but even if he has to leave do you think things will average go back where they used to be trade wise between the united states and china no i don't think they will i don't think they will go back to where there were trade wars i don't think they will go back to where they were security wise i think going to hold the specter of us china relations there has been a profound change and only a post of the art house to do with donald trump on his tariffs it also has to do with china's policy within the eastern nation region i mean how is to do with developments in saudi you know to states. the basis of this whole development in my view is 1st and foremost the fact that the world is moving from having been off to the end of the cold war predominantly unicode meaning dominated by you know the states and towards a much more multi-polar system in which china is an increasingly important country but one among many powers that are going to have great influence so it's stuck

change that is at the bottom of what's now happening in the u.s. china relationship now i think it also has something to do with a new generation of thinkers who gained a lot of influence in and around the white house and given president trump's own antics i think it's very easy to dismiss him as a charlatan but i also tend to think that he's policy visit china is pretty elaborate i'm not saying it's good but all i'm saying that there is a lot of thought behind it by people like michael pillsbury of the it's an institute steve bannon etc is there anything in their world view of china as well and they cannot make war on the industrial economies of the west that rings true to you as well. not as an economic war i mean that you're still make any sense i mean china is competing in the international marketplace like any other country is competing in the national market because the program which is the correct problem to focus on is that china because of its economic structure has had certain

advantages in terms of the development of its own market. that all the countries more advanced countries including you know what the states including europe have not been able to to obtain but this is not uncommon in terms of the historical development so countries that are rising often cut off their own markets to foreign competition the worst similar that i can think of in historical sense in this case is you know the states which for a very long time was the most difficult country in the late 19th and early 20th century to get access to for all of them were drawn to the quantum is so this is not this is not surprising now i'm not so sure how advanced the thinking is strategically with regard to tariffs so i think you're right in saying that some of the us view on china is changing but i think that has to do. with everyone who is thinking about foreign policy or discussing foreign policy here at the moment and that has us much to do with the relative reduction in the overall

american position it has to do with the royce of china so what i'm saying is that i don't think the trumpet ministration has a particularly top or well strata joist attitude or a policy toward china but i also don't think that this administration is necessarily do worse administration that china could face i could easily imagine a democratic administration coming into the white house off to the next election that would be asked tough if not tougher on china know now professor west that you said a moment ago that china is competing just like everybody else and i think the argument prevailing in the white house at the moment is that china is competing in in an absolutely unique way like no one has done before and i mentioned. before one of his bass no on the boards of both in the west one of his most revered works in china is the our at the war which focuses on the exact same thing know how to

advance and win while awaiting direct confrontation you know the use of. delay and deceit the use of spying temporis admission that cetera if one sees that as a cornerstone of the chinese worldview is it at all surprising that people like steve bannon and michael pillsbury would ultimately see china's strategy as aggressive and aiming to take something away from the united states then i think they take. losses for who lived more than 2000 years ago a little bit too seriously aren't chanos are to to to go outside world is dominated by politics current politics and not the ancient philosophy i spent most of the 1st part of this year in beijing met a lot of policymakers i don't think they are a day have much to advance in terms of their understanding of chinese history or what will trump house of american history which is to say very very little so i don't think that's the issue here i think very often you find an overrating or for

china is able to do on the western side and especially on the u.s. side on that front and sort of people now look our who shouldn't over look the issue on the chinese to do something or competition that there is an attempt very concerted attempt to steal secrets from foreign companies to obtain them for free that there is a link between an increasingly or through tarion chinese to do ship and what they have been able to do in terms of getting controlled economy all of that is true but the idea that china is somehow in totally different from what's happening in the rest of the world that's the one b. would object at the same time in your own book you do provide a certain basis for a sort of philosophical clash you you mention several concepts that essential to the chinese press option of the world and one of them is the concept of justice particularly as it relates to china's own place in the world this feeling that china's loss of influence in the previous centuries was unjust that china is now

trying to regain what rightfully. belongs to it and ultimately that's that's an odds of it the american perception of the world to be cheese any rising power as an offense if aggressive and aiming to take something away from america do you think those perceptions how things a supposed to be with ever be reconciled i think it's always very hard when you have an adjustment in terms of power between rising powers and status quo pose some index what we have seen throughout history does also true with regard to china no you're absolutely right in part of course because you quote in my book. in saying that china is owed to regain what it sees its its position within eastern asia and i think that's going to happen i mean china is the most populous country within the region it is seen as the center within the region not these now in economic terms and i think there is very little over

a long period of time that you know to states can do to prevent that the question is how do we get from here to there. being this quite natural great power why will vary from moving on to a full scale conflict and eventually war that's the key issue i think at the moment so there will be there will be conflicts connected to the royce of china that's not that's not surprising but the question is how it happens and i think people in beijing also very aware of what is so this is part of the reason why a lot of people know there are very concerned about what's happening and do the rapid deterioration in the us china relationship now another point that you make in your book is how well integrated china is into the global economy and into the american economy much more than any rising power before it when president trump talks about the crumbling of chinese manufacturing as he did on twitter just the other day. can he be sure that some of those big debris won't land on his own shores no he can't i mean i think china is intimately connected to the global

economy and the way it works. i think if there is a severe decline in terms of the chinese economy that's going to hurt everyone and i think one of the choices that this administration has to make and its successor administration whenever that comes in also will have to make is whether u.s. strategic interests are sole predominant in terms of how do you know the states or to view the world that it would prioritize such a decline in spite of the negative consequences it would have for the u.s. economy over seeking a more collaborative relationship with china in spite of the political and strategic differences so in other words the big question is will one on the u.s. side and the chinese side for that matter decide that one can compete and cooperate at the same time or will the competition move in the direction of an overall. clash

which will have both economic and political and military. consequences in a very negative sense for both countries i think that would also depend on how far they trumpet ministrations a bishop is go do you think they would be satisfied with you know limited concessions on that tarot of them intellectual property rights or od they indeed out to destroy or undermine state capitalism as a system as an ideological concept if you will no i think they would like to do that after but i think they're all a number of people within this administration who understand that that would be would be very difficult. maybe unattainable if you if you think about china's direction so i think there are some severe weaknesses in terms of how the chinese economy works at the moment i think economic reform to try to. intake and forward has in many ways stalled i suppose and foremost a problem for the chinese but i think in the way that this is seen by body trump

administration i think politically because they have an election coming up what they would like to do is to have some kind of agreement which trump condemn present us a great week story which will form part of his platform for deep for the reelection campaign. whether such a deal is going to be lost in doubt is the big question and i'm i'm very doubtful with regard to it up not necessarily because you know what the states is out to undo deep political or economic system in china but but simply because the the trade and economic contradictions between the 2 countries are so strong well professor west that we have to take a very short break now but we will be back in just a few moments. backscatter

survival guide stacey just long to start. this is. the story there you don't get a. good. look at the rest 7 there's. still a separate kaiser. thousands of american men and women choose to serve in the country's military and the decision little sheltered lives every song came to a complete. the day that i was ready to be instructed you know told to shut up but they'd kill me and i see how it destroyed my life any screamed at me and he made me come in and he grabbed my arm and he write me with his birthing area if you take into account that women don't report because of the extreme retaliation and it's

probably somewhere near about half a 1000000 women have now been sexually assaulted in the us military rape is a very very traumatizing tat happen but i've never seen trauma like i've seen women who are veterans who have suffered military sexual trauma reporting rape is more likely to get the victim punished don't be offended and almost 10 year career or chose very invested in and i gave a sex offender who was not even put to justice or put on the registry this is simply an issue of tower and violence male sexual predators for the large part of target whoever is there to prey upon whether that's men or women. well you know that they were kind of adopted because we were called pirates for so long. i mean they're in this small ball of sticks they don't harp on ships and it's very. tough for. the little self to be

told fish already 90 percent of it daryn got on a wall and recover. concert fifteen's 75 tons they do it several times a day with a big fleet so no you get an idea on why. we have to understand we could not stay you still would just. be within this all. he does feel for you. i'm doing this because i want the future world to future generations to have and enjoy the ocean we have. to what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy on sunday shouldn't let it be an arms race based on often scary dramatic developments only

really going to exist i don't see how that strategy will be successful very critical time to sit down and tom. welcome back to worlds apart with the odds are they have west that professor of history of global affairs at the university professor west that the world often the accuses china of stealing ideas let's put it this way but as i was reading your book it occurred to me that the chinese man approach it differently because. you provide many historic examples of them trying to emulate not just industrial designs but whole chunks of other countries in the canal mix systems 1st it was the

soviet one then that was the american the one that they tried to recreate that according to their own needs and understandings how does china go about. choosing what it wants to take when it comes to those. larch strategic things. well as are some russians who know better than anyone and this is of course connected to chinese politics and the directions that chinese politics have been taken over a fairly long period of time so the 1st in many ways encounter with the west for china was to disorient union and was true communism which completely transformed the country and then starting in the late 19th seventies china started under a different political leadership to think in the direction of using market mechanisms in order to transform the country and i've been tremendously successful in doing so which is one of the reasons why i did chinese communist party is still in power while the soviet communist party is long gone so i think china has had an incredible ability to pick up ideas not always the best suited ideas but different

kinds of ideas from elsewhere implementing them and this is why i call. china in many ways a hybrid civilization the way it comes up no i mean it it consists of domestic traditions some domestic ideals but it's also taken an immense amount in from elsewhere yes but it also got them in trouble with the americans and to some extent europeans because even before. her the europeans complaining about china is stealing their trade designs i'll be very quietly now intellectual property rights are clearly essential to the current dispute and the trumpet ministration seems to believe that china's growth could be slowed down if this capacity for appropriation is somewhat curtailed do you believe believe that to be the case do you think china at this point can fuel its own innovation that without relying on technology transfers from other countries no i don't think any country is capable of

developing and so an economy well without access to ideas and to science and patents don't have been developed elsewhere i mean the point here and this is a correct point i think coming from the u.s. administration is that chinese companies from the. and his government have to do this in a way step all in conformity with what happens elsewhere in the world according to international standards for these consequences now china is not the only cinema my friends who know much more about this and what i do. convincing me that china has made significant improvements in terms of intellectual property rights overall but i do think that there is still a problem there is still an issue that needs to be either a sort of the current us administration probably overstates it but there is an issue that china needs to resolve for its own interests as well as the rest of the world now according to your book china had the soviet era we talked a little bit about it the american you know which ironically america is now trying

to bring in and to what do you think will come next will china have a genuinely chinese era. i don't think any concrete really in this day and age can afford to turn inward but it's also a misunderstanding with impulse of the chinese communist party is so one of the things that's really striking in the political discourse in beijing today is the number of people to be close to power who are saying that some of the what i call the american era in china sort of off to denounce and seventy's was a mistake right that china needs to return war to its own roots and become more independent or will i think that would be really difficult to do china needs to stay integrate to do i think they're also policy makers in beijing who realized that this is china's interest as long as the chinese economy is still needs to grow very substantially to deal with domestic problems including rising inequality

poverty in some parts of the country so i think the idea overturning from this engagement with the outside world and because i'm more in with looking simply is not is not an alternative which on china has to stay involved but what it wants to do i think a look at its relation. you put russia on this is to broaden its ability to work with different powers in different parts of the world and that's i think is a is a is a sensible strategy you often make a point that china needs to create a better system of governance particularly finding a better balance between regional and the central levels and if you also meant that vertically integrated system has 3rd that well how do you see you know i don't know i hesitate calling it a democracy but the chinese characteristics about how do you see the system that china could develop that would both give its citizens more protein to express

themselves including politically but also preserve the efficiency that they chinese are so proud of right that's a very good question i mean what china needs to do and this i think is the biggest challenge actually bigger than the relationship with the outside world is to make it possible for ordinary chinese to feel that they have a bigger stake in terms of the development of the country and that includes to do more in terms of freedom of speech freedom of organization i don't think china you know lifetime is going to be anything like a democracy in patisserie for 3 terms but it needs to become a much more open society and that's the problem i think that the current chinese leadership post is that he says don't very little about dealing with these kinds of issues internally and therefore pressure is building and i think a very significant economic downturn and charm no if it comes. and it will come at some point you know could have really serious political consequences inside inside

the country because chinese are very proud of what they have achieved. over the last generation and a half but there is also a need i think now for political reform that would make it possible for people to feel that they have more of a stake. in this remarkable transformation that china has gone through you often talk about how the kidneys believe that they are a system is superior to that of the west and i think in this regard donald trump is every interesting historic phenomenon because he is putting the chinese system to historic test he's also putting the western system to quite a substantial task what each of these 2 systems do you think. may withstand the chum test better. i am very tempted to answer neither of them. i think there are severe challenges and now in terms of governance. in europe and

in do you know other states i think to a severe test to governance in china and in russia i think the most important thing is that people who have their own concerns who want to see things develop maybe in a different way than what has happened before or actually listened to by the elites and body by the people in in power and that it doesn't all because an issue either or 3 tarion rulers in incheon on to some extent in russia or the kind of populist form of democracy does you're seeing in the united states and europe that the challenge share for china to come back to that is that the room conclusion i think no for chinese leaders to draw is that the resoled much trouble in the west that this makes it possible for china to keep the current of system of government in place that they have now forever with any attempt at serious reform it at the political level or in terms of the political economy does it i think would be historical mistake this may be in many ways open an opportunity for china to say ok

look this is what we want to go this is how we want to improve seriously improve governance within our own country when the economic going is still relatively good . i know that in the 1st part of your career you were mainly preoccupied with the history of the cold war you mentioned the soviet union and the us soviet rivalry and i don't know also that you're very adamant that what we're seeing now between beijing and washington is not a repeat or a replay of the cold war how would you characterize what's going on between these 2 great nations. i think what we see coming back to what we talked about earlier is a great poet will read that ramon speak quite a lot of what happened back in the 19th century meaning that there are several powers that compete for influence and for controlled within the regions so what we're looking at now is not a bipolar system like during the cold war where you have royal ideologies in terms

of how society should be organized and economy should be organized you have a conflict and are widely read between several great powers where the main point as we see in the current trade conflict is to get more for oneself it's not about you know fundamentally changing the global system in terms of the way it works it's not even rival systems of governance because that's not a key issue here it is a boat you know getting more in international trade in terms of resources in terms of international finance for one's own country and that i think is what's going to characterize the global system as it develops from oh but i'm not saying that that is less dangerous necessarily than even a cold war i think it could become a very dangerous forms of competition but it's just a different kind of competition from what we saw during the cold war i heard you say that the more the united states and china bit each other more room for maneuver their powers will have and being from russia naturally interested how do you think

moscow can leverage that they thrive already for its own benefit and for the benefit of the world but i think russia could leverage it must. both for its own benefit and for the benefit of the world but it depends on how russia handles the situation that still no i mean if the russian leadership believes that this is the moment to get as close to china as possible in order to have some kind of united front against us dominated world i don't think russia is making use of that leverage for many good historical examples of all how dangerous the. kind of you know towing one's lot in with with one so it would actually be maybe especially for russia or in russia china relationship but if russia tried to deal with the problems you know around its own borders when it tried to deal with us russia that's where the relationship however difficult it is in a way that made it possible to leverage both sides i think that would be an immense

advantage for russia and probably lead to broader stability in terms of the world over a few years ago you described my country as a dissatisfied scavenger on the fringes of the current order and it's evident to me that you didn't try to hide the ideas they had there but don't you think that this scavenger as you put it may prove to be a crucial to both china and the united states as the balance or if the rivalry indeed continues to deepen i'm sorry for that formulation but what i was trying to say is that the way russia has spent over the post decade or so is very much not engaging with what are the central issues in terms of global governance but broader issues that have to do immediately with its own beliefs is natural for any country right which is true to some extent for any country but not for countries who want to see themselves as

a global power necessarily i think that's the that's the question so so what russia has to do is to decide what it wants to be i mean does it want to move back into having a strong global position or those that want to antagonize most of its neighbors spoilt by insisting on its own rights or on the its borders now is possible to do both but the there is usually a price to pay for that i mean it's really it's really difficult to do both politically in this kind of situation where it's clear that russia is compared to do not the states and china is not roy singh. in a global sense particularly with regard to its economy. so. formulation what i tried to say is that you know what russia needs to do is to up its game it needs to think of itself smooth and what it is at the moment and that it can actually play an important global balancing role but only if it takes its responsibility while professor west that let's leave the debate on russia for some other time in the meantime let me thank you for being with us today and sharing

your perspective it has been a great pleasure i invite our viewers to keep this conversation going on our social media pages and i hope to see you again same place same time here on the walls of part. of. this is a sticker from a water bottle found in the stomach of a fish the brand is part of the coca-cola company which sells millions of bottles of soda every day the idea was that let's tell consumers they're the bad ones

they're the litter bugs are throwing this away industry should be blamed for all this waste the company has long promised to reuse the plastic. that's. their. special projects funded. on the line your best bet is the. fun now the mountains of waste only grow.

millions of serbian made weapons reportedly end up in the hands of terrorists in yemen and syria they were bought by the u.s. and its allies as according to leaks documents obtained by bulgarian gentleness i didn't pay the price as i very find if you insist this doesn't tell you seeing. the birth or they are of thank you. foreigners business isn't looting the south african city of johannesburg in a wave of anti immigrant hate crime think up one sunday night i'm getting cold rolled when they break they shove the deadbolt up was a bit inside and 2 seconds i just played to be in something for your schools.

and for us president council so-called secret peace talks with the afghan leader.