u.s. last year china's gdp is more than half of the u.s. gdp. and the imf, according to ppt terms, the chinese gdp is already a match that was the united states. this might not complect a reality, but that does lead people to think about how writing powers and challenging powers, how that is a trap. so in today's relations between china and the united states, we all -- all lords and scholaeade realize the importance of relations. at the same time there is deficit of trust. one example. on the u.s. side, the u.s. says clearly, and the u.s. is a welcome rising communication channel. but we see a lot of u.s. foreign policy toward the channel does -- toward china does not support such rhetoric. it enhances, aligns east asia, increases around china, and -- >> one minute. >> okay. so i think from a realist perspective, we face a deficit of trust. from a realist perspective, we need to find new rules and try to find greater rules to set a problem of our common concern. and because a limitation of time, i think the last point i want to make is that the

my view is that china remain far behind the u.s. power transition very powerfully demonstrate very, very rich. probably the perception feeling now pouring out see china now is a very, very strong competitor. for our chinese view we continue to see china is just the imposition to cooperate while competing for some sort of co-interest. co-interest is sovereignty, political safety, china's unfinished evolution. from this point i would also like to see bilateral relations should be based on very virtuous action and reactions. china shouldn't just [ inaudible ] then the question for u.s. is washington also shouldn't overreact to a rising china. let me stop here. >> thank you. > >>>. >>> thank you very much. let me focus on the challenges to the international security order in northeast asia and the u.s./china relations. my task here is to make my colleagues on the podium speak more. let me highlight four factors that are important. first is the future of bilateral relations between the united states and china. second is north korea nuclea

china and the u.s. on the one hand and also between these three countries and north korea. so there is a lot of suspicion as to what the other's intentions are. the second factor is the rise of china. the rise of china. china is in the middle of the rise and china is both a developing country and a developed country. a weak country and strong country. a poor country and rich country. an ordinary power and a non-ordinary power in some ways. and as a result, the chinese are confused in terms of how to define their interest and let alone to carry out to the coherent foreign policy. so when china sends out conflicting signals, the u.s. gets confused. the u.s. wants to know what the chinese really want. what the chinese are really up to. but the problem is the chinese don't know so americans can't find out. now the americans adopt a policy and of course china -- when chinese look at the united states adopting a hacking policy they adopt their own version of the policy. so as a result, the interaction between

china has been saying the u.s. return isn't necessary because the rise would be peaceful and nature and for that purpose, the u.s. is taking -- the u.s. is relying on the extension of the alliances and consolidation of traditional allies and on the other hand, china is experiencing partnership arrangements with many other countries. in terms of the economy in the asia-pacific and in terms of the military, we had to battle versus washington consensus in terms of the norms and values. so at different levels and domains, there seems to be some sort of a strategic competition poised for the future. there are two key regional issues that have important ramifications for the relationships. one, japan. the united states wants to succeed the military capacity in japan upgraded because it can be used in case of the regional contingency but at the same time it is also to reign in on japan if it is intended with the expectations of the state but whether or not they can actually make a balance between the two seemingly conserv

china and the u.s. on the one hand, and also between these three countries and north korea. so, there is a lot of suspicion as to what the other's intentions are. the second factor is the rise of china. the rise of china means that china now -- china is in the middle of the rise. in the middle of the rise means that china has dual identities, interests on many fronts. for example, china is both a developing country and a developed country. a weak country, a strong country. a poor country and rich country. ordinary power and civil power, in a way. chinese have two sets of interests on many issues. as a result, the chinese are confused in terms of how to define their interests, let alone to carry out a coherent foreign policy. so when china sends out conflict, incoherent signals, the u.s. gets confused. the u.s. wants to know what the chinese really want, what the chinese are really up to. the problem is, if the chinese don't know, americans cannot find out. so, the americans adopt this hedging policy. and

u.s.-china relations given the new regime and china?> i find them to be a constructive -- i try to be a constructive bridge between the two. i think the current status -- u.s.-china relations are always full of challenges and opportunities. >> when it comes to security and cyber security and the privacy of american citizens, who is more of a threat, china or the united states? >> i think everybody is spying on everybody. i think they will are equally a big threat inside our country as outside our country. >> what the nsa has been doing, as far as we know, fair or unfair? >> if the intentions are truly for national security, i think it is fair. setback.want another this is only a personal view. --if the nsa wanted a black backdoor to blackberry, would you open it? >> we don't have backdoors but we would not do that. from time to time, the government wanted information from us, ok? first of all, we don't keep it around could you need to know that. if we do it, it has to be under court order. >> have you ever had a moment where you thought

>> these attacks originated in china. u.s. intelligence sources have been telling various media organizations that the attacks did not originate in north korea and they started in china. that would be consistent with what we know about this china-north korea relationship. we do not have enough evidence to say 100% but what we do know is that these attacks were routed through chinese ip addresses and that means china had to know what was going on because china has the great sophisticatedmost and concentrated internet controls. they know everything that goes out and comes back. the north koreans took at least 100 terabytes of documents. the chinese knew what was going on inside their borders. are located on a permanent basis. >> it is fairly amazing that the infrastructure that has been put together. thecker worked in china are north korean border and said the facilities that north korea has cobbled together are all over the uae and in germany. >> they are located in about four or five different countries but most are located in

u.s. and china.na takes this seriously and comes with a very realistic, negative list proposal early in 2015. this is consistent with china's reform. china has to open up most of the service seccer tor this is the bilateral agreement with the united states. it would be good for the chinese economy and good for u.s. china relations. it's a steppingstone to china. choosing to join the tpp because this deeply integrated asia-pacific economy will be a very attractive way to promote economic growth and welfare more generally. look ahead to the future of the regional economy. it's a big question. the demographics are cooked for the next few decades. they are going to be tending to pull down the growth rate, particularly on the asian side of the pacific. as i said, the u.s. has an aging issue, but it will continue to have labor force growth and the u.s. through immigration policy can influence that. the u.s. could have even more labor force growth and has built into current projections. so the u.s. has adva

u.s. and china including remarks from former u.s. ambassador to china jon huntsman. this is about one hour. [applause] >> well, thank you already much for coming. this is going to be a good one tonight and we have a great panel here. chris johnson down here as most of you know i think senior advisor, a freeman chair in china, studies here at csis. he's an asian affairs specialist. he spent more than two decades in the u.s. government intelligence and foreign affairs communities. he's the senior china analyst, or was, at the cia, like a key role in supporting policymakers during the 1996 taiwan strait missile crisis, the 1999 accidental bombing of the chinese embassy in belgrade, the downing of a u.s. aircraft on the island in 2001 there in 2001 he was awarded the u.s. department of state superior honor award for outstanding support to the secretary, especially for aiding the office when chinese leadership changed hands in 2012. to my right ear is someone who has become very well known and recognized for his knowledge of china, evan osnos, a writer for "the new yorker

china and the u.s. probably should alleviate those concerns over its relationship with the of the country, you know, whether it's china or the u.s., don't push too hard. and china and south korea probably should try to alleviate washington's concern over the nuclear threats in north korea, and also attempt to minimize the role of the u.s., allegedly, the efforts to minimize the role of the u.s. in the region. so if we try to be innovative and pragmatic and cautious at the same time, i think the relationship should be less bad, if not much better. thank you. >> thank you for your presentation on time. if i could give my personal comment on your argument on a a.i.d. come you argued there might be some pressure from the u.s. side. i don't know if the u.s. side pressures on our shoulders, but if i am correct, the biggest problem is that china wants to take 50% shareholders based on -- a little higher than normal gdp per capita. if china takes 50% of shareholders, kobe has some difficulties. so that is my ini

u.s. and china such that the u.s. can't ask for help? >> because we have issues with beijing of our own, as we know from the indictments of five chinese officers in may. the chinese have been going after intellectual property. the amount of theft is staggering. when you look at the report of last year, american companies lose technology each year on the order of exports to asia. last year, u.s. exports were $475 billion. let's say it is only $100 billion. we're talking about a lot of information that is being taken by countries like china, russia, and iran as well. >> obama in his departing --parting interview, interesting he chose cnn to not call this cyber terrorism, but cyber vandalism. i wonder if that had something to do with the u.s. needing to go to china. does that have something to do with that nuanced phrase? >> i think you are right. the president is trying to keep the china connection undercover because he wants to go to beijing to make sure the chinese turf out these people. this is a diplomatic answer, not really what he th

u.s./china relations. from the wilson center, this is an hour and a half. >>> well, good afternoon and welcome to the wilson center. all of you who are here with us here in this auditorium and those who are watching on c-span or on our web cast. the wilson center is the living memorial to the 28th president of the united states. my name is robert daly, i direct the kissinger institute on china and the united states here at the wilson center. we're very glad to bring you this program on corruption, constitutionalism and control, implications of the fourth china and u.s./china relations. this afternoon's talk brings together two topics which are very often treated separately although i think they belong in the same program which are corruption and china's attempts to carry out further round of legal reforms. no doubt all of you have been following corruption stories from china over the past few years. and you have heard about x ping's willingness to take on both tigers and flies. probably followed the some ti

u.s.-china relationship. i would say the u.s.-china relationship is based on one fuel type only, and that is trust. sometimes, the trust is depleted from the gas tank, at which point you must fill it back up. we are at a point where we need to fill the tank back up with trust. produced goodit results on the people-to-people toa outcomes and commitments get more of a heads-up on a are size is and the climate deal. i am not sure how that one works in terms of the verification. i would characterize the relationship today as being status quo. it is ok. i say that because it could be better. generally, the u.s. china relationship is maximized when we have things to do. that we feel that are part of the aspirations of our people. when we had established the relationship in 1972, we had a common geopolitical objective. establishment of the world trade organization. i was involved personally. that was another thing that kept us at the negotiating table. both sides wanted the aspirational outcome, and it kept us honest. we did not feel --

that is you know, there are many people who talk about china supporting the u.s. n the efforts to fight 79. what exactly does the administration hoped china can play a role on? >> well, thank you very much. i am appreciative of all of the work you personally in the institute does. this is a topic of course with conversation between our leaders and certainly between our two systems. i have joined secretary kerry and foreign minister want on this topic and there's different ways of parsing and. but i think that the issue goes the lung isil or 79 and it pertains to the common injuries that both china and the united states have in preventing the spread of radical jihad is some, the interest and protect in the global infrastructure of finance and transportation from being utilized and hijacked by terrorist groups. it is our interest in preventing violent extremists from particularly those returning from conflict zones in the middle east, from conducting operations for attacking us or our neighbors. and it also pertains to the objectives that we share on the necessity of

u.s. and china have 51% of the coal firepower plant sites in the world.ow that from some of the reports that we received from iea and others that we currently, you know, in the last couple years, and you had similar data hiro, that about we've got about 1.6 -- 1,600 -- i'm sorry, 1,600 gigawatts of coal fire electricity capacity and it's expected, and i think it matches your chart pretty well to grow by 2040 to about 2,600. you had 2,630. so we're, you know, this is current growth. so that's a -- that's a 60% growth between today and let's say 2040 or mid 2030s. a lot of that growth is going to be in asia and india and other parts of the developing world. less so in the u.s. but there will be some growth in the u.s. as heat raid is improved on plant and additional technologies are built in. and the global coal demand is expected to rise just over the next five years from 7.8 billion tons in 2013 to a little over 9 billion tons in 2019. so there's going to be continued growth in the demand for the fuel as well. and i put these numbers out there, because i

china suspects the u.s. military uses north korean aggression as a pretext for setting up thaad to monitor china's military facilities. an expert on south korean foreign policy says during a visit to china in october, government and military officials strongly opposed thaad. >> translator: chinese officials told me that if the united states uses thaad it will be able to detect chinese missiles, and make preemptive attacks. there's no doubt that the u.s. is trying to intimidate china. that's why we object to deployment. >> reporter: south korea says the u.s. deployment of thaad will help defend the country. but it has avoided a clear stance on the issue. it says the u.s. has not formally approached south korea about the matter. meanwhile, politicians in south korea's national assembly have been debating the issue for a month. >> translator: if we decide not to use thaad, north korea will be free to threaten our citizens with nuclear missiles. >> translator: thaad could mean we are pulled into a dispute between

u.s. and china ask this question the more fatigue they will have about washington and beijing. i don't think this is going to be healthy down the road. >> thank you very much. you want to continue in >> thank you. i was asked in a comment about how the new model of major power relations is received in the u.s. and other questions about the competitive institution building of north korea. i want to say a couple things. i think the new model of power relations is useful if it is a means of discussing, you know,

that is, you know, there are many people who talk about china should support the u.s. in its efforts to fight isis. what exactly does the administration hope that china can play a role in this regard? thank you. >> well, thank you very much, and appreciative all the work that you personally and the institute does. this was a topic, of course, a conversation between our two leaders when president obama was recently in beijing, and certainly between our two systems. i joined secretary kerry indian with others on this topic. there are different ways of parsing it, but i think that the issue goes beyond isil or isis. and it pertains to the common interest that both china and the united states have in preventing the spread of radical jihadism, the interest in protecting the global infrastructure of finance and transportation from being utilized and hijacked by terrorist groups. it's her interest in preventing violent extremists from, particularly those returning from conflict zones in the middle east, from conducting operations from recruiting or from attacking us or our nei

u.s.-china relations including former u.s. ambassador to china and former 2012 presidential candidate jon huntsman. hosted by the center for strategic and international studies and the tcu school of communications, this is an hour. [applause] >> thank you all very much for coming. this is going to be a good one tonight. we have a great panel here. chris johnson down here most of you know i think senior adviser in china studied at thesis. he's an asian affairs specialist. he spent more than two decades in the u.s. government intelligence and foreign affairs community. he is the senior china analyst or was that the cia, played a key role in supporting the 1996 taiwan strait crisis, the 1999 accidental bombing of the chinese embassy in belgrade, the downing of a u.s. aircraft on hainan on the island in 2001 and in 2001 he was awarded the u.s. department of state superior honor board for outstanding support especially for aiding the office when chinese leadership changed hands in 2012. to my right here is someone who has become ver

china, india. there was a lot of time wasted now the u.s. and china laid down different but agreed upon targets. there's a new possibility. i'm not surprised there has not been progress. what the u.s. and china did is just a few weeks old. it's opened up a new path. what you are seeing here is negotiating a new landscape. not enough happened, buts there is a bright possibility. >> some would argue over how far we have come in the past decade. is there a scientific consensus on climate change? >> scientifically there is. i'm a member of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, the i.p.c.c. sharing the 2006 peace prize, and it reported over and over again with certainty that climate change is not only coming, but is with us now. every time we see storms, droughts, fires, hurricanes, we see examples of what is coming, in some parts of the world, what is here now. scientifically there's no debate. the real process is figuring out who will take the first large steps, domestically and how to develop enough of a fund so that poor countries can step forward. >> is comes down to developing countries

we looked at china, they looked at us, we looked at india, there was a lot of people wasted. now that the u.s. and china laid down different but agreed upon targets, there's a new possibility. i'm not surprised there has not been progress. what the u.s. and china did was a few weeks old. it's opened up a new path what you see is negotiating a new landscape, figuring out how to move forward. not enough has happened. >> some would argue about how far we have come, is there a scientific consensus on claen. >> -- on climate change. >> scientifically there is. the i.p.c.c. reported over and over again with increasing certainty that climate change is not only coming, it's with us now. when we see extreme storms, droughts, fires, hurricanes, we see examples of what is coming and what is here now. scientifically there's no debate. the process is figuring out who will take the first large steps and how to develop enough of a fund so poor countries can make steps forward without breaking the bank. >> mr smith, it comes down to a rich/poor divide. there's a lot of, if you will, frustrations from develop

there's not an extradition treaty between china and the u.s. i don't think there's much of a prospect of there being an extradition treaty between china and the u.s. i don't think they have a fundamental faith. china doesn't enforce u.s. judgments. the u.s. doesn't enforce chinese judgments. i don't think it's going to happen anytime soon. i think there has to be much greater degree of divergence of the two legal systems, and i don't see that happening soon. and it's not because the u.s. likes corrupt officials. it's just some fundamental disconnect between the way the two legal systems work. the canadian government wanted to send bakley chung shin. they were in canadian court arguing, get rid of this guy. we do not want this guy in our country. but he had gotten in, and the canadian courts wouldn't make him leave. because they had other concerns. they're not concerned about foreign policy issues. they're not concerned about whether or not people who prescribe officials in our own country, perhaps bribing our own officials. you know, they have o

u.s. government wants china's help in dealing with pyongyang's cyber attack. will ripley has more on that and joins us live from tokyo. more interesting that china is in the mix of this, will. >> reporter: yeah, when i visited a cyber lacquer, they had a map around the world where a lot of cyberattacks were originating from. and one of the locations was china. number two, the united states and number three, brazil. there has long been concern about cyberattacks launching from china and technically when it comes to north korea. china and north korea have perhaps one of the strongest relationships that china has with any country. they trade with north korea. some it north kornorth koreans travel into china. most average north koreans never heard of the internet, certainly never had free access to it. simple reason being that north korea wants its people to remain isolated and don't want them though see things on the internet to give them a glimpse outside. the cyber unit to the bureau 121, these technical minds hand picked from pyongyang university are going to

the u.s. china, and south korea also sent vessels to the region. >>> japanese stock prices ended lower on this last trading day of 2014. political concerns in greece weighed on market sentiment. but, on the year the benchmark nikkei was up more than 7% and the year-end closing price was the highest in 15 years. ramin mellegard from the nhk world's business desk gives us the details and looks back at the year's trading. [ clapping ] >> well despite the lower share prices markets were in a pretty festive mood here. there was a ceremony to mark the last trading day of the year and market players here will now have a five-day break for the new year. but let's have a look at how the nikkei and top pix ended december 30th. the nikkei closing at 17,450 down 1.5%. and the broader topix at 1,407 down 1.2%. so some investors are concerned about the outcome of the upcoming election in january and they sold stocks to avoid some of the risks. but on the year the nikkei was up more than 7% that's much weaker comp

u.s. is asking china with potential responses to the hack. an official with the obama administration says the u.s. and china have shared information about this attack nd in an editorial published in a chinese newspaper, the ruling communist party says any civilized country will oppose hacker attacks or terror threats. they go on to condemn sony saying the vicious mocking of north korea leader kim jong-un in the film, the interview; a result of sense less cultural arrogance. >>> the cyber attack on sony pictures is raising questions about just how prepared the u.s. government is to defend itself against hackers. there were 61,000 hacks and security breaches throughout last year. the network's at the white house and the state department were targeted recently. cyber incidents involving government agencies are sky rocketing. that number hit more th,000 last year and in january, 2013, hackers hit the army core of engines grabbing sensitive information. people were stealing hard copies of paper work and passing them off when we had spies. today the

china. so, congressman, i ask you, should the u.s. t the squeeze on china for them to in turn put the pressure on north korea? >> we should put the squeeze on everyone that has the capacity to stop what was a terrorist attack by a nation state. i heard also the president this morning called this a cybervandalism. there's not a joy ride in a car. i remember when the president called al qaeda jb and sortly therefore beheaded four americans. this is a president who has no capacity to understand these real threats to america. this cyberattack is not the first and won't be the last if america continues to treat these as minor incidents and not the real threat to the american nation state that they are. >> so, let's stay there for a second. why do you think president obama referred to it as cybervandalism and not calling it cyberwar? >> he has consistently led from behind or had a foreign policy of not doing stupid stuff. he doesn't understand that nations around the world respect power, respect nations that will stand up for their own peopl

but other nations that have not signed up including the u.s., china and russia, are also allowed to attends. the first time palestine was included on that list. in effect, an upgrade in status with the i.c.c. accepting palestine as a state. >> there is a momentum on our side. the international community is fed up with the. [ inaudible ] of is rome. the extremism as was demonstrated whether in the aggression against our people in gaza. and the provocation and insight. in jerusalem and the holy sites. >> reporter: the change is largely symbolic, adding momentum to efforts towards palestinian statehood after a number of recent parliamentary votes in europe. but could it also eventually lead to crimes in the palestinian israeli conflict being brought before the international court? >> the palestinians really need to take a further step and become a member of the court. and that's something that we have been calling on them to do for quite sometime now. and something that the court's prosecute irrelevant has also made clear that they are -- that they are able to do. >> reporter: so why have the

u.s. and china. the u.s.g military chinese of stealing secretive data from companies and now sony has to go back to them saying would you actually help us out? it would be a great precedent for the two superpowers to be working together. time to look at who made money and who lost money. is tom us from singapore met calm. what is the big theme? for us it is the disparity between chinese billionaires and russian billionaires. if you look at the world's 200 richest people they have done well. within that 200 your 10 or 11 chinese billionaires and they are alone worth below $50 billion and you take the russian billionaires they are down $40 billion. chinese -- the continued economic stories and jack markell and in with russia's investment into ukraine and the oil price more recently -- they are really struggling. >> who made the most money this year? the man at the moment, jack markell alibaba's ipo one of the pots of the year and his personal fortune has risen $26 billion this year alone. world's 17th the riche

second, this, i believe -- especially china and u.s.ing a part of the game -- this will inject a very strong political momentum to the paris process. it will be more and more difficult for the countries who are other significant emitters who will not, who will not be a part of the coalition of finding a solution. it's going to be very difficult for them -- [inaudible] not to be part of the countries who want to find a solution. and these countries are the 28 european countries, u.s. and china, the political momentum, number two. all these countries. number three, i believe the key issue here is china. in europe, and i believe in north america, in asia, many people who drag their feet to find a solution to climate change said, say and will say that we can do a lot of things to reduce emissions. but if china doesn't move, we cannot find a solution, so why should we punish our economy if china, the largest emitter, doesn't move? and now china making such a commitment for the first time if you wish we can discuss this target, what it means,

u.s. and china. it was only and may the u.s. accused five military -- only in may the u.s.ed five military personnel of taking significant data. they're having to ask for help. >> maybe they appreciate a good movie. what some of the currencies are doing. the dollar index down a little bit. the ruble is gathering strength as well. we will have a full round up when we come back. >> welcome back to on the move. we are in london. it is the night before the night before christmas. there are few people and volumes are lighter than then good normally be. marketssee the main trading a little higher. yes, another record high. let's look at the stocks we are watching. i will show you what is happening here. caroline, what you have? >> near the top of the leaderboard is the holdings. makedo to ship designs and the chips that go into your apple iphone or your samsung. the designs are going to be in demand, it would seem. analysts say it is one of the favorite picks. technology stocks did well google, facebook, and amazon are at the top of the leaderboards, helping to drive the dow jone

u.s. and china have recently announced, that a certain very, very good sign. u.s.nt and the chinese president have both announced action on climate change, which is very different from what we have seen in copenhagen. >> i want to go to that moment. it was extremely dramatic, that moment in copenhagen, when the secretary of state hillary billionannounced $100 would be put into the global climate fund in 2020. >> the united states is prepared to work with other countries toward a goal of jointly mobilizing $100 billion a year by 2020 to address the climate change needs of developing countries. now, this was extremely significant at the time because president obama -- because of the role the united states had played. maybe you can explain that, dr. hug, fiercely criticized for innocence torpedoing these talks and yet this very grandiose announcement about the green climate fund. >> absolutely. it was a very welcome announcement from the united states on behalf of rich countries, they were not going to do 100 billion dollars themselves. it was all the rich countries p