Being tested like never before. That, combined with populist and over thest forces all world, including here in the United States means what we tend to expect of the International Order is now open to question. Given the history of johns ,opkins and its establishment we might once again reshape international affairs. Continuesmpensation an enduring tradition of. Ialogue on the study of china we have long understood and the importance of chinas relationships around the world, and especially its relationships with the United States. Since the center opened its doors in 1986, we have shaped of u. S. Chinaades relations through our alumni, who have gone on to be global leaders. The scholarship of our esteemed leaders on china has influenced government and the private sector and we are privileged to be hearing from some of them today. Joining the Panel Discussion will be our own professor david he isthe director one of the leading scholars of china today and many institutions have benefited from his wise counsel and scholarship on china. We are also joined by cui liru the former president of the China Institute of contemporary international relations. He serves as the advisor from multiple institutions. He specializes in u. S. Foreign policy, u. S. China relations, International Security issues and Chinese Foreign policy, and it is welcome it is wonderful to be welcoming him today. It is also my great pleasure to. Ntroduce amy celico she is the principle of Albright Stonebridge group and leads the firms china team and washington, d c, drawing washington, d. C. , drawing on her experience in government. She has a deep understanding of the Financial Services in china, rights,tual property and im proud to say she is a hopkins of our johns center. Sais china, and our friends, the chinau. S. Exchange foundation for hosting this event. Finally, i would like to thank and introduce our moderator did day moderator today, dr. John lipsky, a distinguished scholar at the henry a. Kissinger center for global affairs. Without further do, please join me in welcoming dr. Lipsky to the podium. Thank you. [applause] dr. Lipsky i can assure you i deserve no applause. I have the second easiest job. You have the easiest job. You get to sit and enjoy a presentation by our three speakers. First we must talk about how we will go about this. We will hear from each of our speakers in turn. Of re all very capable and youre very capable of knowing how this program will unfold. We will start with professor cui, and then professor lampton, and then amy celico, who, just to amplify what he said is not only a graduate of sais, but attended all three sais campuses. So, we are especially proud of her accomplishments. Our threel have speakers at this event, and then i will rejoin you and they will join us on stage, we will have a brief discussion and then open to questions from you, the audience. Without further a do, let me just add my welcome. Things to the u. S. China wehange foundation, and would like thanks to the u. S. China Exchange Foundation and we would like to tell professor cui how honored and pleased we are to have him. The floor is yours. [applause] that should be turned on. All set. Professor cui all set . Thank you very much, professor lipsky. I would also like to thank johnshina exchange, and hopkins university. It is very much an honor for me to have these duties. There are discussions with the specialists on china in the United States. Today is u. S. China relations and how to manage the transition. Vision there are three keywords in my topic today. They are transition, management, and accommodation. I think that there are also or three points of my presentation. Now, let me start from the first keyword transition. Establish a balance, but that has been changing because of the equation of the power and the deep interdependence developing in china and the between the two country. An unprecedented evaluation process of the two major countries. Complicatedup issues and uncertainties of the future development. Balance has of the been driven traditionally by chinas economic growth, but the most demonstrative has been the year of 2010 when chinas judy b gdp surpassed japan and became the number two largest economy. Since then, china has consistently strengthened the number two position by and large in large and be gdp gap with the United States. Up until the year 2006, the gdp of those three countries are for vely 18, 11, and 4, and china will likely surpass the u. S. In becoming the largest economy in the next 10 to 15 years. Of course, chinas population is much larger, so its for capita gdp is far behind that of the United States. Such dramatic economic has quickly driven s process and comprehensive National Power to a new level. Happenedf these have with a parallel process with chinas engagement outside the world. Horizon haseful become the most important element in the polarization process after the cold war was over. Has change the priority and the special balance in the relationship between the two countries. With the political predominance while chinas capacity and the diplomatic positivity has extended, on the other hand, there has been deeply growing interdependence in the chinau. S. Economic relations, but for most americans the first. S of far greater importance , due to such an attitude, there must be corresponding policy implications. It has an effect on all dimensions of the u. S. Have been china relationship. The u. S. China relationship. Consequently, there has been ,rowing tension and new issues the newlyview balance has been part of two further parallel trends strategic politician and pragmatic corporation. Unprecedented in history. I regarded as a new configuration emerging area now, let me turn to the second keyword. Management. Observing chinau. S. Relations, a relationship between the two. Argest economies is most prominent nowadays the growing strategic competition. Strategist in washington regard chinas rising with its growing entrant, international inference and proactive diplomacy as a major chain challenge to u. S. World leadership. They indicate strongly that china should now be tackled. , hedging is required. The major china policy of readjustment has been carried out with the beijing rebalance strategy, including substantial military and economic measures. Course has been met by chinas reaction to strengthen their National Defense capabilities and countermeasures. Given strategic competition in china and the United States leads to more hedging and risk with each other that creates further impact on each others perceptions of strategic intentions from the other side. These make policy coordination more difficult. At the same time, there is the third party factor. Those are becoming more automatic. Addedpolicies have complexity to the situation. A typical case of such a situation now is occurring in careers where cooperation is dprkd to address the regime. Strategic competition also constitutes the important intervention between the china sean, island. Such u. S. Intervention in the name of taking care of its age allies poses between thelenges two governments on these kinds of issues. Therefore, china could not raise u. S. Ions about the role of systems in asia. Ant is if it is going to be asian nato. Is relevant to the above development, that there is up power struggle a power struggle for primacy in the Pacific Region going on between the u. S. And china. The former is to establish the power is to maintain the status quo. Revisehe latter is to the status quo. There is concern that. Ompetition will devolve this is also a realistic possibility. It seems not so important to. Ebate when both sides are making preparations based on such perceptions, the most important thing is to avoid the tragedy and then the possible would be as the other side requires or both sides would make a strategic compromise. So far, we dont see any such and we are optimistic enough about the future development. That means what we can do is to manage the strategic competition to ensure confrontations can be avoided. So, the two governments have reached the agreement of no and are engaged in confidence holding measures and crisis management. The mechanisms have been set up effective relationships, proper handling of disputes, and Resource Management on certain urgent issues. Despite management and security risks, another challenge in my view in the transition period that both countries should Pay Attention is the political area. Smart, to be strong and to confront pressure from the domestic political establishment. For Different Reasons from both china and the United States, nationalism and populism are rising. The foreignpolicy issues have become ever more closely related as economic twordependence between the countries has developed further. Development of us. China relations tells that historical junctures, the and the policymaking branches in the government are extremely important with strategic insights, political to ensure them tot important relationship develop the longterm interest of the two nations. Current is true in the transition of our relations. Few words on the relationship in asia. The configuration has been changing and the balance is shifting, which probably is irreversible. Based on that understanding, i believe the accommodation of isna in the United States the only prospect we should strike for. And that should also be among a more stable framework. I also believe that kind of framework is an important parts of multipolarization. Before that could be realized then, i think that there will be a pretty long transition period, and how long that will be depends on how the interplay between the two relations countries handle their differences. Of course, fundamentally speaking, i think it depends more on the development of each country. Theideal situation of Development Process could be will bent, technically avoiding the damaging tofrontations stepbystep develop into a positive, constructive management. Then to add more and more consensus for our cooperation which will be beneficial to both countries, and that will pave framework oftable our future accommodations, and that process could be what dr. Coalitionsaid, because coevolution, because the United States and china that the other will change likewise. Each country will maintain their course, but also to accommodate each other. That idea goes the politicians and the diplomats to not only study the past experience in history, but also should have very much a constructive vision of the developand we should our relationship physically, but we should develop our relations and value. That we can find higher toues and reach consensus resolve our differences or disputes. Solve them right away. Before that has been realized, i relationsinau. S. Pressed between the practicalf the relations. In the past history, in several decades demonstrates that and calculations based on rationality will always on important historical junctures and issues. I believe this is something given by the history and the culture of two great nations. I amfore, personally cautiously optimistic about our future. Thank you very much. [applause] prof. Lampton good evening. Can everyone hear me . If my voice gets too far away from the microphone, just wave. I am glad to be here this evening. Was trying to think about how long we have known each other. 25 years or 30, at least. Our gray hair is one indication. Anyway, thank you so much for your remarks and thank you all for being here. Cuis remarks are very much like an article he wrote in 2011. About six years ago in a very rapidly changing world. It is a measure of his deep thoughts that he could write in 2000 11, something that is meaningful, essentially, today as well. 2000 11, he said that china can no longer remain a bystander surveying the world beyond the seas. I think you said that was a quote from mao. An it was much rather act as insider. He called for china to play a greater role in the world in a responsible way. Like today, he talked about how power in the world was rebalancing in the direction of china. I think that is obvious. And that the United States and china needed to jointly manage ,hat you called at that time volatility. Hotspots. Global economic volatility and so forth. I thinkto go youve framed the problem very well. I want to ask the question how do we think about doing that . I think the u. S. Has some things to do and i want to talk more about what we might do to be pragmatic, place importance on interdependence at the same time that we have this strategic competition. I think it is no surprise to anyone that i and most americans would prefer to adjust to a changing balance as little as possible. We would like to see our in some diminished sense or at least balanced to the minimal degree. We have a lot of interest in managing volatility. I would add the Global Economy to that list of things and certainly north korea. , however, that we have to start with a premise which is at the moment, i dont think the environment is inoming more conducive either country to the management you called for six years ago and that i think you are calling for now. Athink we have to start from kind of realism about what some of the problems are. We share the goal that the environment has its problems. Bothnk we have interest in of our capitals, frankly, that are more assertive than the management we have had previously. You can think what you think about it, but i think in the subjective reality. Secondly, it is important to americans and the foreign policy, they look at the direction of evolution. Internal governments, it human rights related issues. And i think not all americans of great about anything, but i think there is some consensus that china is not moving is moving in a more authoritative direction. I think we have to acknowledge that as a problem. I think if we look at china and how it is viewing the United States, every time i go to china, people tell me why is the United States trying to slow us down . A repetitives word. In some sense, i think we both see each others internal policies going in a direction that are not very conducive to the kind of management youre calling for. As you mentioned in passing, this environment also includes third parties. Going in directions that are problematic for our part for our bilateral relationship. Most prominently at the moment, it would be north korea but taiwan is a problem. Towards autonomy are deeply disturbing to china. I would say we have an environment that is not conducive, necessarily, to pragmatism and farsighted management of volatile issues. Framework that though, it let me suggest three things i think the United States really needs to do. Maybe in the discussion along with reacting to amys remarks as well, we can talk about how feasible or troublesome some of these reactions might be. First of all, economically. I have been doing a Research Project on chinas really impressive effort to build railroads in southeast asia. Is theally struck me degree to which the united intes economic presence this region is not nearly as great as it needs to be. And i think that the United States ought to begin to be more supportive of the idea of conductivity, not only to china, but building out infrastructure, participating more actively in trade agreements, multilateral trade agreements that include both china and the u. S. In short, i see us as retreating economically where we need to create more interdependence in asia. China, that it could also include india, japan, republic of korea. I think we are going, in effect, in the wrong way. We should try to create a balance of economic power, to some extent, knowing china will always be the way the the most weighty single actor there. Therefore, i would see us opposing, initially, and now, withdrawingt , absolutely the wrong thing to be doing if you have this vision of interdependence being a shock at store per shock absorber to our inevitable competition. I think the u. S. Has to reaffirm its policies since world war ii involvement, the importance of infrastructure, multilateral agreements and so forth. Disabused,g to be but i do not think we are going right in that direction at this point. And i cannot say when we well. What i think that is what we should be doing. The next point that i would make , and this is probably directed both at americans and chinese, i think one of the many things that china since china has gained power is that the world has opened more to china in economic and trade terms than china has opened to america. That that isgree true or not, i can guarantee you that is what americans think. Or at least a lot of them. And i think what the u. S. And is siteeds need to do down and find particularly troubling areas of nonreciprocity. I will give you a few examples to signal what i mean. I think china has to open up. And i do not mean just in terms of global trade balances. Let us take the media. China has a very big Media Presence here with dozens if not print,s of television, and other media here in washington. It would be absolutely inconceivable for the united an equivalent presence in china. If you look at jesus for research. Of theal in terms duration for which greases are given. We have people here at sais where we have cooperated for 30 years. And we have faculty members that not to that cannot get a visa to go to china. There is a problem maintaining support for the relationship. And then there is the whole issue of Market Access. I will give you an example that was kind of amazing to me. Last month, i was driving in china towards hong kong. Their to the border and was first the prc immigration and then the Hong Kong Immigration and then there is a no mans land. If you get 50 yards into no mans land, suddenly, all of your electronic equipment begins to work properly again by which i mean you get access to all of the things th