism as not that important threat, but competitions among big powers are now ranking No. 1.
And now they have two adversaries, Russia under the Putting the Great and China under our current leader, right? HHHHH
But from long term view point, they believe their only adversary should be China, because Russia fells into so called “Resource Curve” or “Resource Trap” already.
So from a long term viewpoint, Russia will become not that strong economically, so they put China at very top position of adversary.
That’s not good, not good for US-China relation.
As we all know, US people easy to, they are not good at thinking, as for thinking, not good as their European counterpart, but they are very good at action.
So, after they defined China as revisionist country, they immediately launched the trade war.
Actually, our official media does not use the word “trade war”, but we use term 贸易摩擦 ”trade friction”.
We are very cautious; we don’t want to exagerrate the seriousness of the situation.
So we see now the US-China relation deteriorated since spring last year.
But as for the trade friction or trade war, I don’t want to worry so that much. I tend to believe next month, when we have APEC summit in Chili, we will have a partial deal.
Because one side China compromises a lot, China really does not want to have a trade war. China did it best to avoid that. As I know, we compromised 80%.
But the problem is, on the US side, they want to have a 100% deal. That is ridiculous.
You can never get that. Their choice is 0 or 80%.
他们不可能如愿。他们的选择只有 0 或者80%。
And I think, at Chili, President Trump will accept 80% deal,（主持人：OK）because he needs diplomatic victory.
所以我认为， 在智利，特朗普总统会接受 80%&的协议，因为他需要外交成果。
Actually, after 3 years of ruling, he got nothing in foreign policy. North Korea? He failed! Iran? Failed! Venezuela? Failed! Syria? Failed! Ukraine? Failed!
Zero! You know. Hhh
So he needs something to show to his audience that he gets something.
That is why I said as for trade war, don’t worry. We will have a partial deal.
主持人：OK, thank you. I am afraid you have to stop. We will come back.
Just a quick summary of what you have said: China is looking for, to Europe and the rest of the world, for more global governance. But Europe is weak and the US is selfish and China does see theprospect of the deal shaping out if the US just back away for its 100% demand maybe.
OK ,very good. Well Kerry, you want to pick it up from that? 非常感谢。
Kerry Brown:Sure, yeah. Good. Well, thanks for inviting me here,good to see you, Dr. Jin. And thank you very much.
So, I propose my question, what I really think about, is this really about trade?
You know, it seems, to me, there is a lot of deep structurally fuse are coming to the surface. And trade is like the soldier proxy.
One of these is what is China’s rightful place, as you mentioned the “Belt and Road”. And the “Belt and Road” is the first proactive time for China try to really spell out what is seems rationally is.
It looks like, it is a different thing in different place, the “Belt and Road” in central Asia.
It is a different thing, the “Belt and Road” of India, which is obviously opposing it in many different ways.
The “Belt and Road” in Europe is different, which is about road to America, which doesn’t seem to be a part.
I guess “Belt and Road” to me is kind of interesting because it really what this world about for America. I mean, what is not in the “Belt and Road”, the United States and Japan, mostly the United States.
So this vision is quite a geopolitical one. It is a very big geopolitical one. You can’t get rid of the politics.
So I suppose the trade war addresses a huge problem, which is what does China do when it is the one, and universe projection show in the next 5-10 years, it is probably sooner, China would be the world’s biggest economy in a gross term.
I know in capital terms it is still way below the level of the United States.
But that is a very different world to the one we are in now.
The first is how does the United States response to that. And that is not an easy question, because the United States is a proud countrylikes to be loved. And we do love America.
That is one issue. The second issue is it is not easy to see China’s economic status translates into political status.
And in fact, the problem we have been talking about the last days really, is values. And I guess the social problem is American’s acquisition against China with the engagement with the international system, but not really believe its underlying values. Not really
I do not say it right or wrong, but that is the American perception, and for all the rest of the world, you are dealing with the world biggest economy at the moment feeling like it has not been dealt fairly, the world second-biggest economy feeling like it has not been dealt fairly. And there is no easy way to deal with that kind of that conflict.
I mean trade conflict; I guess you like to do a deal, but that conflict is a much sucker one.
So I think your forecast about this bumpy period is right, and I don’t think it needs to be 10 years. I think we are moving toward a world which is gonna be a perpetual pass for global architecture.
And once the trade issue, if it is dealt with, is dealt with, there will be other issues.
So the question, sort of underneath sense, thinking Confucianism, is what China’s rightful place is. And that is part for what China thinks is its rightful place and what is the rest of the world is going to, not to allow, but be comfortable with.
Because there is resentment on either side about that rightful place, that is not going to work.
So the geopolitical consent is going to be absolutely crucial, and I am going to assess the huge debate that we are going to go through with this excellent conference also contributing too.
主持人：Thank you Kerry, so just again in summary.
We are talking about, in terms of in the side of American, the trade dispute, the trade part of that is really just reflection of larger geostrategic competition that is on the way, and not clear how it is going to conclude out,
and reflects of deeper clash of values which of course rises question how do you overcome those differences with resolve, that one is a tough one.
Kerry Brown:So, I notice the very final thing is that no one can say to a fifth of humanity that they have to go away.
So the fact of China, the fact of its structure, its population, the huge importance of its emerging of the middle class, these don’t go away. And even you have but, you know, trade friction or trade wars, that doesn’t go away.
And no amount of confrontation. We will make that go away.