Speaker 1: You're listening to The Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, everybody, Welcome to another
Speaker 1: episode of The Buck Sexton Show, a deep dive on
Speaker 1: all things China right now. And for that we have
Speaker 1: the perfect guest, Gordon Chang. He's the author of The
Speaker 1: Coming Collapse of China as well as the Great US
Speaker 1: China Tech War. He's a great following on Twitter as well.
Speaker 1: Gordon g. Chang, Gordon, my friend. Good to have you back, sir,
Speaker 1: good to see it. Thank you so much. But this
Speaker 1: will be fun. So the biggest news right now with
Speaker 1: regard to China is and something that came up of
Speaker 1: the weekend, how worried should we be about Chinese military
Speaker 1: support to Russia in the Ukraine War? And I want
Speaker 1: to dive into what that could look like. But what
Speaker 1: do you see it as right now? Gordon? China has
Speaker 1: been supplying military assistance from the very beginning of this war, Buck,
Speaker 1: but China has picked up the pace now. The Breaking
Speaker 1: Defense website reports that almost every day, and antonoff An
Speaker 1: one twenty four, which is the biggest cargo plane in
Speaker 1: the World leaves Jung Joe, which is in central China,
Speaker 1: and it goes to Russia. It turns off its transponder
Speaker 1: when it leaves. I mean it's carrying ammunition and other
Speaker 1: high consumption rate items. This follows reports that China has
Speaker 1: been selling drones, so the Wagner Group, for use in Ukraine,
Speaker 1: and from the get go in this war, China has
Speaker 1: been feeding location data to the Russians. The Ukrainian drone
Speaker 1: operators were using products made in China. That means that
Speaker 1: China knew the location of the Ukrainians. China was sending
Speaker 1: that over to Russia, and then Russia was taking out
Speaker 1: the Ukrainians. That's military assistance. Now we have a series
Speaker 1: of state from Jake Sullivan, the National Security Advisor, and
Speaker 1: others saying, oh, we think China is contemplating supplying lethal
Speaker 1: assistance to Russia. Well, they've already been doing so for
Speaker 1: quite some time, and I think that they owe us
Speaker 1: an explanation why they think that all of these reports
Speaker 1: are untrue, because obviously we are hearing information contradicting what
Speaker 1: the administration is publicly telling the world and the American people.
Speaker 1: Is there a concern Gordon I mean, as you just
Speaker 1: laid out, there's already military support that has been going
Speaker 1: from day one from China to Russia. But is it
Speaker 1: possible in your mind that there could be an escalation
Speaker 1: even on top of that from Shijinping to provide either
Speaker 1: just greater amounts of what's already there, or perhaps more
Speaker 1: advanced weaponry or even Chinese training on certain specific systems.
Speaker 1: There always can be a ramp up in assistance. And
Speaker 1: one of the explanations that I have just guessing, because
Speaker 1: all I'm doing is speculating, is that the administration doesn't
Speaker 1: want to acknowledge the lethal assistance because it's still trying
Speaker 1: to work with China to keep that assistance to the
Speaker 1: bare minimum. And maybe people in the administration think that
Speaker 1: if they publicly confront China that Beijing will increase what
Speaker 1: it sends over to the Russians. I don't know. That's
Speaker 1: not a good strategy. It's not working, and I think
Speaker 1: that it just misunderstands the Chinese way of thinking. We
Speaker 1: have a lot of policies but that sound good to
Speaker 1: the ear like they should work. But for decades we've
Speaker 1: been applying these policies and we now have disastrous results,
Speaker 1: which means obviously we've got to try something new because
Speaker 1: what we've been doing ain't working. What is the Chinese
Speaker 1: interest in Ukraine and in the Ukraine Russia conflict? What
Speaker 1: are they hoping to achieve? Is their strategic objectives? Again
Speaker 1: we have to speculate because I think that ultimately what
Speaker 1: they're doing is counterproductive. But obviously they see themselves on
Speaker 1: the same page with Vladimir Putin. Cejumping and Putin, they
Speaker 1: view the world in the same terms. They identify the
Speaker 1: same enemy, which is us, and I think Siejumping finds
Speaker 1: Putin to be very useful because he's willing to go
Speaker 1: out and really put us on the back foot. You know,
Speaker 1: the more that we expend resources in Ukraine, the fewer
Speaker 1: resources we have to defend our friends and allies in
Speaker 1: East Asia. So that's part of it as well. We're
Speaker 1: being bled and we're being distracted. Now I think we
Speaker 1: need to be in Ukraine because the best way to
Speaker 1: deter China over Taiwan for instances, to make sure that
Speaker 1: Putin losers in Ukraine. But the point is we are
Speaker 1: being bled and the Chinese, I think, enjoy watching this.
Speaker 1: What is the what is your response to the assessments
Speaker 1: that are out there now from people that there is
Speaker 1: a just a growing Russia, China Iran axis. You know,
Speaker 1: it harkens back to the axis of evil speech of
Speaker 1: the Bush administration many years ago with Iraq, Iran and
Speaker 1: North Korea. Now it's much bigger, much more important countries
Speaker 1: that people are tying together. What do you make of that.
Speaker 1: I think that's absolutely right, and I think that we
Speaker 1: have to add North Korea and perhaps add a country
Speaker 1: like Algeria. So you put together a lot of these
Speaker 1: countries in the world's dividing into camps. President Biden doesn't
Speaker 1: want to acknowledge that, but it's playing to see. And
Speaker 1: if you don't acknowledge reality, you can't deal with reality. So, yeah,
Speaker 1: the world is dividing, and it is a Cold war,
Speaker 1: and it's a I think, far more dangerous period than
Speaker 1: the Cold War. You know, people say, oh, you know,
Speaker 1: nineteen sixty two Cuban missile crisis the most dangerous moment
Speaker 1: in history. I could argue in say nineteen sixty one,
Speaker 1: the Checkpoint Charlie crisis in Berlin was perhaps even more dangerous.
Speaker 1: But the point is we know from the archives, but
Speaker 1: that neither Khrushchoff nor Kennedy were willing to use nuclear weapons.
Speaker 1: We don't know that about Vladimir Putin. We don't even
Speaker 1: know that about Siejun Ping. And I think that makes
Speaker 1: this the most dangerous moment in history. And because you've
Speaker 1: got that large camp on the other side, there might
Speaker 1: be willing to use nukes. It's just we're not comprehending
Speaker 1: the possibilities. Are there areas of friction between Putin and
Speaker 1: She that US policy or just US action could exploit.
Speaker 1: I mean, how can you make them less cozy together
Speaker 1: so they're less of a threat to the world order
Speaker 1: as we know it. I think that it's theoretically possible,
Speaker 1: but as a practical matter, it is not. These two
Speaker 1: just believe that they find advantage in each other's arms.
Speaker 1: And I don't think that there is anything, as a
Speaker 1: practical matter, we could do to separate them, except to
Speaker 1: perhaps bring down Russia. We do that, We drive it
Speaker 1: out of Ukraine. Yeah, we end that partnership. And you know,
Speaker 1: people will say that's extraordinarily dangerous, And I say, saying
Speaker 1: something is dangerous is not a meaningful objection, because out
Speaker 1: of three decades of truly misguided Russia policy in China policy,
Speaker 1: we have created an extremely perilous situation. There are no
Speaker 1: safe options, and the most dangerous option of all is
Speaker 1: continuing with the policies that created this disaster in the
Speaker 1: first place. So we're going to have to think about,
Speaker 1: you know, the world in very different terms and realize
Speaker 1: that it is perilous. Gordon, I'm gonna ask you about
Speaker 1: China Taiwan here in just a second. But first from
Speaker 1: our sponsor, My Pillow. My Pillow is an amazing company.
Speaker 1: Because of everybody listening to this, you know that these
Speaker 1: are great products. I actually just ordered myself some more
Speaker 1: of the new my pillows as well as some Geezy
Speaker 1: Dreamsheets over the weekend. The sheets are made from the
Speaker 1: world's best cot and geeze at. They're ultrasoft and breathable,
Speaker 1: but extremely durable, and right now the Geeza Dream Sheets
Speaker 1: are at the lowest price ever sheets, coming as low
Speaker 1: as twenty nine ninety nine with promo code Buck. I know,
Speaker 1: because like I said, I just use my own promo
Speaker 1: code and bought some last night's that's promo code buck.
Speaker 1: When you go to my pillow dot com get the
Speaker 1: Geeza Dream Sheets. There's also the mattress top or the
Speaker 1: body pillow. All kinds of products that you can get
Speaker 1: and when you use the promo code buck, you get
Speaker 1: a deal on everything. Just go to my pillow dot
Speaker 1: com click on the radio listener Special Square to check
Speaker 1: out the flash sail on the geeze At dream Sheets.
Speaker 1: Remember my Pillow products come with the ten year Warren
Speaker 1: and they're also given a sixty day money back guarantee.
Speaker 1: So check out my pillow dot com Radio Listeners Special
Speaker 1: Square click on that use promo code buck you'll get
Speaker 1: great limited time specials. But the Geeza Dream Sheets twenty
Speaker 1: out of ninety nine. Get yourself some new sheets. You
Speaker 1: probably need some new sheets at home. My pillow dot
Speaker 1: com promo code b U C K Gordon, China, Taiwan.
Speaker 1: Let's start with this. Is China, after seeing the situation
Speaker 1: in Ukraine, less likely to invade in well, we'll say
Speaker 1: a five year timetable because they see all the trouble
Speaker 1: that Ukraine, that Russia has had in Ukraine, or more
Speaker 1: likely because they feel the US is distracted and doesn't
Speaker 1: have the stomach for a fight. In addition, on the
Speaker 1: Eastern Front, so to speak. I think that this is
Speaker 1: just guessing, but I think China is less deterred than
Speaker 1: it was before. Now. William Burns, the CIA director, a
Speaker 1: couple of days ago, actually said that China is more
Speaker 1: deterred seeing Russia's problems in Ukraine, and the Chinese, we know,
Speaker 1: are looking very closely at Russia's experience. But you got
Speaker 1: to remember, you know, the happy talk in Washington is
Speaker 1: the heroic resistance of the Ukrainian people have convinced the
Speaker 1: Chinese not to invade Taiwan because they worried about similar resistance.
Speaker 1: And you know, I think there's something to that, But
Speaker 1: we got to look at the rest of the situation,
Speaker 1: and that is there was a failure of deterrence in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two. We saw the coalition that was a
Speaker 1: raid against Russia, the United States, the twenty seven nations
Speaker 1: of the European Union, in Great Britain had an economy
Speaker 1: twenty five point one times larger than Russia's in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one, and yet we fail to stop the Russian invasion.
Speaker 1: That is, I perhaps the biggest failure of deterrence since
Speaker 1: the Second World War. And I think China's seen that.
Speaker 1: I think that that reinforces the notion in Chinese minds that,
Speaker 1: as Siejumping's favorite phrases, the East is rising and the
Speaker 1: West is declining. And c has actually thought for a
Speaker 1: very long time the United States is in terminal decline.
Speaker 1: So he sees the failure of deterrence. He sees the
Speaker 1: United States not still being deterred by Russia because we're
Speaker 1: not supplying the assistance that Ukraine needs to win. And
Speaker 1: he can sees that the threats to use nuclear weapons
Speaker 1: have prevented the West from actually coming to the aid
Speaker 1: of Ukraine in the way that we need to. So
Speaker 1: you put all that together, and I think on balance,
Speaker 1: the Chinese believe that they've got a bigger, bigger green
Speaker 1: light to invade. How we don't know how formidable gordon
Speaker 1: are the Taiwanese defense forces in the face of a
Speaker 1: possible Chinese full scale invasion, and also what would it
Speaker 1: take to get well, let's I want to ask you
Speaker 1: about Japan as well, but let's just start with how
Speaker 1: does Taiwan stack up against those initial critical days of
Speaker 1: Chinese forces in an amphibious landing, crossing the straits and
Speaker 1: invading Taiwan doesn't stack up very well because it has
Speaker 1: the wrong types of weapons, and that's the fault of
Speaker 1: some Taiwan general officers who asked to buy the wrong things.
Speaker 1: And it's also the fault of the Pentagon for pushing
Speaker 1: on Taiwan some of the wrong weapons. Taiwan needs cruise
Speaker 1: missiles and it also needs submarines, and we have not
Speaker 1: been willing to sell them submarines. We've been slow walking
Speaker 1: arms sales, as Representative Gallagher said after he just returned
Speaker 1: from Taiwan. So you know, Ukraine needs F sixteens, but
Speaker 1: I don't think Taiwan needs F sixteens because there's gonna
Speaker 1: be no airfield left in Taiwan. You know, after the
Speaker 1: first couple hours of a Chinese bombardment, we're not going
Speaker 1: to have any air fields left in the region either.
Speaker 1: But that's another story. The point is that Taiwan can
Speaker 1: maybe stop the Chinese for a little while, but they're
Speaker 1: going to need help from their friends. Gordon, you raise
Speaker 1: something I think is important for people to know. There
Speaker 1: may be this conception of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan
Speaker 1: looks like some you know, obviously massive air aerial strikes
Speaker 1: beforehand to try to soften up the target the island
Speaker 1: of Taiwan and then naval flotilla, amphibious landing craft and
Speaker 1: they just try to occupy and overrun the forces. But
Speaker 1: you seem to indicate it it could be a lot
Speaker 1: broader than that. What does if you were to invasion
Speaker 1: and I know, look, the Pentagon does war gaming all
Speaker 1: the time, whether the right or wrong. They don't know
Speaker 1: until the bullets start flying. Right, if you were war gaming,
Speaker 1: what a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would look like. What
Speaker 1: happens in those first we'll call those first seventy two hours.
Speaker 1: First of all, I think that maybe for six months
Speaker 1: we don't know that an invasion has started. Because a
Speaker 1: Chinese invasion of Taiwan may not start with war in
Speaker 1: space or you know, a massive aerial bombardment of Taiwan.
Speaker 1: It can start with this. The dissemination of a pathogen
Speaker 1: in Taiwan, you know, just weakened Taiwan's ability to defend
Speaker 1: itself with the disease. You know, We've got a lot
Speaker 1: of smart American war planners who say, oh, don't worry
Speaker 1: about all this. We know, you know, we'll have months
Speaker 1: of notice of an invasion. I'm not sure that that's
Speaker 1: the case. Because you know, we've got American war planners
Speaker 1: who assume that Chinese war planners think like American war planners,
Speaker 1: and so I don't know if that's the case. I
Speaker 1: think that we could very well have this long period.
Speaker 1: It's sort of prepping the battlefield, so to speak. We
Speaker 1: could have sabotage events throughout Taiwan which people may not know,
Speaker 1: or sabotage you know, derailments, chemical fires, all the rest
Speaker 1: of it, the stuff we see in the US for instance.
Speaker 1: So first, the first moments of a war may not
Speaker 1: be evident for quite some time. But when it really
Speaker 1: goes kinnectic, I think we're going to see a lot
Speaker 1: of our assets in space taken down. We'll see a
Speaker 1: bombardment of Okinawa and Guam. We'll see a naval blockade
Speaker 1: which includes sovereign Japanese islands, because remember the island of
Speaker 1: Yanagumi is actually south of Taipei, and for a Chinese
Speaker 1: invasion to be successful, they've got to have a blockade.
Speaker 1: For a blockade to be successful, it's got to include
Speaker 1: Yanagumi and other Japanese islands. So this gets really ugly
Speaker 1: really fast. And one other thing, buck sorry for going on,
Speaker 1: but well, go on, go on. The first kinetic element
Speaker 1: of a Chinese attack could be the use of tactical
Speaker 1: nuclear weapons. I mean, everyone says how hard it is
Speaker 1: to have a cross Straits invasion. You'd have to have
Speaker 1: combined land air sea operations, which the Chinese have never
Speaker 1: done in their history. How do you avoid that, Well,
Speaker 1: you use tactical nukes and you force in the Chinese mind,
Speaker 1: you force everyone to back off because they don't want
Speaker 1: to get nuked as well. Do you think there's a
Speaker 1: chance that they would also? Are there any US assets
Speaker 1: in the region that they would go for with the
Speaker 1: idea that while it maybe US territory, it's not quite
Speaker 1: you know, it's not quite the Fifty States. Do you
Speaker 1: think they might hit Guam? Do you think they might
Speaker 1: try to go after some US Pacific assets? Absolutely? And
Speaker 1: in Okinawa, they got to take out Okinawa. They cannot
Speaker 1: afford to have the large US military presence there left intact.
Speaker 1: So if you're going to go after Guam, you might
Speaker 1: as well go after American bases in Japan, and you
Speaker 1: probably will have the North Koreans engage in some sort
Speaker 1: of provocative activity to draw off the United States. So yeah,
Speaker 1: there's just to be clear, you could foresee or at
Speaker 1: least you could find plausible we'll put it that way. Gordon.
Speaker 1: I'm not you know, no one can predict the future,
Speaker 1: and that's very clear, but you know, it is important
Speaker 1: to understand what the possibilities are in order to plan
Speaker 1: for them. You could foresee a situation where a Chinese
Speaker 1: invasion of Taiwan also coincides with North Korean what just
Speaker 1: military action, maybe not an invasion, but military action of
Speaker 1: some kind strikes, artillery strikes, etc. Against South Korea, absolutely,
Speaker 1: because what better way to divert the United States. And
Speaker 1: so there could be all sorts of things that are occurring.
Speaker 1: And also it could be sabotage by Chinese agents in
Speaker 1: the US, which I think would probably occur pretty much
Speaker 1: at the same time. So this is not going to
Speaker 1: be limited. I want to ask you about Chinese influence
Speaker 1: in the United States Gordon in just a second. But
Speaker 1: first up here, if you're a Team Mobile subscriber out there,
Speaker 1: they're investigating a data breach that exposed a sensitive personal
Speaker 1: information of thirty seven million customers right after the New Year.
Speaker 1: Cyber Hackers grabbed this stuff without notice. It could include
Speaker 1: customer names, emails, billing addresses, and phone numbers. If exploited,
Speaker 1: cyber criminals can use this information to commit online identity theft.
Speaker 1: So how will you know about this? Well, you probably
Speaker 1: won't till it's too late unless you have LifeLock. LifeLock
Speaker 1: has online identity theft protection that monitors the web twenty
Speaker 1: four or seven for regular activities and new account openings.
Speaker 1: If they see on usual activity in your name and
Speaker 1: you're a LifeLock customer, you'll get an alert that comes
Speaker 1: via text, phone, call, email, whatever it takes to get
Speaker 1: your information your attention in the moment, it's important to
Speaker 1: understand of cybercrime and identity theft or affecting our lives.
Speaker 1: If you do become a victim of identity theft, a
Speaker 1: dedicated US based LifeLock restoration specialist will work with you
Speaker 1: to fix it. No one can prevent all identity theft
Speaker 1: or monitor all transactions at all businesses, but it's easy
Speaker 1: to help protect yourself with LifeLock. I've been using them
Speaker 1: for years and they've come through from me before. I
Speaker 1: had to work with the restoration specialist made all my
Speaker 1: problems go away in terms of identity theft. Join now
Speaker 1: save up at twenty five percent off your first year
Speaker 1: with promo code buck at LifeLock dot com. So that's
Speaker 1: LifeLock dot com. Use promo code buck for twenty five
Speaker 1: percent off or call one eight hundred LifeLock again. That
Speaker 1: phone number is one eight hundred LifeLock. Gordon. There's a
Speaker 1: lot of attention that people pay to Chinese influence in
Speaker 1: this country with regard to a few things Hollywood and
Speaker 1: the way that it's clear the media industrial complex here,
Speaker 1: the entertainment complex in America doesn't want to offend China.
Speaker 1: That includes occasionally professional athletes, the NBA notably not wanting
Speaker 1: to upset Beijing. And then some tie in to Hunter Biden,
Speaker 1: the son of the President of the United States, getting
Speaker 1: a whole lot of money from Chinese Communist Party backed
Speaker 1: business interests in China. I wanted you to to sort
Speaker 1: of lay out for everyone in the scope of how much,
Speaker 1: from the elites on down, what kind of control an
Speaker 1: influence operation does China have in the US. China for
Speaker 1: decades has been trying to buy off elements of the
Speaker 1: American society, and they've been extremely successful. As you've been
Speaker 1: talking about on November twenty eight, twenty twenty, Joe Biden
Speaker 1: was elected president, but before he took office, a Chinese
Speaker 1: academic d Dong Shong gave a live stream lecture in
Speaker 1: Shanghai got a lot of play throughout China, and d
Speaker 1: talked about how China was controlling outcomes at the highest
Speaker 1: levels of the American political system. He said that China
Speaker 1: was able to get what it wanted up until Trump.
Speaker 1: It mentioned that the Chinese levers of influence during the
Speaker 1: Trump administration were broken, but how China was looking forward
Speaker 1: to exercising control after Biden took office. And when Dee
Speaker 1: talked about Hunter Biden, everybody in the live audience in
Speaker 1: Shanghai was snickering, so you can see what the Chinese thing. Also,
Speaker 1: D said there was no American politician who could resist China,
Speaker 1: and every American could be bought. Now, I'm not saying
Speaker 1: that what D's assessment was correct. I actually think it wasn't.
Speaker 1: But the point is that's what the Chinese think, and
Speaker 1: that shows you how pervasive Chinese influence in the United
Speaker 1: States is. And by the way, those levers of influence
Speaker 1: that D talked about, that he was exercising both before
Speaker 1: and would exercise after Trump two things Wall Street and
Speaker 1: Henry Kissinger. Just one other thing. The thing about Eric
Speaker 1: Swalwell was the Chinese. And I'm not saying that he
Speaker 1: was treacherous or anything, because I don't know. And I
Speaker 1: also believe that being targeted by China's Ministry of State
Speaker 1: Security is not a sin, because that means everybody in
Speaker 1: Congress would be a sinner. But the point is that
Speaker 1: they Chinese first contact a swallowal not when he was
Speaker 1: in on the House Intelligence Committee, which would obviously be
Speaker 1: of great importance for China. They first contacted him when
Speaker 1: he was on the City Council of Dublin City, California.
Speaker 1: That means that they have not just one Swallowell. That
Speaker 1: means they must have hundreds or thousands of swallow Wells.
Speaker 1: That shows you how pervasive their operations are. So they're
Speaker 1: going for influence operations not just obviously at the White
Speaker 1: House level, but as you point out, all the way
Speaker 1: all the way down and then on the corporate side,
Speaker 1: because that's an area where you know, whether it's Disney
Speaker 1: or Paramount Pictures or National Basketball Association, clearly companies have
Speaker 1: a sensitivity about to say Chinese interests, Chinese Communist Party dogma, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's not they're not worried about offending the
Speaker 1: man on the streets so to speak, in Beijing. They
Speaker 1: don't want to upset the powers that be in China
Speaker 1: and lose access to those markets. How much, how much
Speaker 1: money is at staken things like that, I mean, what
Speaker 1: what were to happen, What would happen to some of
Speaker 1: these companies if Shiji and Ping said no, not you,
Speaker 1: you're out. Well, we're already starting to see that buck
Speaker 1: because Cijumping has in fact been saying that. But you know,
Speaker 1: obviously the NBA would lose its entire China market. Um.
Speaker 1: The Hollywood studios, Um, they already losing, you know, a
Speaker 1: large part of the market because Beijing has been promoting
Speaker 1: local films making it difficult for foreign films to be shown.
Speaker 1: But you know, Hollywood still is very much on board
Speaker 1: with China. Um. Fortunately the movie Maverick Top Gun um
Speaker 1: has sort of convinced Hollywood that you don't necessarily need
Speaker 1: the Chinese market. Um. But this is not only this
Speaker 1: is this is a question of Sijumping forcing American companies
Speaker 1: and other companies out of China. A good job. Maverick
Speaker 1: not allowed in China, Gordon, I didn't know that, but
Speaker 1: they didn't allow that movie in. Yeah, I don't think
Speaker 1: it was allowed in Remember the issue though, was the
Speaker 1: patches on right, Yeah, yeah, the Taiwan you know, the
Speaker 1: Taiwan message there. So really what Beijing, what Hollywood was saying,
Speaker 1: was look, we don't care, We're going to do this.
Speaker 1: You know where you let your film in or not.
Speaker 1: But American films have not done that well in China
Speaker 1: recently because Beijing has really started to put the clamps
Speaker 1: down on them. So, yeah, they still have a market.
Speaker 1: It's still considered to be important in Hollywood, but I
Speaker 1: think it'll become less important as Beijing seeks to really
Speaker 1: control what the Chinese people see to a greater extent
Speaker 1: than they've done in the past. I want to come
Speaker 1: in in just a second here and ask you about
Speaker 1: what's going on inside of China with in terms of stability,
Speaker 1: political stability, the economy Hong Kong. We'll get to that
Speaker 1: in just a second. But work from our sponsor here,
Speaker 1: the Towers Foundation, born from the tragedy of nine to eleven,
Speaker 1: The tunnel of the Towers Foundation has been honoring America's heroes.
Speaker 1: Ever since, the Foundation honors fallen and severely injured heroes
Speaker 1: and their families with mortgage free homes. This year alone,
Speaker 1: hundreds of Gold Star on fallen first responder families with
Speaker 1: young children, and our nation's most severely injured veterans and
Speaker 1: first responders are receiving homes. More than five hundred homeless
Speaker 1: veterans received housing and services last year, and more than
Speaker 1: fifteen hundred are receiving housing and services this year. This
Speaker 1: coming Memorial Day, all of the brave men and women
Speaker 1: law since nine eleven and the War on Terror are
Speaker 1: having the names read aloud in a Tunnel the Tower
Speaker 1: Ceremony in our nation's capital. Through the Tunnel of the
Speaker 1: Towers nine eleven Institute, the Foundation is educating kids in
Speaker 1: kindergarten through twelfth grade about our nation's darkest day. Joined
Speaker 1: Tunnel of the Towers on its mission to do good.
Speaker 1: Please help America to never forget its greatest heroes. Join
Speaker 1: me in donating eleven dollars a month the Tunnel of
Speaker 1: the Towers at t twot dot org. That's t the
Speaker 1: number two T dot org. Gordon. Let's start with Hong
Speaker 1: Kong remember when there were I know you do, but
Speaker 1: for our audience, there were all of those protests and
Speaker 1: even some American flags being weighed. There was all this
Speaker 1: media attention on the threat of Hong Kong being essentially
Speaker 1: consumed by the Chinese Communist Party, losing its special status
Speaker 1: for all intents and purposes. What ended up happening there?
Speaker 1: What's the status of Hong Kong and the freedoms that
Speaker 1: it was supposed to have today? Yeah, just for some background,
Speaker 1: Beijing promised fifty years of a high degree of autonomy
Speaker 1: for Hong Kong in the one Country, two systems formula
Speaker 1: starting from July one, nineteen ninety seven, when Britain, as
Speaker 1: they say, handed over Hong Kong to the People's Republic.
Speaker 1: This was a pursuant to a treaty. China has clearly
Speaker 1: violated that treaty. It's now running Hong Kong lock stock
Speaker 1: and barrel, and it has done so since basically twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: You were referring to the big protests of twenty nineteen.
Speaker 1: Sejumping decided that he was going to take over Hong Kong.
Speaker 1: They did that with their National Security Law, which was
Speaker 1: basically called the End of law in Hong Kong, and
Speaker 1: right now, Hong Kong in many respects, it is actually
Speaker 1: less free than the mainland itself. Certainly it's more dangerous
Speaker 1: for foreigners because we don't know exactly where the line is.
Speaker 1: So yeah, Hong Kong has been smothered by Beijing. And
Speaker 1: also we had mentioned before we brought in North Korea
Speaker 1: to the conversation. We don't hear that much about North
Speaker 1: Korea these days, and we didn't during the Trump administration
Speaker 1: because of the the outreach, the discussion conversations between Kim
Speaker 1: Jong un and then President Donald Trump. What is North
Speaker 1: Korea up to right now? Has a situation deteriorated when
Speaker 1: it comes to US interest which really are in Japanese
Speaker 1: and US interests in the region. Jesion pain keep North
Speaker 1: Korea ready at a moment's notice to cause trouble, to
Speaker 1: throw the international community off balance. What's going on? First
Speaker 1: of all on their missile program and their nuclear weapons program.
Speaker 1: Those are proceeding, and you know the Biden North Koreans
Speaker 1: will fire off intercontinental ballistic missiles. Those are violations of
Speaker 1: UN Security Council resolutions, and we complain about it. Over
Speaker 1: the last one we call the Security Council meeting, we
Speaker 1: don't do anything. So this really is this is the
Speaker 1: United States. We are not vigorously enforcing our sanctions against
Speaker 1: North Korea, and more important, we're not enforcing our sanctions
Speaker 1: against China and Russia, which is busting those sanctions. You know,
Speaker 1: North Korea relies on exports sales. That remains that they're
Speaker 1: getting dollars China is Chinese banks are laundering those dollars
Speaker 1: through our financial system. Buck We know about this, and
Speaker 1: we do nothing to stop China from doing that. So
Speaker 1: this is shame on us because we didn't allow Pablo
Speaker 1: Escobar to run money through New York, but we're allowing
Speaker 1: the Chinese to do so inside North Korea. Right now,
Speaker 1: they don't have a famine like they did in the
Speaker 1: middle of the nineteen nineties, but there is a severe
Speaker 1: shortage of food. They didn't recover very well from COVID.
Speaker 1: There's a lot that we do not know. But basically,
Speaker 1: Kim Jong un is able to survive and we're not.
Speaker 1: We could, we could affect that situation, but we've decided
Speaker 1: not to do so because after the outreach of diplomacy
Speaker 1: during the Trump administration, Biden has gone back to a
Speaker 1: policy you could generally call strategy patients, which is basically
Speaker 1: ignoring the North Koreans. Gordon, how is China doing with
Speaker 1: regard to COVID right now? I know that they've had
Speaker 1: obviously the most extreme lockdowns of any country in the world,
Speaker 1: stretching back for a long time. But I think people
Speaker 1: were pretty surprised in this country to hear that China
Speaker 1: was still having extreme lockdowns well as of the last
Speaker 1: six months. What's going on? Yeah, China had a zero
Speaker 1: COVID policy, which was a policy meant to prevent any
Speaker 1: transmission of the disease, and it was, as you say,
Speaker 1: the most extreme set of disease control measures anywhere, or
Speaker 1: maybe anywhere outside of North Korea. It's not entirely clear,
Speaker 1: but the point is that they had these large quarantine camps,
Speaker 1: Stanley testing, all the rest of it. On December seventh,
Speaker 1: the National Health Commission in China enacted its ten point plan,
Speaker 1: which was essentially the abandonment of zero COVID, and they
Speaker 1: let the disease rip and even by Beijing's own estimates,
Speaker 1: about eighty percent of the population has now been infected
Speaker 1: by COVID, probably more by the end of this winner
Speaker 1: they'll be somewhere, maybe one or two million deaths. We
Speaker 1: don't know, but clearly this has been China has had
Speaker 1: its COVID epidemic in the beginning and now at the end,
Speaker 1: as we've seen in the last couple of months or so,
Speaker 1: and they'll get over it because this is omicron it's
Speaker 1: pretty mild, but nonetheless China was not prepared for this,
Speaker 1: and the Chinese people are pretty upset at the way
Speaker 1: that the government has handled it. What are the chances
Speaker 1: in your mind, Gordon, that we could wake up in
Speaker 1: a week, a month, a year and Xijing Ping is
Speaker 1: no longer the Chinese premiere for reasons other than his
Speaker 1: own natural health and demise. That's a great question. In October,
Speaker 1: at the twentieth National Congress of the Communist Party, where
Speaker 1: cijun Ping got his precedent breaking third term as General Secretary,
Speaker 1: everyone or almost everybody said that he was unchallenged. Since
Speaker 1: that time, Buck, we have seen reversals of his signature
Speaker 1: policies like common prosperity, zero COVID as we talked about
Speaker 1: crackdowns on certain businesses, and so that has led people
Speaker 1: to believe that perhaps cijing Ping is not as powerful
Speaker 1: or influential as he first thought. The Chinese political system
Speaker 1: has gotten more opaque, if that were possible, So there's
Speaker 1: less that we know about it, and we can only
Speaker 1: guess from these policy reversals that there's turmoil at the
Speaker 1: top of the Communist Party, because otherwise c would have
Speaker 1: been able to enforce his will and make sure that
Speaker 1: his policies we're not reversed. So I think that there
Speaker 1: is a real problem. That he's clearly the most powerful,
Speaker 1: but that doesn't mean he's as powerful as he once was. Gordon.
Speaker 1: Also on the American front, if someone told you right
Speaker 1: now that they were considering traveling to China for you know,
Speaker 1: a US citizen for work or for fun, are there concerns?
Speaker 1: I mean, for example, right now, if someone told me, hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: I want to go to Russia. I've never seen Moscow,
Speaker 1: I want to go to a Red Square, I would say,
Speaker 1: bad timing, don't do it now. Do I think they
Speaker 1: know by the odds would be okay? Yeah, probably, but
Speaker 1: I certainly wouldn't tell a family member or a friend
Speaker 1: of mine. I think it's wise to go. Do you
Speaker 1: have a similar feeling about China right now or our
Speaker 1: relations still strong enough that American businessmen can feel safe
Speaker 1: going over there and not worry they're going to get
Speaker 1: detained for some made up reason. It hasn't been saved
Speaker 1: for quite some time. Buck He remember when President Trump
Speaker 1: sought Canada, asked Canada to detain Mung Wang Joe, who
Speaker 1: was the chief financial officer of Lahwei Technologies, which is
Speaker 1: China's national champion telecom equipment provider. China just grabbed two
Speaker 1: Canadian citizens, the two Michaels as they're called, and detained
Speaker 1: them for no reason at all, And this obviously was
Speaker 1: in retaliation for China complying with our request for the
Speaker 1: tension of Msmong. Just a couple of just a day
Speaker 1: or so ago, on Sunday, we learned that Balfon, Chinese
Speaker 1: citizen of China Renaissance, a very influential tech financier, was
Speaker 1: cooperating with authorities as the way they was put in.
Speaker 1: He disappeared in the middle of this month and people
Speaker 1: didn't know whether he had fled or whether he was detained.
Speaker 1: He's detained, I mean, there's just no law. So if
Speaker 1: they can do that to someone really powerful in China,
Speaker 1: they can do that to an American citizen, and I
Speaker 1: think the State Department should have an advisory on travel
Speaker 1: to China, which is more than just be careful, It
Speaker 1: should be thou shalt not go, because I think that
Speaker 1: it's not possible for US to protect American citizens who
Speaker 1: have been detained in China for any reason. So unless
Speaker 1: you're traveling on a diplomatic passport, I don't think that
Speaker 1: it's safe to go to China. Gordon, last one for you,
Speaker 1: how is the Biden administration doing on China policy in general?
Speaker 1: What's your honest assessment? What are they getting right? What
Speaker 1: are they getting wrong? What are you worried about? It's
Speaker 1: not been one hundred percent awful, but they're not moving
Speaker 1: fast enough and they're still issuing. Just to give you
Speaker 1: an example, you know, they're still issuing hollow warnings on
Speaker 1: providing leadable assistance. As we talked about, that's a real
Speaker 1: problem because let me give you just a little bit
Speaker 1: of historical analogy as to how dangerous this is. You
Speaker 1: remember England and France we're issuing hollow warnings to the
Speaker 1: Third Reich in the late nineteen thirties, and we know
Speaker 1: that in August of nineteen thirty nine, Britain and France
Speaker 1: told Hitler that they would declare war on Germany if
Speaker 1: Germany invaded Poland. We know from the archives that Hitler
Speaker 1: didn't believe Britain and France. He thought he could invade
Speaker 1: Poland and there would be no general war in Europe. Well,
Speaker 1: Hitler was the most surprised person in September nineteen thirty
Speaker 1: nine because he invaded Poland, and Britain and France actually
Speaker 1: made good on their warnings the first time they had done.
Speaker 1: So that's our problem right now. We are the Britain
Speaker 1: in France. Of our decade, we've been issuing all these
Speaker 1: hollow warnings to China Biden administration and not following up.
Speaker 1: And we have and this is not just Biden, this
Speaker 1: is previous presidents as well. We've taught the Chinese to
Speaker 1: ignore our warnings and eventually the Biden administration is for
Speaker 1: the protection of the American people, is going to have
Speaker 1: to carry through on one of them. The Chinese aren't
Speaker 1: going to believe us. This is going to get ugly.
Speaker 1: This is nineteen thirty nine ugly. And so yes, their
Speaker 1: Biden administration has done some good things, like the CHIP restrictions,
Speaker 1: the restrictions on selling chip making equipment. But it's too slow,
Speaker 1: and we are now at a point where the Biden
Speaker 1: administration is not acknowledging how dangerous this world is, and
Speaker 1: it's engaging in policies that in the past have led
Speaker 1: to great tragedy. Get the US The Great US China
Speaker 1: Tech War, Gordon's latest book, also The Coming Collapse of China,
Speaker 1: and follow Gordon Chang on Twitter. Gordon always enlightening. Thank
Speaker 1: you for being with us. Good to see you. Thank
Speaker 1: you so much. Buck