 Good evening. I would like to welcome you to tonight's educational webinar sponsored by the Coalition Peace Initiative and co-sponsored by 11 other organizations. My name is Don Tao and I'll serve as your host for tonight's program, which is on U.S.-China relationship 20th and 21st centuries. As you know, we are organizing a series of nine webinars to promote peace between U.S. and China. This series of webinars all revolve around the three topics of Chinese-American experience in the United States, modern Chinese history, and U.S.-China relationship. In the first six webinars, we are covered the first two topics of Chinese-American experience in the United States and modern Chinese history. Last week, we covered the topic of U.S.-China relationship in the 19th century. Tonight, we will discuss that relationship in the 20th and 21st centuries. We believe that the most important question facing the world today is whether our world is moving toward war or moving toward peace. And the key to answering that question is the relationship between the United States and China. I hope that these educational webinars will help people understand that the current United States policy of demonization of China is not based on facts, but on fabrications. And that such fabricated demonization of China is not good for Americans and also not good for all the people of the world, because it will move the world toward war instead of peace. The consequences would be that critical funding will be allocated to the military and for wars. Instead of using these valuable resources to improve our economy, we build our crumbling infrastructure to work on global problems like climate change, pandemic, terrorism, poverty, discrimination, and peace. Furthermore, the most serious consequence is that it could lead to nuclear war that could destroy the world as we know it. We hope that you'll join these peace-promoting organizations like our co-sponsors to help move the world toward peace. If you think that our webinars are useful, please sign the Coalition Peace Initiative petition so that more such programs can be organized in the future. The link for that petition will be posted in our chat box. Thank you. Now we will start tonight's program. Dr. George Kuhl will be our speaker, and I'll serve as your moderator. Dr. Kuhl is an international business advisor and the founder of the International Strategic Alliances. Since 1978, he has assisted American companies to establish business alliances in China. He's also a founder and chairman of the board of the Berlin Game Foundation. He regularly writes on issues related to U.S.-China relations, and he has appeared in mainstream media and radio and TV. George has bachelor and master's degrees in engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. Assigned from Steven Institute of Technology and an MBA from Santa Clara University. George, the floor is yours. Thank you very much, Don. And once again, it's my honor to join this webinar and I also want to thank the Coalition for putting this on. Do you mind putting that first slide on, please? Okay. So I phrased the title of my talk today as, How Did Our China Relations Turn So Sour? As you already said, Don, there's so much misinformation out there, and what I'm going to do is try to clarify and debunk much of the misinformation and false information out there that's influencing the thinking of the American public as well as our politicians as well as our media. I just want to qualify by saying I'm not an academic, so I can't come at you with all kinds of academic studies and research. I also don't see myself as a China watcher, which at some point it's considered a pejorative term for some people. I'm really based on my own experience. I've been going to China as you said in the early intro in 78 and I've been helping American companies there and so I'm going to be talking based on what I saw what I learned. So let's go on to the next slide. So for the next three slides, I will actually spend quite a bit of time on. The first slide is to emphasize the major events. This one here is major events developed between U.S. China. And then the second slide after this one I will be talking about all the different complaints the current and the former Trump administration has been levied a China and examine the validity or lack of their off in that. The third slide, which I will also spend a lot of time on is to point out and examine the differences between the Chinese culture, the Chinese conduct government contact versus that of the United States. So let's talk about this one that I have on right now. The first major important timeline that's actually not on this slide is October 1964. China exploded its first atomic bomb on that at that time in Xinjiang. Why is that important? Well, the development of atomic bomb in China received no help whatsoever, not from the Soviet Union and not from the U.S. In fact, it was almost forced into development that bomb as a self defense. They were feeling so much pressure from the USSR, as well as from the USA. They felt that they needed to have a worthy credible retaliation. And that's why that's how they developed the bomb. And very quickly, they were able to develop the hydrogen bomb in a little over two years, which is faster than any of the other member nations of the nuclear of the nuclear club. Why am I making this point? I think we will be coming back to it, which is that if you push China into the corner, they will come, they will respond and they will do what they think is necessary. And be sure to remember, they did not steal any intellectual property when they did this. Now, the first important event on this calendar is when China was that was restored their seat in the United Nations. And that was in late 1971. Now, I think there's an impression that China will got back to the UN because the United States allow them to do so or assisted in doing so. That's almost diametrically opposite the truth. In point of fact, the third world nations in UN been pushing for China to regain their seat in the United Nations, rather than the Taiwan government, the nationalist government that went to Taiwan. For a very simple reason that China represented the majority of the population and not the Republic of China ROC in Taiwan. And as a matter of fact, the United States exerted this maximum effort to keep China from regaining the UNC. Now, in 1971, it's possible that US relented, because at that point Kissinger was going back and forth to Beijing to set up Nixon's trip. Nixon went to China in February of 1972. Nixon did it again, because he had an eye on history. He had a sense of wanting a place in history. And furthermore, at that point Nixon saw China as a counterweight to the rivalry that US had with US SR. So that's the Nixon trip to China. The next important development is when Mao died in 1976. And after a year of interim government, the then shopping returned to power. The so called gang of four was arrested and put in jail. And after then shopping came to power. That's when reform began in China. And the two leaders that then shopping appointed to run China was who y'all bang. And I was young, who y'all bang was very reform minded and he was the party secretary. And so I was the premier. Zhao Zui Yang was governor of Sichuan at one point, and he began the experiment of economic reform. He disbanded the communes, he gave the peasants their own plot of land. He encouraged entrepreneurism and and then shopping saw that this was very successful. He brought him into the central government to basically do the same thing. So between that time, and by the way, and then of course the normalization took place in 1979. Now I was in Beijing in 1978 at the time, middle of December when they announced the normalization, and there was a extra addition of people's daily to announces, all in red. And it's to show you how important it was, because the last time there was a special edition of people's daily was when they exploded that first atomic bomb. So it's been a in a while and it shows you how important it was. And of course after the normalization then shopping came to the US. And the war the, the Ken gallon had and charmed the heck out of the American people, and that the relationship was warm ever since he made that trip. And as, as the reform began, China start to gradually to open up to foreign investments. I'm in China from 78 on helping American companies to show you how backward China was at the time. Whenever you need to make an overseas call from the Beijing hotel, you tell the operator after dinner, and then you sort of go and take a nap because two three hours later the operator will come back and say your line is now open. They're in a day when you call and you try to make appointments in Beijing. Sometimes before you even finished dialing the number you want to call the busy signal comes on because Beijing was so short of telephone lines. That's what it was like. In the reform. The, there was a phenomenon called the big character dots is about the big character wall, where students and other disgruntled people post their complaints and criticisms. This quickly became known as the democracy wall. And that handle, not quite accurate plants to see that China is on its way to a democracy. The Tiananmen incident happened. The way that came about was that we all bang who was, who was too progressive minded, then shopping removed him from being a party secretary of China. And he died in April, I think it was that year. And the students use the morning him as an excuse for demonstration and Tiananmen Square, and it was a big deal for about 30 days or so. And just as it was running out of steam and very few students were left on Tiananmen Square was when Gorbachev made a state visit to Beijing. And of course I held gaggle a Western reporters, followed Gorbachev to Beijing, and some of the Western reporters saw this rag tag bag, a bunch of students on them. And then they walked over and asked him, what is this all about? What are you protesting about? Are you protesting about democracy in China? And some of the students are very smart and very bright. And they say, hey, instead of complaining about corruption, instead of complaining about unfair appointments after graduation, instead of complaining about how you have to have inside connections to get anywhere. That's protest about democracy because then the Western media will pay attention and will be focused on us. So the protest that was dying, the amber was kicked up and they blew to bigger and bigger protests again by middle to late May. On June 3rd, Deng Xiaoping called the PRA into Beijing to quell the protest. Those soldiers, some of them were actually mauled and burned and killed outside of Beijing on the Western outskirts of Beijing. And the soldiers in turn start to shoot and kill some of the spectators along the way. By the time they got to Tiananmen Square, which was in the early morning of June 4th, they then approached the students and basically said, if you will now disband and go home, there won't be any shooting and there won't be any violence. And that's what happened. So there is nobody killed on Tiananmen Square, despite whatever you might have heard from the Western media. In fact, some of the reporters from the Western media said so much as much. The famous picture that you see that CNN plays over and over again of a young man standing in front of the tank. That was east of Tiananmen Square after the tanks had gone past Tiananmen Square. And of course, to this day, we don't know quite what happened to the young man. Nevertheless, inside China, people have forgotten about Tiananmen and what happened. But to the West, that was democracy protest that failed. In 1992, then Xiaoping went on a southern tour to send Jun. At the time, the debate on economic reform was running pretty hot inside the leadership of China. And then Xiaoping felt that he was losing the debate with the leaders. In fact, there was a very famous one of the vice premier Chen Yun, who coined the term Bay Burkage economics. In other words, Burkage comes and goes, but we have to keep the economic development inside of Burkage. The Burkage can be big or small, but we got to keep it under control. So when then Xiaoping went to Shenzhen, he basically encouraged the mayor of Shenzhen to really open up and encourage investments and to make the economy boom. And that's exactly what the mayor or Shenzhen did. The first people to respond to that opportunity, again, contrary to the Western media or the Hong Kong industrialists. Basically, Hong Kong industrial picked up all the manufacturing they had in Hong Kong and moved to Shenzhen because of tax breaks because of much lower cost. The next group to invest in China were actually from Taiwan. They invested in Dongguan. They subsequently invested their plants outside of Shanghai in Kunshan. These two fat groups created the basis, the fundamentals that taught the Chinese how to manufacture efficiently and effectively with high quality. Before that happened. There was the iron bowl principle in China. Basically people show up for work, read newspapers, have long lunches, just sit around and it didn't matter if they work hard or didn't work hard. So it's important to note that at that point, American companies entering in China are very small in numbers. I dare to say though during that period, China requires foreign investment to form joint ventures. No one can make a wholly owned operation in China. And this is before entering a WTO in 2001. Of course, to encourage the transfer of know how an intellectual property, China will allow the foreign company to put in their technology as 25% of the equity in a joint venture up to 25% and exact percentage were negotiable between the Chinese partner and the outside company. In that way they did bring in intellectual property in an orderly continuous way. Now, in 2001 was important because first of all those 911 and Johnson being called George W to express his condolences and indicate that we are together, China and us together to fight global terrorism. The only thing was with China entered a WTO. Now, we tend in this country we tend to portray that as a free ride for China. That's far from the truth. In 2001 to run G was the premier and the economics are inside China. He actually had to shut down many of the state on enterprises because they were inefficient. They had to change. They no longer stay on companies no longer own schools, hospitals, canteens, things like that. They privatize everything. The apartments that the employees were saying they allow them to buy at a low price so that they now own their own dwellings and units. In other words, there was a substantial economic reform that to run G had to have to make happen before China was getting ready for WTO, and he in fact made a comment that I have created so many enemies internally are going to have my coffin ready just in case. Probably, but after WTO, of course, China's economy start to really boom around 10% 11% 12% a year. That basically means that economy was doubling at every seven years. By the time the financial crisis hit in 2008, China was already a very important part of the world economy. To the point that Hank Paulson, the Secretary of Treasury under George W made number of trips to Beijing to consult and confer with the leaders in Beijing to make sure that the Beijing economic policies was not going to make the US economic situation worse. In other words, the US needed China's support to keep the economy afloat and not sink. As a matter of fact China, what they did was they invested, they didn't do quote unquote qualitative easing. They invested heavily in infrastructure. That's how they had a high speed rail with underground metro systems in the major cities in interstate like highway bridges across Yangtze and other spectacular construction and all that investment created demand for material supply and kept the whole world economy from collapsing. That was 2008. In exchange for what the China did by then Hu Jingtao was the head of the Chinese government. When he came to visit he basically suggested to, I think by then Obama might have been the president suggested that, you know, we are now. We consider ourselves a peer nation to the United States. We no longer in much polite term more polite terms in the way I'm pretty. We no longer see ourselves as a little brother and the nice and America Uncle Sam is the big brother. That didn't sit well with Obama's team, and it certainly did not sit well to subsequent successors Donald Trump and Joe Biden. It's interesting to know that China was always in sort of a love hate relationship, even going back to Bill Clinton. When he ran against George H Bush, he criticized George HW Bush as being soft on China. After he got elected, he found that he had to find all kinds of ways to get along with China because how that was how important the relationship was. And every president succeeding always attacked the sitting president for being soft on China, until they become president. Now Trump was different. Trump came in, and he thought he knew the answer to make America great again. He was going to launch a real trade war against China. He raised the terrorists on Chinese goods, and he thought that meant that all the factories that's in China was going to come back to the United States. No such thing happened. As a matter of fact, with that tariff barrier on the Chinese export or export to US or US import Chinese goods went up 40% because the economy of what China has to sell was still attractive. And the tariff, the free money that Trump talked about ended up being paid by the Americans consumer. So it's very disappointing today that Biden has not seen fit to tear up whatever Trump did, but it's just grudgingly and slowly trying to move away but basically still trying to have his cake and eat it too. So, can we have one other thing I didn't have on this calendar was the ridiculous arrest of men ones or the daughter of Huawei, but it's, you know, but in the interest of time I'm going to cut cut that part out. So, don't please next slide please. So, I'm going to quickly go through some of these complaints that China. The US has levied at China unfair track track trade practices well that's that's the favorite thing that Donald Trump levied I don't think we need to go into that very much intellectual property theft was I mentioned during the early years when they form it from the joint venture. There's intellectual property transfer. That's part of the deal. Secondly, Huawei and the many of the Chinese companies, they pay royalty to American companies and communications and computer and many other things. They pay royalty for license licensing royalty. Third thing, take stealing intellectual property is pretty much a standard operating procedure for every aspiring country against a established country. One of the best example is the United States in the early years. Alexander Hamilton sent people over to UK to outright steal the technology the industrial technology that was part of UK. Until the country reaches a certain level and certain point before they can seize to have to steal or copy or reverse engineer, all the other terms just so happen in Silicon Valley where I live. The intellectual property is very much used as a weapon that the big companies used to club over the small company alleging infringement, taking them to court, etc. That's why abuses. Well, Hong Kong and you and the Xinjiang Uyghurs were two examples and previous seminar on October 27 by Don and by judge Julie Tang had covered that very, very well so I won't go into it. But site one example, anecdotal example, if you just contrast the way the two countries deal with it. There was a TikTok piece about a young woman from China who apparently married a American and came over to the, to set to the Bay Area. And she asked her husband, how come there's so many homeless people over the streets. And her husband explained while these people are on drugs they're mental, they have mental problems. They don't have a job, and they've been kicked out blah blah blah blah blah. That's amazing. An advanced country like this could have homeless people running around like this. Heck, in China, let me tell you what we do. If we find a homeless person in the city, we call a public security. Public security comes and interview this person, find out where he's from. And most of the time they're not from the local they're from some rural area. They buy him a train ticket, they put him on a train, they send him back to the rural area. When he arrives at the other end, the local government is there to receive him, and if he has family there they would come and pick him up and take him home. There's no family anymore he's by himself. The local government would take care of him and put him an arrest in a some sort of a home. You know, a, what do you call it, take care arrest homes of some kind. It's a much more civilized human human way, and it's no indication of human rights violation, compared to what we're doing in this country. Basically, threat to national security. That's a, that's the handy dandy excuse that we are using whenever we don't, we, China is do something we don't like. And of course, Christopher Ray, the director of FBI has made it very popular that all Chinese in this country are potential spies that too has been covered by the previous webinar. I just want to point out that by blackening the image of the Chinese scientists and engineers and technologies, working in the US, we are cutting our nose to spite our face, because they have more than polar away. You're discouraging them from coming, you chasing them back to China, or worse, you don't give them due process and you're putting them in jail. After cotton from Arkansas. He made a very interesting coming he said that the Chinese come and study Shakespeare, implying that the we shouldn't let them come to to join the stem schools, like an MIT or Stanford. I, I wrote a commentary and said, you know, the Chinese should go to university Arkansas and learn how to be a football power a college football power in the AP poll top 10, the freedom of navigation. We don't chat we don't see any Chinese exercising their freedom and navigation in the Caribbean off the coast of Hawaii or California. So, but the Americans are exercising their freedom and navigation in the South China Sea off the coast of China. In the old days, when the, when China is militarily weak. They basically couldn't do anything about it by just sit and watch. And of course there was one important incident which happened during George W's ring when they a Chinese jet collided with the spy plane off the coast of high nine Island. And that created a quite an incident I believe that was 2001. But, you know, we, we, anytime we have the freedom of navigation, and the Chinese then start to build a missile base landfill the islands, put in weapons to try to deter the ships. They get upset, and we say see they're being aggressive, because they're trying to defend the South China Sea. And of course, recently USS Connecticut, they wanted a more potent nuclear subs apparently ran into something. But at least in that case they couldn't blame the Chinese will putting putting in the under seas mountain that created the collision. And one other point, you guys like to say China violated the enclose which is a United Nations Convention on the law of seas. Well heck, in the first place us never was never a signatory to that particular UN convention. Secondly, they're referring to a court of arbitration that the US put Philippine to to complain about a dispute on the island. The court of arbitration has no standing in the United Nations. It depends on voluntary participation by the two parties involved. China never agreed to the arbitration so when the arbitration one gave Philippines the award. China didn't recognize it, but that didn't stop us from saying see China violated the enclose, whereas the arbitration has nothing to do with the convention on law of the seas. Something to keep in mind. Taiwan has always been a red line situation because China has considered Taiwan to be important part of China, and has always. During the past time declaration, the condition the one of the stipulation of unconditioned unconditional surrender of Japan was that Japan must give back all the islands that they occupied. That includes the four northern islands back to us as our one island between Korea and Japan that went to Korea and Taiwan back to China. In fact, one of the islands that should have gone back to China is the Diao Yutai, which is the Japanese called Senkaku. But the US organized a 1951 UN conference, ostensibly UN conference to settle all the things having to do with the reparation of World War Two. Neither Taiwan government, all the Beijing government were invited to that convention, and therefore they had no say and no agreement on the death deposition. And because of the Korean war. The PRP a had to stop the campaign and they were prepared to take to overtake Taiwan. At this point, because of what we're the Congress is trying to do and what Biden is trying to do. They are increasing the sensitivity and the liability of Taiwan as a, as a spark that could spark the next conflict. From the Taipei government headed by Tsai Ing-wen. She is emboldened to keep pushing the red line because she thinks the American will come back come to her aid. The natural progression. The Beijing is perfectly willing to wait for the natural progression, the settlement between the two sides across the straight. If the US truly want to interfere, then that will have serious consequences. It's important. It's also important to know that all along China has said, yes, we have nuclear war weapons, but we will always be the second we will never be the first to use the weapons. And we will maintain credible second strike capability to deter anybody from thinking otherwise from attacking us. So of course, as us develop more and more potent weapons, China will have to keep up, they will have to maintain a credible second strike. But the investment for viable second strike is many times smaller than the investment needed to develop the shock and all mighty weaponry that the United States is developing at very great cost to our federal budget. Now, although this is being abetted by our mainstream media. And it's easy. It's easy to see why there is this incentive for negative, negative input about China. It's a really career enhancer for all the naysayers about China and the biggest example is Gordon Chang. He wrote the book about collapse of China 20 years ago. And he has been shown to be way off base time and time and time again. But the media loves a guy like that. He gets interviewed. He gets on CNN, Fox News, all the national, and he's always asked about his opinion, even though his opinion is not worth the paper it's printed on. Peter Navarro is another example. He taught a course on China in UC Irvine. He didn't know anything about China. He got a graduate student to, to set up the course curriculum, except for the last part which is the base on his book about the death of death by China and, and all the nonsense that he wrote. But never let us, you can see that he used it as a career enhancer and I don't need to go into that. Until he was that until he did that, he ran for office in San Diego, and he lost every time he couldn't even get elected as a dog catcher. Adrian sense, I think. Don talked about in the context of Xinjiang. Another clear example of mainstream infraction BBC British broadcast company actually had a video showing the exploitation of young Uyghur women to work in sweatshops. And that looks so authentic. But thank goodness somebody. I forgot which one one of the expats living in China show. It was actually a CG TN, in other words, a Chinese documentary talking about the benefits of inviting young Uyghur women to go and to go away get away from home to work in factories. Get away from Xinjiang, make a decent living and be able to convince her family then to join her and make an established improve their lifestyle and standard living. The tearful part that BBC use in their documentary was when she had to leave home for the first time, and, and young Uyghur women are very close to their family, and this was a tearful scene. But it's so easy to take something legitimate and turn it into a distortion. Next slide please. Okay, so I'm not going to go through this point by point but I'm simply you want to point out the big differences between the way China operates and what China believes in, and what the how the United States does. Okay, so it's important to note that China has a family community neighborhood orientation, individual rights, individual liberty and freedom. It's not a, it's not an important concept to them. Okay. But because of the way the central government cares about the people, they have taken 800 million or 850 million people out of poverty. Today, they can claim nobody in China lives in poverty. The way they govern with engineers, mostly engineers and not, I don't know if they have any lawyers in the, in the government. They pry and place stability as the most important consideration because with a stable society in a stable country, then you can develop the economy in an orderly way. China doesn't have OSHA doesn't have environmental impact statements does not have two parties bickering when they make a decision, they get things done. We haven't gotten things done for a long time in this country. China does not believe in interfering with anybody else's internal affairs. They believe in working within the UN, not above or outside the UN. They believe that the Belt and Road Initiative is a win-win arrangement. They can apply their skills, their expertise to design and build roads, bridges, railroads and help other countries. In fact, they started doing that even in the Mao era for the Zambia to Tanzania Railroad. They make friends this way. The way they get promoted is that they have to execute at every level. They start out maybe as a township leader, they go to a mayor of the city, then maybe become the governor or the party secretary. Every step of the way you are graded, evaluated and then you have the opportunity to move up. We know in this country, the way you move up is that you have to raise a lot of money for campaign. And after you get elected, you have to raise more money so that potential opponents will come, will not come and compete against you. China believes in infrastructure investments, and they have been doing so and because of their infrastructure investment experience, they have been able to take it and apply to the road and belt initiative over elsewhere. And they believe in science, they believe in education, and they are using that, as I said before, to develop sufficient credible weapons for destruction. They have one military base outside of China at Djibouti, and that was established with the concurrence of Djibouti government to supply and support the ships, the Chinese naval ships that was patrolling off the coast of Africa against the pirates. United States have more than 800 military bases around the world. And we talk about China being the aggressor, being the threat to the US security. Let's go to the next slide. Done. These are just some selected. You have to speak a little bit faster. Okay. Okay, I'm going to go quickly. So, we've been accusing China of lagging behind and copying us and so on and so forth. Well, here's some examples where China is, has exceeded the United States in terms of market share. The one example, not true is semiconductors, but actually 47% of accredited US are chips designed. The manufacturing capacity in China and the US now is around only about 17%. Let's go down. Let's go next. The Ash Center at Harvard has been tracking satisfaction of Chinese people on the Beijing government. And as you can see, it's up to 93% in the last year taken. The local level is not as approved, approval is not as high, because that's where the people sometimes suffer from the local corruption problems. How does the US compare? Well, after 290 days, which is about what? A little over nine months. The approval for Biden is 42.9%. Disapproval is 50.4%. And by the way, that's better than Trump's figures on the comparable days. Let's go on to the next slide. This is, I have to explain. Pew Research recently did a survey on how is US faring as a model for democracy? You know, what do you think of the US as a model of democracy? And they asked some selected countries and I picked off a few of these just to show you. The first figure there, for example, in the case of UK is 56%. What that number is saying, we don't think the US is any longer a suitable model for democracy. The next number, 21%, is the number that says we never thought US was a good model of democracy. So if you add it up together, it's about 80%, including the United States. Now, United States is the biggest number is the 72%. Although South Korea has that one beat. Let's go to the next slide. So, where are we going at this point? Well, already China is a bigger trading partner than the US with 128 countries. That will mean something when they start to think and then they're forced to choose. When the COVID hit, everybody's economy shrank, but the US, but China still grew by 6%. US investment in China in 2020 has not decreased because they see the company see whether where the profit potential lies. In terms of technology, China has the only space station aloft. Their Beidou is rivaling GPS and some deals is even better. They have 41 space launch this year. By threatening to decouple technology, I think this will force China to accelerate their own development. Okay, so, as I showed before, the sentiment towards the US is increasingly disillusioned. And of course, after the end of the forever war in Afghanistan, it seems that the credibility of China at US has taken even a bigger hit. And as far as surpassing US economy is concerned, it's inevitable because of the people involved. In fact, in terms of purchasing parity, China's economy is already bigger than the US. But that shouldn't be a problem. You know, in the first place, per capita in US will continue to be higher than China for a long time. And besides, economic growth is good for both sides. I think one saving grace for the United States at this point is that the dollar is everybody's reserve currency. The US can get away with printing more and more dollars and get away with it. Next slide please. I think it's obvious, and I probably don't need to go to this point by point but it's obvious that global challenges needs collaboration between the two great powers. One works and don't trust the other. These things are not going to get done. And all of them, but I will comment on one thing that has been distorted and misrepresented and that's the climate change issue. The UN environmental report recently pointed out, China has been investing for the decade investing in green energy at twice the amount the US has been investing. And China has more wind energy and solar energy capacity. And they are, and this is a UN report. They are now positioned to be the primary supplier of clean economy. In other words, they're going to be making the windmills they'll be making the solar panels. One surprising fact, before we move on is that coal fire power in the United States in 2021 this year increased by 22% over last year. Think about that. Next slide. CNN, we interviewed Jake Solomon, the National Security Advisor, and here's his quote. We are not starting a cold war. We're not looking to contain China. We just want a rule based international order that's favorable to American people's interests. You can read this in other, in other words, my conclusion. If we get to make the rules, we're good to go. Our rules is the rule based international order. So, that's where we're coming from. One other thing, beware of people for the center of New America's security. Next week, KJ No, we'll talk more about it, but 16 members of the Biden administration belongs to CNN as including such people as Blinken, Solomon, Campbell, and so on. They are all in favor of pushing for war with China. Their biggest donor is Northrop Grumman, and then State Department and then DOD, and the Taipei government. Clearly, there's a conflict of interest of what they're pushing for and and their donors. Last slide please, Don. So, there's the article written by Laura Ruggieri, and she's her last sentence was insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result. Someone should tell the Biden team. I understand that other than someone should tell the Biden team the first part was attributed to Albert Einstein at one point. Whereas I think we desperately need some new thinking to change our policy. The cartoon on the right came from my friend Johnson Choi. It was drawn up in, in China. And the Chinese cartoon apparently don't know the proper image for Uncle Sam but otherwise, so Johnson label the USA and, and in China. And this cartoon says it all. China off the plank. And the US will go down with it. With that, I look forward to Q&A. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry, I guess we ran out of time. Yeah, well, let's, let's find a couple of minutes. Let's, let's go look at the, as you see, I was sharing the screen. Okay, let me look at the queue. I did not have a chance to look at the Q&A. Yeah, I'm looking at it now. Can I go. Can I do that? Yeah, go ahead, look at it and see if there's some some questions that you would like to answer. Yeah, it's participation China Korean company a notable event. Well, I cut it out only because it's too many other things to cover. It's a combination where you have a creating cooperation between, you know, cooperation was pretty successful until, until Obama years and then subsequently to Trump and to Biden. If only we stopped looking at China as an adversary, I think we are well on the way to cooperating. I know in China governance. What what I meant to say and maybe I didn't say it clearly is that people officials who are mayors and governors and others that get appointed and gets promoted. They have to prove they're competent and capable every step along the way. They're capable and they're not competent. They are move aside, for example, recently the mayor of Jinzhou, I believe was fired, because he didn't handle the flooding very well and people died and property damage and so on. That's what I mean about it's not being elected. It's been proven and and then you are selected. I think by the Communist Party, there's a, there's a group that monitors and K tracks of how everybody is doing. It's mirad, mirad, mirad, miradocracy, not financial campaigning. I guess that's it. Okay. Hey, do you want to address the last question. Which one recommendation will you have for creating cooperation between us and China. Oh, we, I already, I already did that by just simply saying the first step is to stop looking and treating China as an adversary. If you, if you don't treat China as an adversary, everything can go can collaborate much easier. Okay, next question. Do you think us and China can cooperate and bell and road, instead of a threat is a benefit. It's it's down and row is a win-win arrangement. There's plenty of room for anybody and everybody to participate China cannot do it all. They don't have the resources to do it the whole world to improve needs trains and trains. And Biden is in the process of introducing American version of mountain row or whether they can see succeed or not succeed. They're welcome to do it. It's, it's a necessary thing that that. Again, sort of a rising tide floats all boats, if the world economy improves, everybody's going to benefit. And the US can do what they do best versus what China can do so much the better. There's no competition. There's no win, win, lose arrangement in the belt and row type of idea. Okay. Let me just elaborate on some of the things that you mentioned. You know, because, as you said, the key one of the key questions between United States and China is the issue of Taiwan. However, just like you said, if you look at them from history, and you also look at it from a legal perspective. It really has no ground on his position in respect to Taiwan, because as you said if you look at all the historical treaties, all the agreements by various international parties, such as the custom decoration you mentioned, such as the Cairo such as the World War Two Japanese around the statement signed on the battleship original Missouri. They all said that Japan should give up return Taiwan back to China. And I think that did not say that was a 1951 San Francisco peace treaty. As you said, there was a mask mastermind by the United States and China, whether it's the Republic of China, or the people's Republic of China was not invited to that conference, even though 51 other countries were invited to that conference, and China was a country that suffered the most during the Second World War. So, from a legal perspective from a historical perspective, United States has no ground on the issue of Taiwan. And similarly on other issues. That's what you mentioned about South China sea and so on. Yeah, well let me, let me, let me add one comment to what you said down about Taiwan. Okay. illegal has never stopped the United States from doing anything they want, but never stop. However, you us must know and understand. Taiwan is a red line that if they cross China will not back down they will have to respond, because the leaders in China will be kicked out of the office if they don't respond. This is a very emotional issue for them from the mainland China, Taiwan is part of China, Taiwan cannot be wrestled away. If it means war. So be it. And that's what the US has to keep in mind and remember. Okay, thank you very much. Since we have basically exhausted all the questions already. So, and since we're running over time. So, George, I just want to say, thank you very much for your very informative and insightful discussion, or US China relationship in the 20th and 21st century. Thank you. Thank you everybody and thank you for taking it. It's been a pleasure. Before we leave, I just want to make a couple announcements. One is that I want to show you what comes next. Okay. This is the next week, which is our last webinar. As we said last time, we also added another speaker Sheila Xiao is a co founder of pivot to peace she will be one of the speakers in KJ know. As a matter of fact, he's also a journalist and a writer, and he also co author some of the documents essays with speaker today George cool. And he's very knowledgeable about Asia Pacific is Korean by birth. And I'm looking forward to their joint presentation next week. Okay, the last thing I want to say is that next week is our last webinar. And at the end of that during the webinar we're going to be handing out a distributing a survey very simple survey. It's only a few questions it takes only it actually only takes you two to three minutes to fill out the survey online, you can do that online. So we will send that out to you after next week's webinar, and then we hope you filled out and send it back. And then they will help us to decide what programs we should sponsor in the future, and what programs is of interest to you. Okay, anything else anybody wants to say. And as far as the replay, we already send that out today. And you expect the replays for this week will be send it out sometime next week. And also, the replay links are also you can find the find them at the coalition PCS website. And I believe that link has been posted in the chat today. And, and we hope that you sign the petition or coalition PCS initiative, and you can find that link in the chat box today. Okay, once again, thank you very much. And thank you George, and I hope to see you all next week. Bye. Bye.