Hello and welcome to the panel discussion, World Today.
I'm Ding Ren in Beijing.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has highlighted China's role as a source of stability in the turbulent world.
On Friday, the senior Chinese diplomat answered more than 20 questions on the sidelines of annual session of the country's national legislature.
One held the progress of frameworks including BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, announcing China will host an SCO summit in Tianjin, in autumn.
He also called on China and the United States to seek peaceful coexistence, saying mutual respect is an important prerequisite.
The foreign minister reiterated that China maintains an objective and impartial stance on the Ukraine crisis, calling on all parties to work towards a fair and durable peace deal.
He said Beijing will continue to strive for justice and peace in the Middle East.
So in this edition of the program, we will delve into Wang Yi's key messages on China's foreign policy.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching world today.
So joining us now on the line are Wahweg Powel, a Senior Fellow with the Taihe Institute, an Adjunct Professor who has Queensland University of Technology, Professor Yau Shujie from Chongqing University, and a Professor Wang Zhenxui from the School of Public Administration who has Zhejiang University.
So thank you very much for joining us today gentlemen.
First of all, to start with you, Wowik, Foreign Minister Wang Yi, talked about last year's highlights in China's top leader diplomacy.
And this year, according to Foreign Minister Wang Yi, President Xi Jinping will continue to make some foreign visits, and China will host a few events, including one that will commemorate a very big moment after the victory in the fight against fascism in history, as well as a Shanghai cooperation organization summit held in Tianjin.
Now, of course, I mean, different diplomatic occasions may have different contacts and different focuses.
But each time when you see President Xi Jinping engage with his foreign counterparts, engage with foreign leaders.
What do you think are some of the key messages from China that the Chinese president tends to convey?
I think the fundamental message is that there is a need for countries to focus on continual dialogue as the underlying methodology to manage their differences, but importantly also to align around common aspirations, and this can only be done if countries are committed to having the doors open and being willing to sit down and listen to what others have to say and to take on board what others are saying as part of the ongoing processes of transnational diplomacy.
I think the other thing that President Xi seeks to impress upon counterparties is that as China has developed over the past 40 or so years it has sought to become a responsible actor on the global stage.
And it does that by presenting itself in a steady and predictable manner, so as to provide a certain environment for other actors to gauge their own actions around.
But importantly, I think, and increasingly, China is also playing the role of an enabler by providing other countries with access to markets, know -how, technologies, as well as the experience of China's own modernization path so that other nations can begin to forge their own development pathways.
So they're the kinds of messages that I think President Xi Jinping consistently conveys to other national leaders when they meet.
Hmmm, so Professor Yao going to you, The Chinese foreign minister has reiterated that against the backdrop of global volatility and global uncertainty, China will continue to be a stabilizing force that promotes justice, peace, unity and inclusiveness, for example.
So to what extent do you think this particular piece of determination on China's part?
can counterbalance the turbulence that can be expected in terms of say global politics, international affairs over the course of 2025.
Yes, I mean, the global situation has been very turbulent.
You can see only the economy and trade confusion between major economy between the United States in China, and also between the United States, Europe, and other countries, and the war in the Carder Strait, and also the Wukmen War.
There are many other things, including even the global financial crisis in the early part of the centuries.
China has played a very important role in stabilizing the global economy and the global politics and global diplomacy by actively engaging in dialogue, and sending out messages that China will wish people to restrain their military activity against the global trade and investment order.
And China has played a very important role in different aspects.
That number is one of the largest economies in the world and also the biggest exporter and importer of the merchandise trade.
Now this already gives a fairly strong stabilisation effect in the global economy and trade, as well as investments, of course.
Another thing, in terms of international politics, China always tries to be as neutral as possible.
For example, like the current conflict in the Middle East and also the European continent.
China always appealed to all the parties.
The diplomatic discussion is better than that of the confrontation.
All these concepts are activity including the engagement into the multilateral organization, For example, in the Shanghai cooperation, the United Nations, China gives a voice to peace and common prosperity and the common desire and demand of the human being.
And every country should respect other peoples' human rights, as well as their political stability, rather than entering into a different soil and different entity to create trouble with There is absolutely political biases, I think this is the attitude.
Hmm, absolutely. So, Professor Wong, going to you, I mean when we talk about the sources of international turbulence and uncertainty nowadays, well of course, there were way too many the Ukraine crisis, the gather crisis, etc. And going back to the history a little bit, more than a century ago, at the Paris Peace conference immediately after the end of the first world war, Chinese representatives raised a question at the time.
It goes like this, might is right, or should a right prevail over might?
so now when we take a look at the situation today, do you think there is a risk that our our global order is going back to the law of the jungle?
Wang Yi suggested that in a scenario where Our countries are talking about putting themselves first in positions of strength.
Things will be in chaos.
What is your take? Okay.
I think first of all, we are in quite a difficult time in terms of global cooperation and getting countries to collaborate to generate economic growth and peace for the humankind.
In that sense, it is quite a different time compared to 15 years ago.
But on the other hand, I think I am more optimistic than what you were in hinting, compared to the 1910s, through the first and second World War periods.
I think a humankind has make a big progress in terms of understanding the inevitability of nations working together for common future.
Like the World War I time, it was the time that countries didn't know people, humankind had not learned that there's no way for nations to solve problems by forces, by military forces and what the term might mean by the Chinese delegation, By the way, thank you for this famous quote.
It's a reminder for us that between countries, among countries, we should not restore to military or material forces.
So today, I think after the World War II, after end of the Cold War, and after about 30 years of progress in global integration and globalization, actually people have learned Of course, unfortunately, it is now the United States that is making a big change in terms of its global outlooks.
It is retreating from a lot of global responsibilities.
It is using its strength, using its might to make threats to some countries.
That's very unfortunate, but I think the global community has something to understand you know, country, that shouldn't be the correct way to solve differences to solve global issues.
So when you talk about mite there's another mite core you can say intellectual leadership or moral leadership.
They are countries that can, can play a lot of this leadership roles in promoting collaboration in reducing tensions and so on.
So I'm more optimistic than you are.
Okay, so Wauig going back to you, in particular we understand in his responses to several questions actually Wang Yi pledged that China will continue to promote economic openness in a high -quality way.
So at a time when we are seeing some intensifying attempts on decoupling, including decoupling from China, but also elsewhere in the world, why do you think China remains committed to international cooperation and openness, including further opening China's own economy in various ways?
Look, there's both practical reasons for this, as well as theoretical and philosophical reasons.
In practical terms, China has learned from its own experience that opening up to the world, and also enabling others from the rest of the world to interact with China, creates the conditions in which both parties can benefit from the exchange, whether that's in the processes of exchanging goods and services or in cultural exchange, let alone the exchange of knowledges and technologies.
So, that's the practical experience, and the runs are on the board.
The philosophical dimensions are also important to consider because what they actually show is that China's commitment to the pathway of global collaboration is grounded on a sense that the world and the countries in the world are intimately interconnected with each other.
So the idea that a country can articulate a set of interests that somehow are separate from those of others in the world is not only self -destructive but it's also unrealistic.
In reality, the existence of countries and the nature of their interests are in part a function of the fact that they are recognized and acknowledged by others, so there's a philosophical dimension to all of this, too.
Lastly, there's a theoretical dimension, and this goes to the ways in which we can think about efforts to create collaborative equilibrium in games involving multiple actors, or the pursuit of competitive equilibriums.
So this goes back to classic game theory and ideas related to the prisoner's dilemma.
In the prisoner's dilemma, you have two actors who would actually achieve optimal outcomes for themselves if they could actually coordinate their actions.
But because they can't communicate with each other in the way that that particular game is set up, there is a possibility that they will pursue actions that may they are maybe in their own interest but ultimately are suboptimal.
The beauty of the global environment is that communications and interactions have intensified over the last 100 years, which means that efforts to have single countries or a small number of countries to pursue competitive equilibria are actually overcome and undermined by the ability of other countries to communicate, collaborate and coordinate with each other.
Of course, some countries will seek to sabotage those efforts, but as it becomes clearer to everybody that there are spoilers in the system, such as pursuing regime change and colour revolutions and other forms of interference in the collaboration of other countries, the other countries are actually better able to handle the pressures that come from spoilers who seek to sabotage collaboration.
So like the others I'm marginally optimistic in fact that persistence with this strategy of collaboration will actually lead to better outcomes in the end.
Yeah, so collaboration are multiple fronts, for example between China and Russia collaboration has been going on quite well in most recent years not only recent years but in most recent decades, since the early 2000s I would say.
When we talk about China -Russia ties, Professor Yuan, the Chinese Foreign Minister said the ties' internal dynamics will remain strong no matter how international situation evolves, suggesting that Beijing and Moscow have already figured out a way of how to have a mature resilient and stable relationship.
So, do you agree that China -Ragitize will be, to use a scientific term here, a constant in the turbulent world rather than a geopolitical variable?
Yes, in a sense, when you suggest constant, I think in international theories, we refer to some like a structural factor and this there's a stable China -Russia relation will be a remain a structural factor of the global affairs and the reason is determined by many other structural factors that China and Russia feel a good relation between the two are beneficial to both sides and it is beneficial to the global order.
So, there's very high level of agreement between the two countries' leadership and the two people that the two needs to continue to build cooperative and mutually supporting our relationship and it is benefiting both sides.
Okay, then between China and the United States things are more thorny China's foreign minister Wang Yi said that the United States cannot expect to have a pattern where Washington on one hand is moving to contain China or counter China but on the other hand seeks to have a somehow friendly ties or benign ties with China what is your take about this professor Yau for example what do you think are some of the key efforts that should be made here in order to have mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and women cooperation between the US and China.
The difficulty between the China -US legislation is because the US attitude is you know is a double standard.
On the one hand, regard China is a developing country, is a poor country compared to the United States, so China should listen to the United States.
On the other hand, when you talking about market assets, I think the United States asked the Chinese counterpart to open the door wider for the United States export.
And also in terms of technological corporations, the U .S.
always considered it is superior in every aspect of the technological innovation.
So, any engagement with China would end up in technology being stolen by the Chinese companies.
But in reality, I think the US multinational company has made huge investment into the Chinese market in making huge profit for many, many years.
So, the benefit that the United States is getting from the Chinese market tends to ignore but the US administration.
And on the service, I think you see there's a trade in balances between the two.
They make blend. The Chinese are dumping the cheap product into the US market.
But you can see the benefit of the US consumers of enjoying the relatively high quality product with low prices.
This is the benefit that the US economy is getting from.
So this concept of a twisted sort in the political mindset of the current administration by Donald Trump or Biden, and even going back to some other administration, there's always an unequal treatment and discrimination against the Chinese.
If the US is willing to remove some of the discrimination and also mitigate this kind of double standard measurement against the relationship, I think China and the US could be even better in the future.
And this is why Mr. Wang is saying that you cannot have this imbalance aspect.
On the one hand, you expect Chinese to behave really well, and on the other hand, you don't behave very well.
So I think both party have to be have reasonably well in order to get this mutual benefit.
So this is the problem.
The problem may be long lasting, it can cannot be dissolved in the short term because of the mindset.
You know, a lot in the in the politician in the United States have been for so long and the Chinese have been discriminating for so long.
So it makes some time to you know, to absorb this iceberg.
So yes, it is possible to get better, but I think people have to change attitude, particularly the United States.
So Professor Wang, of course, like we heard, Professor Yao talking about this economic and trade issues are a very important aspect of the relationship between the US and China.
Now, the Chinese Foreign Minister has urged the Trump administration to reflect on the trade war since 2018.
Looking back, do you think Washington has achieved its — achieved what it wants to achieve economically on issues like trade deficit or manufacturing by fighting a trade war with China?
Well, I think the answer to that question is very simple.
In this note, the trade war, the tariff war, was a totally disaster for the US economy.
US people are suffering very rapidly raising commodity prices and living costs.
And then there's no way the US is going to re -industrialize through these kind of protectionist measures.
I mean, there are so many figures in studies showing that.
So and we have economists here to talk about this.
And even for the next run, what Trump is doing for his next four years, all the forecasts are pointing otherwise, It's going to hurt the US economy, it will matter much less for the Chinese economy, and it will not do well to US purpose of bringing back manufacturing to the US economy.
So very briefly, Huawei, the final question before we need to take a short break.
With regard to the so -called science and tech competition between China and the United States, Wang Yi has warned against using technology as a tool to build an iron curtain.
He even said, whenever there is blockade and containment, there is breakthrough and new innovation.
So has that been the case judging from the track records of the People's Republic of China?
Look, it's most evident when we look at the past six or seven years, particularly in relation to how the United States has actively sought to curtail China's access to particular technologies and limit the ability of Chinese firms at the cutting edge of technology to develop their own capabilities, whether it's been sanctions on Huawei or export restrictions conditions on various parts of the semiconductor process.
The end result, of course, has been a catalyzing of massive commitments from Chinese enterprises and government to develop a domestic capability and the result of that is a market environment at a global scale where Chinese firms will progressively expand their market share in in areas such as the larger, more traditional forms of semiconductors.
And they eventually catch up with some of the cutting -edge technologies.
I take a point. So let's take a very short break here.
Coming back, our discussion will continue.
Stay tuned. You are back with World Today.
I'm Dean Henning Baixin.
Today we're exploring the key messages from Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi at the annual session of China's National Legislature.
Joining our discussion, Wawak Powwow, a senior fellow with the Taihe Institute, an adjunct professor with Queensland University of Technology, Professor Yao Shujie from Chongqing University, and a professor Wang Zhenxui from the School of Public Administration with Zhejiang University.
Professor Yao Shujie, with regard to the relations between China and Europe, the Chinese foreign minister has highlighted this very exponential growth in terms of the two -way trade and investments over the past half a century call on the two sides to continue to see each other as a partner.
So, what do you make of the strategic significance of China -Europe cooperation and collaboration in the world today?
Yes. About 20 years ago, the European Union as a economic block is the biggest economy power in the world, bigger than the United States and China, and up to the financial crisis the European debt crisis.
I think the European economy is, you know, relatively to the United State is getting a little bit smaller, and is now in parallel with the Chinese economy.
So, now a day we're talking about the major economic block is the United States, Europe, the Western Europe, and China.
So this means that the relationship between China and in the United States is important, but equally important is the China -EU relationship.
One important issue that we have discussed is the US -China relationship has been very turbulent by the Trump administration to impose the tariff and also the technological war against the Chinese.
And as we have mentioned, the Chinese have been coping very well.
In terms of international trade, we are doing very legitimately in terms of the export volumes and also the trade balances, and technological brokerage doesn't actually kill the Chinese high -tech companies such as Huawei, actually, Huawei turn up to be even stronger.
And they seem like dip -stick, like miners, we're just talking about this, and also the space technology China is doing fairly, fairly, markedly well.
Now, in terms of Europe, come to our key, key point, Europe have been playing a role which is much more friendly compared to the United States.
The problem with Europe is that is highly effective because there are so many members there and they don't have a uniform policy.
So it makes the international regulation is a little bit more complicated.
Another thing is that some of the European countries share the same mentality like the United States.
They believe they have a technological superiority, and they believe that the relationship, you know, the cooperation, especially on the high -end, industrial and technological side, they will lose out to the Chinese counterpart.
But this concert mentality is similar to the United States attitude is quite negative for the relationship between Europe and China.
So the best thing for both sides to mutually benefit each other, I think they got to rectify the attitude first and come to the realization of where that China and the EU can cooperate to benefit both sides.
So this is why Mr. Waani emphasized a good partner.
A good partner is not just working together, but sink together, work together, and try to find where the complementality are, whether it's technology, whether it's natural resources.
So this is fairly important because if China and the EU you can work together much better than the China -U .S.
regulation, then it will give some demonstrating example to the U .S.
and say, look, we have to really have to work in a friendly way, LOLism antagonizing way.
Working together in a friendly manner.
That's a key message I heard from Professor Yao.
So, Professor Wang, when we talk about China -Japan relations, Do you think this same pattern should also apply?
What we have heard from the Chinese Foreign Minister is that on one hand, he acknowledged the warming in this China -Japan ties since sometime last year, but in the meantime, he has also caught on Japan to pay more attention to those historical controversial issues and adhere to its pacifist constitution, say warning Japan against making provocations on the Taiwan question.
I think the China -Japan relation yeah there are some similarities between this pair of relation and China -EU relation is that there are great potential, great opportunities for economic and technological cooperation so there's an economic foundation for China and Japan to get along, try to get along well.
But there are big challenges.
One is, of course, what kind of role Japan wants to play in the US strategy against China.
Will Japan play a very active role supporting US to undermine China's interests?
That's a big question.
And the other is Taiwan, and what you mentioned, the Minister Wang -Yi mentioned the Japanese positions regarding its specific constitution.
These matters are also related to how Japan sees US, US's role, US strategy, US's intention against China.
So, I think China is very clear that if Japan is willing willing to look after, to pay attention to China's security interests in the sense, respect China's sovereignty over Taiwan, and stay with the specific constitutional requirements.
There are rooms for the two countries to improve the relation, to even to make the relation better, and that will serve the interest of the two peoples.
And it will be it will be good good factor for the global order as well Hmm now talking about global order, of course United States the EU Japan these countries or these blocks we have mentioned they all belong to the global north, but Nowadays the collective rise of the global south really seems to be phenomenal so Warwick, so do you agree with Wang Yi when he made this point that the Global South will play a key role in determining whether the world will turn for the better.
And why do you think China insists that it is rooted in and it belongs to the Global South?
Well China is a developing nation.
It continues to work towards reaching its own objectives of becoming a fully developed economy sometime over the course of the next few decades.
But China, I think has a very clear sense of where it comes from.
And as a result of that, appreciates that it also has an historic responsibility.
This historic responsibility goes to the heart of, I think the major transformations that are taking place in the global order of things that we are witnessing today.
And that is the culmination of many decades of anti -colonial struggles across the globe as formerly colonised nations have been able to not only achieve legal or political independence as many did in the 50s and the 60s, but now are able to achieve or to a great extent begin their pathway of achieving economic sovereignty, which means that they are finally in a position to realize their own potential as countries and peoples.
And China's own rise has been very central to that.
Its rise has ensured that there are alternatives in the world now that enable other countries, particularly those in the global south, to break through from the shackles of financial exploitation and resources exploitation that have been part and parcel of the global financial and economic structures since Bretton Woods.
So I think China has a sense of responsibility and because it does, it will continue to speak out on behalf of the global South, but importantly, not just on behalf of the global South, but act as a focal point that can coordinate and amplify the voices of the global south, so that they can be heard and for the global south to have a proper seat at the table of decision making that will shape the future of the world for the rest of this century.
Actually, when we talk about China's engagement with the global south, we're talking about.
Say China's ties with Africa for example and China's engagement with Latin America those are two important pillars of the South South cooperation on which the Chinese foreign minister has also elaborated as well.
He even shared some small story for example an African farmer going to China's Hunan province, to show his thankfulness and gratitude towards Yuan Longping, the innovator and a father of this hybrid rice, which have contributed to the full security on the African continent.
That's a small story that he shared.
So ultimately Professor Wang, what do you think has made China win the hearts of Africa and Latin America?
Well, of course, China needs to maintain a very humble posture, reaching out to support, give support to African countries and other Southern countries, to help them to achieve their national aspirations.
But I think the reason that China is getting quite well along with these countries is China's willingness to He genuinely sustained support financial high logic knowledge.
I mentioned my father, in the 1970s, he was a government -cent engineer team to Kaplan, and I was born during those years.
So me, with African friends, I always mentioned this historical episode, So the relation between China, the very genuine willingness of China to support these countries has a long history.
And today, with much better capacity, much more resources and much more economic weight, China can do much more.
We see many good things are happening in these countries because of the support and help from China?
Professor Yao, this year we understand for example, South Africa is going to host a G20 summit, this is the first time that a G20 summit is to be held on the African continent, and in the meantime, Brazil is also set to host a summit of the BRICS grouping.
With that in mind, what kind of support do you think China can give in order to make voices from the global cells better heard at those two particular events?
Yes. The BRICS economy broke and also the G20 is… are two phenomena in the new centuries, especially up to the global financial crisis.
The absolute dominance of the western G7 industrial economy have been gradually in parallel with the G20, technology, which involve not only the G7 but another 13 countries joining, including the European Union.
This has a much more representative voice in the international political and economy affairs.
Now, the British, led by China, Russia, India, South Africa, Brazil, they have a huge population.
I mean, India and China alone, they have over nearly three billion people, which is about more than 30 % of the global population.
And Brazil is also a big country, Russia is also relatively large country, and the economy is just rapidly emerging in the new century.
They are important in the international trade, the investment, and other things, are getting more and more recognized by the global community.
So I think the new century withdrawal, we discussed this, and lots of turbulence and uncertainty and threat and risk and so on and so forth, but the G7 and the Greeks, they emerged to become a very stable multinational organization.
the providing the dialogue platform so China's support is feasible.
China would have unconditional support to this you know multilateral you know organization by not only actively participating in the event but also financially given as much support as possible and open the door as much wider as possible for Google and services from the other countries into the domestic markets.
So this is what China can play.
And in terms of talking about military conflict, China as I mentioned, always try to have a fairly firm and constant attitude of peace and negotiation.
Yeah. So, Wal -Wake, when we talk about global South actually India represents another um significant and key player here and some people are even talking about this narrative like China and India are rivaling for uh for influence for the so -called influence or competing for the leadership within the global south what is your take in this regard and actually when we talk about the relations between uh China and India China's foreign minister has caught on both sides, to provide support each other's development, rather than consuming each other's development energy.
Is that possible? Yeah, the relationship between India and China, of course, is a complex one, but, in essence, those who try to paint a picture of two large countries engaged in some kind of rivalry ready to be the quote leader of the Global South unquote really misrepresents the ways in which the multipolarity that characterizes the Global South actually exists.
These aren't countries that are seeking to somehow be the leader of a group.
What both of these countries have focus upon, first and foremost, is their own development.
And from that, they seek to reach out and find ways in which their own development can enhance in power the development opportunities of others and, of course, receive the benefits, the feedback benefits of others own development.
So I don't think that the characterization of the India -China relationship as one of rivalry for leadership of the global south is necessarily a very helpful one.
I think the countries actually behave in far more sophisticated ways and look for opportunities to advance themselves, first and foremost, to bring better economic and social outcomes to their own societies and, of course, in doing so, contribute ultimately to the creation of a more stable multipolar global order.
So that, I think, is a better way of understanding the complex and at times subtle relationships between China and India.
Of course, they are neighboring countries, which creates their own challenges.
And from time to time, unsurprisingly, neighboring countries have issues that only neighboring countries do have.
And these are, by and large, managed with a level of professional civility and sensibility.
And hopefully over time, the issues can be addressed to become a more stable settlement, enabling both countries to deepen their collaborative relationships to mutual benefit.
Yeah, I very much resonate with this point, say some problems will only arise between or among neighboring countries.
That's a very valid point, so exactly that's one thing that China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi has elaborated with regard to China's neighborhood diplomacy.
He has emphasized mutual benefits, consultation, prosperity, and peace, et cetera.
So professor Wang in your observation, why do you think to many countries in China's neighborhood community, China represents an opportunity for prosperity.
For example, China is the largest trading partner for 18 countries in its neighborhoods community and in the meantime, more than a dozen, more than two dozen countries in China's neighbourhood have signed on to the Belt and Road Initiative.
Yes, I think one is that good neighbourhood is one important objective of China's foreign policy.
It plays a very heavy focus on cultivating and good relations with neighboring countries.
And then I think a typical example, a very successful pair of neighbor relations is between China and Asian countries, especially in raccoon river countries.
And I think Laos – you know, the railway between China and Laos were opened several years ago.
And then now we are seeing the railway networks extending to Thailand and eventually to Malaysia and Singapore.
So they are, I mean when countries want to work together as good neighbors and build a good future together, they can.
And China provide a lot of opportunities.
China is a big market for many of these countries' products.
China can be a source of investment coming into these countries.
China can share technologies and other know -hows to these countries.
So things can go well if countries are willing to work together.
In the India case, and I think you already talked about it, the main problem is the mutual perception and India has in its own ego, in its own understanding of the world, he sees himself as a leader of the global south of the developing countries, And it even it was not ready to, to take China's achievement as a successful case of developing countries.
It cannot quite appreciate China's success, and it is unwilling to face that.
So Professor Yao Suji, if we're talking about this very important reality that China represents an opportunity for prosperity for countries in China's neighborhood community.
If that is the case, why do you think certain countries in China's neighborhood, for example, the Philippines, does not want to have a stable relationship with China right now?
The Chinese Foreign Minister has described Manila's current behavior in the South China Sea as a shadow play.
what is your take? Yeah, the most important difficulty for China in some of the countries is regulation, particularly the Philippines, and to some extent, in some particular point in Vietnam as well.
It's because of the domestic political stability and divided views which in the country suggest the Philippines because some administration, they are more friendly with the Chinese, and some administration, they are less friendly.
And the policy is not absolutely consistent between one administration and the others.
So this is the problem.
But on the main, I think because of the South China Sea dispute, because the Philippines, they believe the example of a territory is theirs.
And China believe it's theirs.
And there are there are no certainty of settlement yet, they are still under discussion.
So the Philippine they always play in know, a certain discard that we are because Philippine is smaller country, China is a bigger country.
So they believe that if they cry a little bit louder, then it may win some support from America and the rest of the world.
But in In reality, some of the crisis, some of the crisis doesn't have a solid reason, at least from the perspective of the Chinese side.
So this is the issue.
And in terms of business relationship, because the Philippine has been colonized by the Japanese and up to the Second World War, is more or less colonized by the United States, although it's a different context of colonization.
education. So the attitude and also the culture, the education in the Philippines, they actually biased against the reality of the Chinese society and the Chinese people.
So what we need to resolve is through more dialogue, through more diplomatic discussion and people to people's exchange, to know each other what they want to do, what they want to realize for their benefit, not only for the economy, but also the political relationship.
It is complicated, but it is not a one -sided track.
They will get worse.
Sometimes they can get better.
So we just hope that they can get better over time.
Yeah. If history is of any guidance, we definitely do hope that Manila can manage to have a better relations with Beijing, that's for sure.
So the final question before we'll let you go and this question goes to Wawek.
What do you make of China's mentality on the United Nations?
Wang Yi said, the more complex our global order becomes and the more international conflicts and intuitions where we are witnessing the more we need to adhere to this UN centered international system.
What do you What do you think this tells us about China's approach to global governance?
I think it tells us a few important things.
Firstly, it tells us that China's approach to international institutions is very pragmatic.
The United Nations was formed after the Second World War and it of course has been an imperfect institution ever since.
With all that said and done China's approach recognizes firstly that it's better to work with what you have and to make the most of it.
Because pulling together an international institution that has the buy -in of over 190 countries is a very tall order indeed, and notwithstanding some of the challenges and limitations of the United Nations, it would be foolish to to throw the baby out with the bath water as the English saying would go.
So I think the first thing is, is that China has a very pragmatic view towards international institutions like the United Nations.
The second thing I think it tells us is a recognition that problems need to be solved in a multi -lateral or a multipolar way.
And that means having forums in which the voices of all can be heard and amplified and taken on board.
And for solutions to be developed from the ground up through the processes of consensus building.
So that they can be stabilised in problem situations around the world.
So, I think that there is secondly a recognition that solving problems globally, particularly complex ones that don't have clear and simple national boundaries, requires dialogue.
And dialogue can best take place through multilateral formats like the United Nations.
And I think the third thing is actually again, a philosophical proposition and that is that The United Nations, again for all of its limitations and faults, represents an aspiration for a global architecture of governance that emphasizes the capacity of nations to work through dialogue to identify common objectives and agree on solutions that create a collaborative equilibrium rather than pursue processes and mechanisms that pull countries apart.
Mmm. A big thank you to our panellists.
Waowi SEWAL from the Taihe Institute, and Professor Yao Xuji from Chongqing University, Professor Wang Zhenxu from Zhejiang University.
That's all the time for this edition of WorldToday.
I'm Ding Hening Beijing, bye for now.
you
