The title of my note today is taken from a new book by former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, which has become increasingly timely since it was published a few months ago. I had a chance to hear Rudd — who speaks fluent Mandarin and, in my opinion, is one of the smartest Westerners who regularly speaks out about China — talk about his book last week and how Beijing might be Consider decoupling social virtual events in Asia. Here are five of the most interesting points he made:

1. The 2020s will be a “decade of dangerous lives” as China builds not only its military but also its ability to counter any future Western financial sanctions. Rudd pointed out that China is determined not to be vulnerable in any area, especially Taiwan. But the West and China have clear red lines over Taiwan, the South China Sea, cybersecurity and space, not any managed competition, and the risk of accidental confrontation is high.

2. Rudd himself advocates managed competition in which the two sides quarrel over everything but security issues – economics, foreign policy, finance, trade (where he thinks the supply chain is, the currency too), the talent market and the idea of ??the marketplace. In his view, fighting is possible in all of these areas. He believes that victory will come down to the value competition between liberal democracy and authoritarianism, “may the best system win.”

3. Potential areas of cooperation exist – such as climate, global finance, vaccines, and future pandemic preparedness. But to take advantage of these, Washington and Beijing need executive-level coordination, with direct access to the top leadership (ie, the office of the president or prime minister) at any time.

4. China’s hope is that it can simply use the “gravity” of its economic power (a direct expression of President Xi Jinping) to pull the West and Europe, in particular, into its orbit without sparking a violent conflict with the United States. Beijing knows that its stance on Russia’s war in Ukraine has alienated Europe. “But Beijing has a profound, cynical, pragmatic approach to war” and believes that Europe’s desire not to lose China and other high-growth Asian markets will create “selective amnesia” about war this time next year, he said. Say.

5. Rudd, who has met with Xi many times, said he was “not someone I wanted to oppose.”Xi’s father is Persecuted by Mao Zedong, he knows what it’s like to be outside the system. Rudd said Xi made sure to clear them before any potential threats that could threaten his power. “He was a man of ideas, politics and history” with “steel tenacity”.

What can I get out of all this? Well, for starters, decoupling is clearly inevitable. Rudd, like me, believes that regionalization is the future, although both the US and China will try to limit it to areas that won’t do them too much economic or geopolitical harm. Second, if I were National Security Adviser Jack Sullivan, I would definitely try to create some behind-the-scenes red lines around hot issues. I think Rudd is absolutely right, in lieu of those, the risk of accidental conflict is too high to be comfortable. But on the Chinese side, given Xi Jinping’s reputation, I wonder if there is a reluctance to get involved – the Chinese never accept public pressure, and even hints of secondary US sanctions are sure to backfire in Beijing.

Lastly, I’m not sure if Rudd is quite right in Europe. While I don’t want to underestimate the lobbying power of European multinationals in Brussels (especially German exporters desperate for access to the Chinese market), I think it will be very difficult for the EU to take such a tough stance on the EU. Digital rights and technology regulation, peaceful coexistence with state surveillance, and the assumption that there is no data privacy in China.

Ed, do you agree, what’s your take on Rudd?

Recommended reading

• It’s always hard to finish reading an economics paper, but this, co-authored by one of my favorite academics, Daron Acemoglu of MIT, is a must-read for any business school dean. It basically quantifies my long-standing suspicion (and wrote about in my first book) that people with MBA degrees actually lower the wages of the workers they supervise, while managers from outside the business sector do the opposite . What’s more, MBAs only do non-MBAs to improve their company’s sales and profitability. I’d say save $200,000 and go straight to what you love to do.

• In this regard, maybe we can even save a few years of college and make high school better – check out this NYT opinion piece By John McWhorter, for the kind of “6-in-4” program I use write about In the past, as an alternative to entering a four-year college by default for everyone.

Edward Luce responds

Rana, I agree that Rudd is a first-rate observer of China and I look forward to reading his book. I also agree with his prediction that the 2020s will be a “decade of dangerous living”. As to what all this means for the future of Western democracy, I have a hard time predicting. Will Europe decouple from China? Given China’s centrality to global growth, I doubt that any part of the world will be completely decoupled from China. However, as we have seen on both sides of the Atlantic over the past few years, China’s strategic investments in Western high-tech and national security-related areas will be increasingly restricted.

My concern is that the strategic need to curb China’s growing AI-powered military and surveillance capabilities will seep into an unrelated anti-globalization agenda. The rest of Asia is not China, and it wants to see more Western economic participation as a counterweight to China’s growing dominance in the region, not less. It would be foolish to cede this field to China. I’m also concerned about our lack of engagement with the rest of the world. Dozens of low- and middle-income countries in Africa, South Asia, the Middle East and Latin America are at risk of defaulting on their debt next year.as Adam Toots this poignant article On the foreign policy front, developing countries will suffer the most from the imminent credit crunch in the West.

In all the debate about whether and how to decouple from China, we forget that the other side of the coin has to re-engage with the rest of the world, which could weaken their resilience. If the West is to think strategically about the difficult decade ahead, the rest of the world should feature more prominently in its calculations.

your feedback

Now our swamp man says a word. . .

respond’Politicization of the Supreme Court‘:

“The politicization of the Supreme Court is an existential problem for America and any modern society. However, the Clarence-Ginni Thomas problem is exaggerated. . . the problem in America is the toxic partisanship that defines how justices are confirmed. No A credible, trustworthy judiciary, constitutional democracy, is unsustainable. The courts have no military or enforcement tools other than moral authority. For over 200 years, this authority has been won, not conferred and nurtured. Today’s partisanship is a real threat. Antonin Scalia – far right – and Ruth Bader Ginsburg – far left – elected with at least 98 votes in favor because They are considered undeniably worthy of appointment by all. The system works. Less than 20% of Scotus decisions are 5-4. Most of the rest are decided at 9-0. The judges have proven to be worthy of what they all got “High Quality” label. But cowardly partisanship in the Senate has reduced the consent process to teenage squabbles. It spreads belief in the partisanship of judges and courts. Over time, it erodes trust in the system and weakens it The value of the courts themselves. The rule of law is the greatest legacy of Western civilization. Once lost, it is almost impossible to rebuild.” —Robert A Rogowsky, Leesburg, Virginia