leading the way of the. strengthening economic. international. shrugged off the pitch for more austerity with her. friends calling it the biggest threat to global security.

with michael klare a speaker. russia's role in the asia pacific region. i. am. hello again or welcome to spotlight the interview show on r.t.e. i'm on room and today my guest is michael clear one of the key speakers at the apec summit expert on energy and world security but first here's

a seasonal chorus question what what's the capital of russia right now and i'm sure most of you got that question to trash and city just call the northern cap some might know that st petersburg russia is a gateway to your final question what city today claims it's the eastern cap the far far east you'll know the answer just minutes into this show. moscow and st petersburg i haven't a break these days as all the attention has been on the part of russia most remote from the capital for recency to avoid evil stalkers hosting the summit of the asia pacific economic cooperation apac russia joined the forum fourteen years ago and they see it to a with a rotating chair for the first time it's also first time russia is at the event as a w t o member which means

a new level of involvement in international trade before hosting the summit of a store had to go through a major grade roads bridges and conference holes have been built to welcome a peg guests it has been the second most expensive infrastructure project in russia after preparations for the two thousand and fourteen winter on. pics in sochi around twenty billion u.s. dollars were invested in getting word of a stock radio with a high profile meeting some of the resources were spent on one of the most invasive project a breach connecting the mainland and schiano and where the coup or events of the apec who are empowered to be held. the current scheme break just outside the r.t. office in moscow is much more than a way to get from one side of the river to the other it's also one of the most impressive parts of the city a landscape a legacy of the stall in iraq and the beautiful site likewise thing you will build to breach between whatever stock and rules talent is more than just

a bridge it's also something of a trademark for the apec summit as well as a symbolic thing you will stop being given to the russian far east more than three kilometers more on the bridges the worlds like just structure of its kind and it's not only about impressing foreign guests everything that was done here within the last few years was a course connected to the summit but it's not really for the summit it is for all of you leave here. russia's far east has long been in decline with only infrastructure fully part and the population living in great numbers with the new build breached the city is no much compared to san francisco but it's going to take plenty more for the similarity to go beyond just moves. to a hello mr clair welcome to the show thank you very much for being with us today. well pleasure you have been writing extensively about the rising row of the asia

pacific region are you sure that the region is bound to replace the atlantic and global importance is a true. well you know on the basis of population on the basis of economy on the basis of economic dynamism yes i think that the atlantic the asia pacific region will become the dominant region of the future yes the need you tend to see the future of the region rather in terms of most of all between the u.s. and china rather than cooperation what makes you think so. you know when you look at history when you have a dominant power that's been a player in place for a very long time. in this case the united states and you have a rising power like china there's always going to be friction and conflict now that

doesn't mean it will lead to war a conflict does not always have to lead to war but certainly there will be rivalry and competition are you talking about a possibility up a cold war between between america and china a cold war across the pacific. well tao i remember the cold war very well as you say. and there are ways in which the situation is similar and ways in which it's dissimilar it's dissimilar talk about that first it's dissimilar in the sense that the u.s. and china have many economic bonds that wasn't true between the united states and the soviet union they didn't have economic ties very much at all but the u.s. and china have many economic ties they're very close trading partners american

corporations do a lot of business with china chinese companies do business with the united states so this is a force that acts against a cold war on the other hand there are similarities and and those are powerful forces on both sides that see benefits from competition for example what what president eisenhower called the military industrial complex in this country and in china which would see benefits from a cold war and i think that those forces are becoming very aggressive right now with the end of the war in iraq and afghanistan the military industrial complex in the united states is pushing for a naval rivalry with china and i believe there are very similar forces and china that would also push for

a expansion of the chinese navy so and that sense there was a similar forces during the cold war in the soviet union in the united states that pushed for armament is so there are similarities and dissimilarities and it's hard to say which will prevail well michael you mentioned the economic factors. well well i did study political economy as you surely and but i don't think that economic competition that it seems to be sufficient to explain poetical and military rivalry for example despite competition between the u.s. and japan they remain close allies why then is rivalry between the u.s. and china no good. well one difference is that japan never threatened america's global dominance japan after world war two i should say

remember during world war two japan did have aspirations to be an imperial power and that did threaten the united states' interests and it did lead to war after world war two japan abandon any imperial aspirations and so the economic competition did not produce the same kind of. struggle for international dominance that it did during world war two and so it didn't lead to the kind of friction that you're speaking of but china is different china appears to have certainly regional aspirations to be a major power in southeast asia and elsewhere and conceivably to have international aspirations as a prominent power and africa and the middle east and central asia and from the

perspective of american leaders not all of them but many of them this is very threatening to american interests so there is a difference. you. when i start talking about studying studying political prisoner political science i suddenly thought you reminded me of one of my teachers that taught political science in school that i when i went to. mr he used to teach us. probably as you would also do that political that that that democracies never go to war with each other so maybe the root of the problems we're talking about being the fact that china is not a democracy it at least is not considered democracy in most of the countries. well that may be a factor my thinking is a little bit different. i i rest my analysis

on a global struggle for vital resources room materials i think we're in a world today where the supply of vital resources i'm talking about oil natural gas minerals and practically everything else is going to be in increasingly short supply because we've used up so much of the world's available resources so the u.s. and china are going to be in competition for vital supplies especially of oil the u.s. and china are now the leading consumers of oil and increasingly china will need more and more of what's left of the world's oil but who is so who will be to we move more provoke of give in this struggle in this trouble for resources china or the you are going to be more aggressive what would well very. well the united states

has historically been very aggressive the united states has long been the dominant oil power in the middle east and parts of africa and in parts of latin america so china as it overtakes the united states as the leading oil importer has no choice but to be assertive to be aggressive in places i don't think this is because of a desire to to confront the united states but the sheer necessity of providing energy for china's booming economy michael i have a quote here that i think proves proves your your your statement my guidance is clear about america declared in canberra australia last year. as we plan and budget for the future we will allocate the resources necessary to maintain our strong military presence in this region

and quote can. this can this strategy voiced by mr obama will lead to a new two new arms race or don't you think or do you think chinese the chinese will not respond to such words. i don't see how the chinese cannot respond to those words after all we're not talking about the area of the pacific off of the american coast we're talking about areas of the pacific off of the chinese coast we're talking about the south china sea and the east china sea these are areas right off the coast of china and the number one priority for the chinese military is to is defense of the homeland says michael clay an expert on attitude and world security and one of the speakers at the apec summit in. prague

mike will be back shortly we'll continue this interview author breaks out the state . wealthy british style. that's not on my mind. like the. markets why not. come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with mike stronger for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into cars

a report. from . russia. which brightened a few. songs from feinstein question. don't talk team don't come. welcome back to spotlight i'm now going off and just a reminder that my guest on the show today is michael klare who is an expert on energy and world security and one of the speakers at the at pax summit in the city of lot of on stock and rush well michael we started to speak about about

the competition that the possible rivalry even that does worry people around the world between the u.s. and china well do you think that the u.s. consider control over the sea routes of asia and means to control the flow of oil another role materials and here by as the main two of china's containment is that true. you know there there is no verbal indication on the part of the u.s. government that that's the case they don't say that out loud but i have suspicions that the case that they have adopted a strategy to use control of the sea lanes as a way of intimidating china or threatening china in some sense the way that nuclear deterrence was once

a way of intimidating powers now instead of nuclear deterrence where we're talking about controlling the sea lanes as a way of threatening countries but you will not find this are spoken out loud or in official documents so it's just a suspicion on my part well there is the reason i ask you this question is that there is suspicion my pont too because i've been hearing. lately more and more often a russian russian politicians speaking about the increasing american presence in the reason region and that this presence is being is being explained by the necessity to protect international trade and seaways and so what so politicians don't always say all the truth but do you think that these suspicions my and yours are really grounded. well i i do i mean i think there is discussion among

naval strategists of this strategy and bear in mind this may be a little bit academic but the leading american strategist of all time alfred thayer mae hahn who was president of the u.s. naval academy and is well known in strategic circles proposed exactly these kinds of strategies and may han is enjoying the revival in the united states but also in china and elsewhere in the world because he spoke about the importance of sea power in a globalized economy so yes i do think there is this kind of thinking taking place in washington mr claridge do you think that this this growing competition a possible rivalry with the united states. the resources. for all

materials first of all for oil and gas will increase china's dependence on russian energy supplies. yes i do think that's the case and. i think that china would prefer china would prefer if left to itself to trade with everyone in the world but china sea that it's freedom of operation has been somewhat narrow by this buildup of u.s. forces naval forces and so is hedging its bets as we would say by strengthening its ties with russia because energy from russia can be delivered by interior means by pipelines to rectally connecting russia and china the same is true of central asia china is also building its energy ties with the central asian countries well under these circumstances do you think russia should

take a side should pick a side because because unlike the soviet union and the russian foreign policy lately was not to take sides trying to be neutral even in the syrian conflict russia is trying to say we're not we're just trying to to to to to be neutral do you think it's time for russia to toot to pick a card to take a side of the conflict and either win or lose. well you know as a non russian you know i think it would be inappropriate for me to tell russia what to do but i would say no i don't think russia should take sides remember i said earlier that there are there is the drift towards a cold war is not inevitable there are forces in the united states and in china that would prefer to avoid a cold war and anything that could be done to strengthen those forces is good for

everybody in the world we don't want a new cold war that's the worst thing that could possibly happen in my mind so anything that we could do to avert a new cold war would be for the good of everybody and for russia to take sides i think would be a mistake because that would strengthen the arguments of those in washington who want to see a new cold war or who would benefit from a new cold war and who think of russia in negative terms so for russia to take sides i think would be a terrible mistake says an american whose country i mean the united states always takes sides not in any conflict that happens around the world well you know this is the habit of a superpower. united states was and considers itself to be a superpower and tends to take sides because that is the way superpowers behave

well actually america america has diplomatic and military advantages while china today dominates the region economically so how food may it dominate the world economically and question two is china capable to establish also military and political dominance. well you know i've read many studies about china's potential and some say that china is destined to be the equal of the united states before twenty fifty and others say that china has so many internal problems that it will never achieve that rank so it's a little bit hard to say and right now we're seeing a lot of problems emerge and china economic problems environmental problems so

i would be hesitant to say that china is going to be in the near future equivalent of the united states in all respects i don't see china becoming a global power on the same scale as the united states and one reason is i think wisely very wisely chinese leaders do not want to spend as much money on the military as the united states i personally believe that the united states spends way too much money on the military at at the expense of other vital dash needs like education and research and development i think the chinese leadership would prefer to spend more money on education and economic development and i think that's a wise decision so they're not building up their military at a speed that will allow them to reach equivalence with the united states soon so

they're not going to become a global superpower in the same way i don't see it happening. china seems to lack allies in the region if it's going i think facing a rivalry with the united states it already is. very very harsh relations with india in that the regional superpower and dad the allies are only isolated regimes like that as that says for example north korea. do you think china is capable of acquiring new allies and does it need our allies or or. what china may may may be you know as it is old by itself is growth as a growing monster. but china needs closer relations with the countries on its periphery and it needs friends around the world there's no question about that because china as a major economic power has to have trading partners it has to have

suppliers of rule materials so it must have a global international presence that's an absolute necessity and i think chinese leaders wisely understand that the best way to achieve those kind of ties is not through military force or domination but through trading relations that benefit its allies you know by providing development assistance and loans and so forth and i i think to the degree that they persist and that kind of strategy they will succeed and the more they choose more intimidating measures the way they have in the south china sea they will suffer for it they've been quite assertive and aggressive in the south china sea with respect to the philippines and vietnam and that i think will harm their interests the more they

rely on economic means of diplomacy the better off they are that's my opinion besides the apac there is an organization called the brics south so i want to ask you what's the what's the place or is there a place for latin american countries in this competition between between china and the. i don't see the brics emerging as a political alternative to other forums other places like the g eight and the united nations security council and so on but i do think the brics play an important role in developing economic alternatives to be the long dominant economic policies of the western powers thank you thank you very much for being with us and just a reminder that my guest today was my plan and next week and the g. eight and world security and one of the speakers at the summit in life and that's

it for now from all of us here if you want to have your sound spotlight someone in mind do you think i'm stupid the next time you drop me a line that now we're not and. are you let's be fought live interact we'll be back with more profound comments on what's going on in and outside russia until then stay on and take a. look . you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else you hear or see some other part of it and realize everything you thought you knew you don't know i'm sorry welcome is a big issue. admission

free accreditation free cost for charge is free.