failing states, weak states and nonstate actors which i'm calling the snakes, right? and suggest that the state adversaries are not going to be a big deal for the media future. which i'm calling dragons. what i'm suggesting is we have a period of about nearly 30 years since his testimony adversaries were involved. and i'm trying to sort of trace the history of how that happened and where they are now. what's the rest of this event but a booktv.org and search for the title of his book the dragons and the snakes using the box at the top of the page. >> welcome, welcome to our session here on china. this is probably among the most distinguished panelists we will have at this conference on the most important subject which is the people's republic of china and the commonest party of china to look at the problems

there. i'd like to first introduce our panelists including myself. doctor michael pillsbury is one of the foremost china experts in the world. he's currently senior fellow and director of the chinese strategy at the hudson institution. it's an incentive rate he's distinguished defense and policy advisor high-ranking official in numerous books and reports on china. i know, i can tell you definitively that mike has really changed the u.s. military's thinking. back a number of years ago he sent to china to collect chinese military writings. he was the first american official who revealed that what the chinese were telling themselves militarily behind the scenes was quite different than what they were saying in public about how they wanted to be friends with the world.

and it really had a tremendous impact on understanding the military's review with people's republic of china. his book is a landmark book to replace america as a superpower. this book is really a fascinating look. it's probably one of the only places in public will you will find information about chinese defectors. people within the chinese system reveal what's going on there. before mike speaks i also want to introduce general robert spalding retired from the u.s. air force. he is a senior fellow at the hudson institute. and he too is a distinguished china expert. he spent time as a bomber pilot and is also been inside of china as a defense attaché being chased in tracking down the inside story of china.

his most recent book is called stealth war, how china took over while america's elite slept. a little bit about myself, as mentioned on national security correspondent for the washington times, author of eight books read my most recent book is deceiving the sky inside commonest china's drive for global supremacy. kind of a follow-on to a book i wrote back in 2000, 20 years ago called the china threat. as a result of that i had gained quite a reputation. back in 2006 the chinese news agency described me as the number one anti- china expert in the world. to which i respond, i am very much pro- china, pro- chinese people. but very much opposed to the communist party system in china. with that let's begin with our first panelist doctor michael

pillsbury. >> thank you bill. i thought i would begin by revealing a new publication it's going to come out and about two weeks from the hudson institute. you will be able to get it online. it's called a guide to the trump administration china policy statements. and it has a link to every one of about 200 statements, interviews or tweets by president trump on the top members of his team. the reason i put this together as i believe there has been a lot of misunderstanding. and the left is also attacked president trump's chinese policy in many ways to distort what he has done what his team is said and done over the last three and half years. as we begin the next 100 days of the election campaign i think we are going to hear more of this. more attacks on the president

either that he has been too soft on china, the biting team is already run several commercials where they imply that president trump then ice pe biden comes on and said if i had been president i would have demanded xi jinping immediately tell us what happened in wuhan with the virus. i will sort of save you against president trump. i believe the president's policy towards china, i called the three c's. it has been clear, coherent, and comprehensive. if you go through the documents which i have organized according to subject matter, although i've done a special segment just for the president's tweets and his spontaneous interviews. i believe you will agree with me. and i want to give you some examples just to make sure you understand the range of debate among conservatives on china is actually very wide. not altogether clear where we

are going with china policy over the last three decades. what's going to happen in the next two decades. conservative reporter is called jesus in beijing came out about ten years ago. he forecast christianity to take over china. the leading largest nation in the world with christians will be china. totally wrong, he misunderstood some trends. it is a nice effort, it is a positive thought. wouldn't it be nice, completely false. the others called the coming collapse of china. vice president penn's address this directly in his speech at hudson institute. the coming collapse of china brought for many months the number one book in america on china. the coming collapse of china. very popular author. i like him very much. his name is gordon chang. i said gordon, don't predict

the year that china will collapse in your book. leave some flexibility. no, it's going to be 2012 pretty put 2012 in the book. the book came out into thousand one. vice president pence in his speech at hudson said since 2001 china's gdp their economic strength has grown by how much? ten times. was an economy collapse? no. so in 2012 foreign policy magazine asked gordon give us an article, when is china going to collapse? the feeling that china was going to collapse is very important that means it's not going to be a problem very long. so gordon wrote the article. they said give us when it will collapse. i would've said maybe general spalding could say 2050 or who knows. gordon wrote again 2013, one more year.

this point of view infects a lot of thinking about china. begin to get an idea of what the sing he said at least ten times i won't repeat it ten times bill is either tweeted or said these points ten times. did if hillary clinton had won the election, china would be surpassing us now. that's extremely important. the president and his team see china is coming close to his preview rate of economic growth, their military growth, many other indicators are not to be trifled with and thought of as this is an easy challenge. i also want to mention my own book. i made some mistakes throughout my career. i thought i was one of the original panda huggers. i thought china would align with this. not only against the soviet

union, built in a recently declassified memorandum, president nixon tells chairman and premier we need you to bear more of the burden of global governance. we need china to have more armaments so we can have less. that's 1972. see how this thinking has consequences over the years? i very much believe that myself. some u-turn turn back to the trump administration statements, what are the points they are making is the scale of the challenge. this is not panama or even venezuela. this is not a small country we are dealing with. nuclear weapons, a serious navy, but most important of all a growth rate averaging more than 10% for 35 years.

looks like no one has an example number looks like technology theft to other parts that we could do next. number one is american capital. we seem to have been the largest investor in china for 30 years. and no one seems to know how to undo that. there's not even an exact number. some people think it is several trillion. no, several trillion u.s. dollars invested in china. companies, private equities, general spalding begins his wonderful book with the story he puts in a grant wants to write a paper the grant is turned down pretty gets a phone call until the story in the first few pages for the think tank president says sorry we can't fund your projects.

general spalding says he looks at it and a member of the board, correct me if i'm wrong. billionaires, various people who made money from china. while this is in a norma's problems. we are in some sense influence deeply about capital for china, how are you going to undo that? it's going to take legislation which leads to my second point about what we do next and where china's growth came from. technology, restricting u.s. capital, restricting u.s. investments in china, takes legislation, i have counted more than 80 examples 80 current examples of bills introduced by congressman or senators to impose costs on china. including being able to sue china legally for damages with the china buyers. generally speaking, all of this legislation attracts four or six cosponsors.

i was a senate staffer for ten years print i know how to count on it when senators care about something they can tell the staff go finally cosponsors. i went 50 cosponsors if you want a raise next year, doctor pillsbury i went 60 cosponsors in my legislation. sometimes they have cosponsors other than one who drafted it. there's no hearings the leadership doesn't put them up for a vote senators encouragement come on television they can sorely come on fox news the host more and more they're saying senator how many cosponsors have you got. that's extremely constructive.

sometimes is called virtual signaling so here's my bill that's it wash my hands working some thing else. that's another thing the chinese are laughing at us let people i meet with in china have phd's are american universities. the harvard daughter understand our system extremely well how are influence inside china to our ambassadors to try to always speak mandarin fluently? basically it never happens for there's two that are somewhat good but i would not call them television show fluent. neither would they. how about our programs inside china? they are blocks, they are gm's. how about a magazine that used

to be passed out by usia. no more magazine. here's a list of what china does for influence operations inside the united states with agi would like to do that inside china. it would be very, very difficult not to mention some centers oppose this some it's dead it goes nowhere. it stays live on fox news owen got a plan and the nothing happens i haven't had time to promote my own book, but basically it is a history declassified documents of how we got here how naïve and delusional american presidents in american policymakers including myself got here. and the book has now sold more than 200,000 copies. translated into eight

languages. all of china's neighbors it's a bestseller. so this is my challenge for doctor spalding. his book has sold 33000 copies so i'm six times more which doesn't mean the quality of my book is higher maybe his book is better, not to mention our moderator, bill's book, i don't know the sales figures. but i hate to be delivering bad news. but it seems to me we are in for a long kind of cold war with china. this is the early phases. so far president trump has turned things around. scott the successful formula but we are a long way to go before china becomes a kind of china we all thought would happen before. how's that for an opening statement bill. excellent well said. i would point out that you mentioned legislation for all of the best things that you've done regarding china have been in legislation. because policies can be changed from administration to

administration. but you look at the record and first of all there is the taiwan relations act. which was passed basically after the u.s. recognized beijing diplomatically. then there's also these sanctions that remain in place. also the military power reports the pentagon has done. since really important to codify these things. we are beginning to see that with the trump administration. let's turn now to general spalding for your remarks. thank you bill. so it's an interesting thing that michael pillsbury talks about. his book was the first one i read when he got to the pentagon 2014. what i would tell people read the concluding chapter you really get an understanding of a synopsis it's essentially we had bent over backwards that it currently is.

of course when i got to the pentagon 2014, i was a very much, what i would say. [inaudible] [laughter] infect michael pillsbury.me how to be what he would now say is a super hawk. i don't see myself to be hawkish free to really focus on defending the american people, the american way of life, our constitution. and in fact, you look at in the current national security strategy and addition to being clear, concise, comprehensive, it is about how we turn things around. and while it has been noted and lauded, it is not been widely understood. and so my book is really about the background and context behind the national security strategy.

you want to know about how successful the president's foreign policy has been, i would refer you to the uk decision to reverse decision with regard to allowing while way to have its 5g network. now the media would have you believe that decision was made overnight. maybe over a couple of months during the coronavirus but in fact it really demonstrates the power of the diplomatic effort undertaken by the department of state and the national security council beginning in the first quarter 2018 after the national security strategy was released. that diplomatic effort is something that we describe in national security council in 2017 as forging a new consensus. on really before you saw them address any problem or have a

plan or a strategy really need to understand the problem. so the main problem we were addressing was the inability of the united states to get its interest promoted within international institutions and it's a lack of geopolitical power in those institutions. the primary reason was most of the nations in the institution were beginning to look to china and china's model as more beneficial to furthering their own interests and being aligned few of the world about democracy, human rights, civil liberties and free trade. someone could forge a new consensus similar to the western consensus that sought to really bring democracies

together again in a very tight relationship economically, financially, and trade and information. two matches already strong military alliances that successful and how that initiative in diplomacy has been. but we have also gotten a glimpse of china's response to that diplomatic initiative through the coronavirus in the aftermath. with regard to the coronavirus, many people talk about what is the origin of the virus? and i say disregard that. really we are not going to know. because we are not going to be able to get investigators into china, into the lab to talk to the researchers that we are working there to understand the line of effort to understand what happened. it was there even any relation

between the lab in the coronavirus? that is not something we are going to know. but what we can know with certainty is that the chinese communist party recited over the spread of the virus. and it wasn't that they accidentally presided of the spread of the virus. or it was a manifestation or secondary effect of its institution. it wasn't that they directly spread the virus. on january 7, xi jinping himself said he was in charge of the wuhan crisis. on the 13th of january, there's immediate reports about human to human transmission that come out in china. and in fact, on the 14th of january they world health organization tweets about limited human to human transaction. what was going on during this critical time between the seventh of january when xi jinping was in charge of the crisis in wuhan and generally 2d

when they shut down wuhan. what was happening was a nun only was a chinese commonest parting putting pressure on the world health organization to not discuss human to human transmission. was also walking down the spread of the information within china. and in fact, at the same time they were walking down in china and locking down outside of china to their proxies. so over the course of a couple of weeks, they began to turn and turn to an into net importer were they had been annexed export of pp and masks. at the same ten they shut down domestic travel from wuhan but allowed international travel to goforth. now, this essentially has a net effect of putting them into the need position with

the regard to the pandemic. they knew it was going to impact the chinese society. but they wanted to make sure it impacted other societies as well. and that they had the memes to really profit from it and have advantage from it. and so what we are seeing today and michael pillsbury talks about it is beginning of the second cold war. i'm really the pandemic spread by the chinese commonest parting is opening shots of the second cold war. interestingly, not only do they uncork the spreading pandemic, they also uncork the new form of diplomatic and informational war. so if you go back to, michael pillsbury was a very good historian can talk to you about how the chinese commonest party overthrew the nationalist party, but chinese

thanks about war whites and viewed within the chinese commonest party thinking about war was opposed to the way we looked at it, specifically between the idea of peace time and work time. and that war is politics by other means. and other words you use warfare to get to a political outcome. and in fact the chinese commonest party thanks the opposite way. that politics is war by other means. in other words the entire war is about the political war. that in fact the coronavirus is the beginning of a political offensive against the free worl world. the diplomatic effort they

began to spread the idea that the coronavirus didn't manifest itself in china. but in fact it was spread by the united states. the latest thing they said it spread by. [inaudible] on the informational effort 40% of the social media posts in regard to the coronavirus turn out to be bought. this is state centered activity influencing our social media. fact is the same kind of activity followed the riots and looting that come on a tale of the coronavirus. >> so you're really getting a glimpse of the manifestation in the 21st century of what two kernels talk about unrestricted warfare. or another translation, or without rules. and there is no difference between peace time in wartime. in fact we are always at war. and in fact there are no rules and everything within the bounds of the conflict.

so if you think about that in the context of world war ii, the french built to prevent the germans from conquering them. and the fact the germans went around and in fact conquered the french. the case case of the united states we built this wonderful sheen for war, air force, space force now, marines, army, navy, that really protects us, the physical manifestation of our world from invasion. when in fact the way the chinese commonest party seeks to wage war is through information and politics. and other words, they are trying to change the character of our society and our political process due to the connections of the internet. and in fact they've been very, very successful. so this second cold war is going to be nothing like the first cold war. and where america strengths

align very, very well with the soviet union in the first cold war. our strengths have been turned into vulnerability in the second cold war. and in fact, our strengths and openness have become vulnerability as a chinese commonest party seeks to use innovation, technology, talents and capital from free societies and essentially comprehensive battle for hearts and minds of the free world. and they have been very, very successful. not just billionaires the united states believe that the chinese communist party has a better system. many, many diplomats in the eu, and the united nations belief so as well. in fact it is the constitution, as i write in my book, that has essentially given us a shot. because in the constitution it says rather than the leaders of a country having domain in

over the population. in fact the people have dominion in the united states. and in fact they can elect new leaders that think differently about the problem bring forth new solutions. and so i think we are going to see what i would call political warfare at a hyper scale going forward. but it is important to note that here in the united states they need not become part of it. it's not necessarily between the right and the left. it is in fact between this idea of a constitutional democracy versus a more authoritarian system. in fact the more that we understand that, it's not a partisan divide really is the divide on how we should govern ourselves and how people should govern their governments that will really be the center of this fight going forward. i look forward to the discussion that follows.

>> >> general spalding was very instrumental in bringing about an awareness of the 5g issue which of course is one of the most important technology confrontations that the country is facing right now. he was really a hero at the white house and alerting the world to that problem. i like to spend a few minutes talking about what i call the china threat. as was going to show a powerpoint but i won't. it is too complex to be able to do that. i'd like to start out my talk by talking about this matter of the china threat. it brings me back to the late 1990s when as a reporter for the washington times i was doing a story on the pla, the people's liberation army. and the defense intelligence agency agreed to give me a background briefing on that. and so i went to the pentagon, into their secure area can be

a briefing pla. : : : they said why do you think that an essentially it was because they tell us they are not oppressed and it's really the situation not within the u.s. government in the air but within the intelligence community itself and the subset of the intelligence community which is responsible for informing our military leaders in wartime is deeply influenced by the notion that china is a threat. it is a short time after that in

the case of the public to one of the top china analyst was in the defense intelligence agency turned out to be a chinese spy. his name was ron. he was convicted of mishandling classified information. he was not convicted as a spy but the case revealed that he had closed ties to two military chinese military at the chinese embassy in washington and there was a compromise of some serious classified information. so you could see that this issue of the china threat that i titled my 2000 book the china threat which is a play on what the chinese government in called the china threat theory. in other words as mike knows the chinese diplomatic corps and intelligence personnel are tasked to study around the world the level of opposition to the communist parties modernization program program and they take their actions accordingly.

so the play on it was the china threat my new book which came out 20 years later "deceiving the sky" i spend a lot of time looking at chinese communist ideology and i would like to spend time talking about for recent speeches which have been given by senior trump administration officials and i've been fortunate enough to actually have traveled with white house national security adviser robert o'brien and just last week the secretary of state mike tom pao for their speeches through the first beach was given by robert o'brien in phoenix and it was a landmark speech and it was a high-level speech in the sense that it identified communist ideology for the first time. a senior official has really come out and said we are facing not just an economic -- it

economically powerful government which remains marxist-leninist. that is again the marxist-leninist society all it is motivating their actions. i can remember actually when mike and i many years ago did a debate in new york on whether china was a threat and we were on the side that said that it was a threat to one of the assessment on the other side says i have done business in china for 20 years and i've never met a communist. i told them, i said this is the pla museum and mate beijing which i was able to do on one of my businesses there. they have the statues of all the communist leaders marx engels lenin and even stalin is still revered in china. in fact that was one of the key points of o'brien's speech was that china remains a stalinist state. they have never rejected stalin and we are seeing that more and more with the emergence of xi

jinping who has assumed more power in china than any leader since mao. the second major seats that was given was fbi director christopher wray and this again was another unprecedented speech. in fact director wray said that the information that he provided in his speech about chinese intelligence and economic espionage was the most information that the fbi had ever made public on the threat from china. he talked in grand terms about the problems facing the country and begin this had earlier been highlighted by the white house which issued a report called china's economic aggression against the united states. peter navarro was instrumental in that and you heard earlier. and basically this view that the chinese are on the march, they are working nonstop director

wray said on average the fbi opens a brand-new case related to chinese national security every 10 hours and of the 5000 cases that the fbi is investigating half are related to the chinese. this is an amazing story and its unfolding almost on a weekly basis. as a reporter who has covered these issues i can remember a decade would go by before an administration would prosecute a chinese spy case. under the trump administration chinese spying has taken a massive hit and just last week as i was flying home from los angeles with secretary of state pompeo i was able to write a story about a chinese singaporean consultant who was indicted for being an unregistered chinese agent almost on a weekly basis.

in addition to that the fbi is now focused on what it calls chinese ally align influence operation. they are beginning to look at what used to be known in cold war terms back in the days of the soviet union as a fellow travelers those assisting china in its intelligence and influence operations. like i said it was a monumental speech by the director. the third speech was given by attorney general bill barr and bill barr took on the path of really identifying these people that are supporting china acting as agents of china. many of them are in the business community and the way china does it, they do it through coercion. they go to the top officials, the bankers, the business people. you want to continue doing business in china you lobby for us against the trump administration's hard-line policy against china. it's a serious problem.

it has not been fully rectified yet. they are beginning to first of all identify these people. they are beginning to inform them that you could in fact be prosecuted under the foreign agents russ is -- registration act which makes it a crime to lobby representing a foreign governments interest without first registering so we have seen a few of those cases surfacing in recent months. last was i think the of the four speeches was by secretary of state mike pompeo at the nixon library, very poignant venue for that. they -- before the speech pompeo was given a tour of the nixon library and to have a second -- separate china exhibit where they show this great opening to china which was done back in the 1970s under nixon and kissinger.

and yet this speech was informative because for the first time secretary of state pompeo was saying that the engagement policy, that is the policy of unfettered engagement of the people's republic of china had failed. the idea behind that engaged in a policy was that if we traded with china engage them diplomatically economically and politically on every level that this would have a moderating influence then it would lead to a changing of that system that they would abandon communism and then they would -- they should develop a free and open system. it was an utter failure. in fact what i call a 40 year gamble this idea that if we just trade with china they will be, moderate nonthreatening power and fail. what we are seeing now is the early stages of the brand-new policy as general spaulding said

the national security strategy is an important first step. it doesn't go far enough however though in identifying china is the enemy. the reason for that is because china is engaged in unrestricted warfare against the united states. this is a cold war but the problem has been only one side has been fighting it and that is china. the u.s. has been asleep at the wheel and so has the trump administration and now they are beginning to recognize that we face a foe that is an existential threat. we have many different threats around the world. russia iran and north korea but in my view there is one supreme threat and that is dealing with china and it will take all of our energy as a nation to deal with that threat. i present solutions for that. i think the first step is again to go beyond declaring china as

a strategic competitor that declaring them as an enemy to realize they are working to not just underminer system but to literally destroy it. xi jinping's notion that the china dream is really a chinese nightmare where china assumes a supreme role and in order for china to achieve that role they must diminish and ultimately defeat the united states. i would go back in summing up here on the intelligence issue and i focused the chapter on this issue of the u.s. intelligence community has been woefully deficient in understanding the threat from china. this is a problem that has been going on for years. it has been, very little has been written about it. it's beginning to calm to the floor but for many years our intelligence agencies were giving us bad information. that is a problem of analysis, of analyzing the collective

information took a major hit again in 2010 and that's when the chinese intelligence or counterintelligence was able to begin unraveling the cia's recruiting agent network inside china. as many as 27 of the cia's agents were caught. many of them are executed including one that was brought out into the central square of one of the ministries and executed on the spot in front of a large number of chinese intelligence personnel. the message was unmistakable that they were going to aggressively pursue any and the efforts to learn what's going on. this is a problem because without understanding the nature of the chinese threat without good intelligence we are never going to be able to formulate a good policy. so to sum up i think the ultimate solution here is that the united states really needs to continue this policy of really confronting china, of

making sure that we bring about a different kind of system. you could call it a regime change. i think the terms that pompeo used was to induce change in china, that is to use the leverage of power economics political, military to bring about change. he pointed out that the chinese leadership is not united. xi jinping is assuming power in 2012 has undertaken a massive purge and if you understand the nature of the congress party system in china it's very much like a mafia system. it is controlled by a powerful family. some of them are in shanghai and some are in beijing in some are and other parts of the country chengdu and they operate on the family route. they have stolen billions and billions of dollars from the

chinese people as part of this modernization that has been underway. once again i have to complement the trump administration but i think they are very much following a policy that ronald reagan followed in beating the soviet union and that was going after china's ability and inability to develop technology and innovate. we address stood that they have been stealing u.s. technology and intellectual property to the tune of $250 billion a year year to as much as $600 billion a year. the trump administration is try to cut that off with the idea of let's see if the chinese miracle can survive without stealing american technology. at this point or they may have taken so much of our technology that it may be difficult to cut them off and see if they could survive. so at this point i will conclude their and we will accept any questions that anyone has right now. we have got about the team

minutes more. yes. >> i wanted to respond to something that michael said for which i vehemently disagree. michael you said the only way to end this problem of china's military is through legislation. it is a matter of missing statues and i think you know the president has the authority to stop chinese people from bringing companies that are here , more than 20 from doing business in this country. we talked about this before whether statutorily its

authorized implicitly but under the international emergency economic powers act he has the authority on his own without getting anybody in congress to do anything to shut down those companies. frankly i can imagine a more powerful signal to the chinese communist party which i think you are right has contempt for us and has come to the conclusion that we are -- and it's absolutely certain that they are going to get any legislation they don't approve of their congress. [inaudible even if it's been unanimously approved in some cases by the senate. legislation has recently been acted. my question to you is as a guy

who has the president here does he actually have -- [inaudible >> that may summarize the question. i'm not sure the audience was able to hear that. he oust about the president having authority. he asked the question about does the president have current authority to prevent pla linked companies from doing business in the united states. i would say frank gaffney's correction of me is correct. the president does have the power to declare emergencies and conduct punishment or strategies towards china. he actually did that in the case of the hong kong executive order. a lot of people are astonished because the press did not actually cover that emergency declaration. it's actually the first stage of the executive order so yes the president can do that.

the president i have none hesitates to get out in front of the congress on controversial issues so you are right but to defend myself i would say the president probably looks at how very few co-sponsors there are for all these bills i mentioned. actually it's not 80 comets 120 so the white house can see that yes we have robert spalding's books and bill gertz howes wonderful books. opposing nixon's trip while he was there in beijing, these are nazis that we have an unlimited 15 years of conservative warning that presidents tend to look at defensive serve the majority view or how much will i be attacked for this. i think my view is still correct that the legislation may be is

not totally necessary but it would certainly help a lot eerie at by the way you sound like you are former senate staffer. [laughter] is that correct? >> any comment on that? >> i do believe that the president has many authorities and i think the answer that michael proffered is only partially correct because in reality the critical consensus within washington d.c. is very much driven by where the corporate sector and wall street donates their money and in fact they have all been incentivized by the chinese communist party because of the profits they have learned on behalf of the chinese communist party and so it is not just politics. also about the money trail and if you follow the money trail you will find through corporate america and wall street directly

to the chinese come in his party so in that sense what the party does is essentially curry favor in our political system through these connections. >> i would just say on the issue of conflict one of the policy suggestions that has been raised is we need to decouple our economy from china and that's part of the problem. we are so integrated right now with the figures you mentioned trillions of dollars of investment in china at the united states can't just walk away from china right now. they need to do it in a way that's responsible and careful and protect american interests. my view is that president trump is a very transactional figure. he is not a career politician. he works through things that happen and doesn't want to foreclose his way of doing a deal with someone so he is not an ideological person and therefore i think legislation is

really needed on a lot of these issues. all of the best things that have happened as i mentioned earlier were related to legislation. despite the hyperpartisanship in washington these days one area of emerging bipartisanship is the issue of the china threat or they think that needs to be developed and we need to find a way to really build up a bipartisan consensus and i think we can get the legislation that will fix a lot of these problems. >> there are is a challenge here and that is the fundamental misunderstanding of the chinese communist party. there is a belief on behalf of wall street and corporate america that money is still available to be brought back an effect that money is gone. none of them want to take a haircut so there's a famous saying that says you find yourself at the bottom of the hole the first thing you should do is not brief that the problem

is the chinese communist party has convinced wall street and corporate america to keep digging somehow to get this money back and this is the challenge that we face. >> any other questions? and they should have the role of the committee on china and we are lucky to have the vice chairman here. the committee's web site its activities its meetings. this is really sending a message that this is not really a small minority of people who are worried about china. to broader group of then than that. i think the membership is growing from the beginning so that's really a plus but we should praise the creation and the duties of the committee on the present danger of china. >> questions? we have a few minutes left. you want to make a couple of final comments here? >> essay due bill. your book in 1999 and 2000 the china threat is very important but before that and also in 2005

there were other quite eloquent warnings about china. i just mentioned to frank the calling of bill buckley. i listen to a tape recently for my next book it's kissinger talking to nixon or a show we buckley along with us to beijing and kissinger says no, he will disrupt everything and cause trouble and nixon says what we need him because he's the most famous conservative of the time. another example is constantine mangoes in the book i think he wrote the forward to. he rode along 700 pages or so book called the gathering storm about the china threat very detailed specific idea. the u.s. should sponsor and fund a chinese government or parliament in exile that meets annually in talks about ideas to

induce change in china. nothing happened but the idea is still kicks around and i track down how much money we spend as the federal government on democracy rule of law information operation inside china. i think at most $50 million a year. the department of justice has a program usaid. most of our department have programs inside china. $50 million is nothing. this is a 14, 15 trillion-dollar economy. they are going to surpass us if we don't do the right thing so we can afford more than $50 million of democracy and human rights and rule of law projects in china? it's just ridiculous. i don't want to be pessimistic and i know you're an optimist by nature but we have got a turn things around before it's too late. sid actually the book was called china the gathering threat.

>> it's a important to understand silicon valley today and the power they have led to the chinese come his party the ability to influence individuals using their own data. i think this is achieved challenge of 5g. it's not just about huawei, it's about l.a. baba and the chinese version of facebook amazon and google that they potentially dominate facebook and google. kaifu lee says the chinese strategy for intelligence dominance is to become the saudi arabia of data and that's what they are really doing today. >> in my final comments i would say i think the model for defeating the communist party of china needs to be adapted from the model that mikhail gorbachev used to bring down the soviet union and that is glasgow sent perestroika. we need to break through the

firewall in china and get information into the chinese people and if we do that the chinese people will get rid of the communist china of -- the communist party of china. thank you all. sid i want to say a special thanks to this panel but i like moderating but i know when the panel is above my pay. and so i oust bill gertz to moderate this panel and if the liberty students are watching out there we have a ton of folks streaming different channels across the country. i just want to let you know who you just heard from. these are the three best book others in the country by far. all of their titles are not exactly rosy scenarios. i'm an optimistic calvinist so michael pillsbury and "the hundred year marathon," its award and then the general one "stealth war" and bill gertz on

"deceiving the sky." your office since is in the cloud in your defense is in -- all three of these gentlemen, please google them and learn from them and look at their bios see who they are because what they just said to you is profound more than i can put in 30 seconds. it's an honor to be on a stage with these three gentlemen. i will just personalize it their books and the message they deliver is risky for them to be out there putting out the truth the way they do it. i want to thank them on behalf of the kirk center who put this event together but let's give them a big warm round of liberty applause. [applause] thank you gentlemen. thanks for all you do. [applause]

[inaudible conversations]

>> washington doesn't get enough credit for being politically savvy and for having good leadership skills and being actively involved in the presidential process. as i sort of mentioned he was doing this and really big personalities. they were loud, they were sometimes arrogant, they have their own ambitions. they had their own ideas about

how to do things including charles lee who like to bring in his pack of hounds council award which i is a dog lover personally think it's great that anyone who knows hounds knows they can be quite loud and not conducive to a good meeting environment. it's just a really colorful boisterous environment in the yet to manage all those personalities that washington was president he certainly had fewer people that he had to manage that anyone who has seen "hamilton" knows that hamilton and jefferson really really didn't like each other and really didn't get along so that management was crucial for the other management that was important was washington was setting precedent in any single action he was taking. the other thing from how to correspond with the secretaries or how to interact with congressman, how to respond to an average person on the street

and what sort of social event should take ways. he was capable of managing these details in managing the people beneath him was crucial when you're talking about putting up a government structure that is and in the end isn't passed in legislation so that management becomes essential.