Club summary: On October 10, local time, US President Trump repeated his old tactics and suddenly posted on social media, emotionally threatening to restart tariffs. However, this tariff blackmail not only ignores the fact that the US government is shut down, but also "scared the US stock market into a heart attack".

Recently, Zhou Bo, a researcher at the Center for Strategic and Security Studies at Tsinghua University, was interviewed by the American blog channel Live. Starting from "Should the world be afraid of China?", he expressed his views on Sino-US relations, China's global initiatives, and the Russia-Ukraine war.

Zhou Bo believes that although China has demonstrated modern military strength, it has not been involved in a war for more than 40 years, which shows that China's peaceful rise is the real reality. At the same time, although Sino-US relations are defined by the United States as strategic competition, China still hopes that cooperation will account for a greater proportion than competition.

In addition, Zhou Bo believes that the differences in the U.S.’s attitude toward Ukraine and the Taiwan Strait issue reflect the different approaches taken by the U.S. when the nuclear forces of its opponents are unbalanced, and China needs to draw strategic inspiration from them. Overall, this dialogue not only responded to misunderstandings from the outside world, but also reminded people to rethink the direction of Sino-US relations: In an era of uncertainty in major-country relations, persisting in dialogue and maintaining peace is the most constructive choice.

Live: Your most recent book is titled "Should the World Fear China?" 》. So, why is the world afraid of China?

Zhou Bo: I raised this question actually because the famous German magazine Die Zeit asked me this question - this was actually the first question they asked me: Colonel, should the world be afraid of China?

I'm not saying that raising this question means the world should be afraid of China. The answer is no, but China does seem intimidating now for various reasons, such as the just-concluded Tiananmen military parade, which showed all the latest weapons passing through Tiananmen Square. This shows China's military strength, and China's strength is indeed very strong.

But let me point out a fact: China has not been involved in any wars since 1979; except for some small conflicts with Vietnam, we have maintained peace for more than four decades. This fact shows that China's rise is peaceful.

China's development from a very backward level to the world's second largest economy is a miracle in human history. Therefore, the possession of military capabilities does not necessarily imply the use of military capabilities.

Live: Well, that does make sense. But at least some people in the United States would say that China had no way to demonstrate its military power in the past. But when China starts flexing its muscles, it's a different story. How would you respond?

Zhou Bo: Everyone can draw different conclusions when watching the Tiananmen Parade, depending on their different perspectives. For example, this is definitely a show of military power, but it's also an unprecedented effort at transparency. China actually releases (defense) white papers from time to time, but these white papers are not big books and sometimes appear a bit abstract. Displaying these weapons that the People's Liberation Army has deployed really shows the strength of the People's Liberation Army. But compare the People's Liberation Army and the US Army. Since the end of the Cold War, how many wars has the U.S. military participated in? The Gulf War, the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, Kosovo, etc., the list is almost endless.

But what about the People's Liberation Army? As I said before, the People's Liberation Army actually did not fight, and China enjoyed the dividends of peace. This peace dividend allowed China to achieve today's achievements and become the second largest economy in terms of GDP (China is already the largest economy in terms of purchasing power parity). As a Chinese, there is something very interesting. In the past, some African countries called China a superpower. But at this year's Shangri-La Dialogue, even French President Macron, one of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, called China a superpower. This is very interesting.

Screenshot of video of French President Macron’s speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue in May this year

Live: Yeah, it’s really fun. You often go to many famous international conferences, such as the Munich Security Conference, Shangri-La, etc. In the United States, Sino-US relations are known as strategic competition. How does China describe the United States at these meetings?

Zhou Bo: Initially, China called for cooperation because in Chinese culture, describing the relationship between the two countries as a cooperative relationship would make people more comfortable. That's why in the beginning we said we were going to work together. Calling it competition just makes people nervous, right? Yes, that’s what we called for at the beginning. But since the United States insists on defining this relationship as strategic competition, China has to take a deep breath and say, okay, if this is what you want, then we must dare to fight. “Dare to fight” is the official phrase used by the Chinese government in documents.

But it took us a long time to get to this point. Even if the relationship is a mixture of competition and cooperation, there is still a relative weight between the two; my best hope is that cooperation can outweigh competition, and in the worst case, I believe that both parties have a common desire not to let the relationship slide into confrontation.

Live: This leads to a point you often make: Taiwan is the only issue that could drag China and the United States into a full-scale conflict. But you have an interesting side note to this, which is that in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, you said that U.S. leaders refused to directly go to war with Russia in Ukraine even though they believed that Russia's behavior was seriously overstepping the bounds. Likewise, they should view war with China as a red line that cannot be crossed. This seems to be a perspective on Taiwan, but it is not widely discussed. Can you talk about that? Because this seems to be a very interesting topic.

Zhou Bo: No matter what happens in Ukraine, the United States has made it clear that they will not send troops to fight the Russian army on Ukrainian territory. So, as a Chinese, I have to consider, why is this happening? Why will the United States not send troops to fight Russian troops on Ukrainian soil, but it maintains strategic ambiguity on whether to send troops on the Taiwan Strait issue? This means that they may still use force in Taiwan. Then I compared the Chinese military with the Russian military, and it confused me even more because the Chinese military is the largest military in the world and our defense spending is three times that of Russia. We also have the largest number of ships in the world. So why is the United States hesitant to go to war with Russia? Why don't you mind going to war with China?

The only conclusion I can draw is that we have fewer nuclear warheads. Because not only does Russia have the largest number of nuclear warheads in the world, but they also occasionally threaten to imply the use of nuclear weapons. According to estimates from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) and the Pentagon, China had about 600 nuclear warheads by the end of last year, which is far less than the number of the United States and Russia. So I would say, except for nuclear weapons, China's military strength is not inferior to Russia's to a large extent. If the Chinese government concludes that it is a shortage of nuclear warheads that is driving the United States to become more provocative, the solution would be very simple for us. We just need to increase the number of nuclear warheads. We have the technology and the methods, and if we have the political determination, we can do it.

On October 29, 2024, Russia launched an intercontinental ballistic missile during a strategic nuclear force exercise. Video screenshot

Live: Totally agree, I know what you mean. I heard something you said in an interview (I forget which media outlet) where you also mentioned the word "crossing the line." You said that although U.S. leaders believed that Russia's "cross-border behavior" was extremely serious, they refused to engage in direct conflict with Russia in Ukraine. The United States and the West will say that if this is "crossing the line", then why does China "support" it by buying Russian oil?

Zhou Bo: First of all, shortly after Russia attacked Ukraine, the Chinese government made it clear that Russia should respect its national sovereignty. To say this is actually to criticize Russia for not respecting Ukraine's sovereignty. If I were to explain it bluntly, that's what it is.

But since China and Russia have good relations, they may be more tactful in their expressions. This is a Chinese expression, but it does not mean that China finds it acceptable. The second point is that China did not support Russia in this war because China obviously did not provide any military assistance to Russia. If China did provide it, it would have been impossible not to be discovered.

What China is doing is continuing to sell to Russia the same goods it was selling to Russia before the war, the only difference is on a larger scale because Russia faces Western sanctions and has to turn to China to buy more goods. Indeed, some of them are dual-use products, and this is the focus of the controversy. But with a dual-use item, you first have to assume it's for civilian use. Take oil and natural gas, for example. No one would consider oil and natural gas to be military products, unless it is added to the fuel tank of a military vehicle, then you can say that it has become military supplies. But people don't typically think of oil and gas as military supplies. So this is what China is doing now.

Furthermore, China's economic development in recent years has been slower than before, so China also needs more exports. But even if China sells things to Russia through normal trade, China has not provided any military assistance to Russia.

Live: Chinese leaders recently reminded everyone that China and the United States were allies who fought side by side during World War II. This partnership was crucial in defeating the fascist war. He noted that now is the time to look back on that period of victory and cooperation and build a similar partnership on today's issues. I'd like to ask you to talk about how you see this and how you think it could be achieved.

Zhou Bo: I think President Xi Jinping made such an appeal to remind Americans to look back on the past. Yes, the United States did give China great help during the Anti-Japanese War, just like the Soviet Union. All Chinese people know how the American pilots of the "Flying Tigers" helped China.

But the situation now is almost completely different. Therefore, President Xi Jinping is taking this opportunity to remind Americans: We have worked together in the past, so this relationship is not necessarily a competitive one. Biden described it as "extreme competition." But I'm thinking, if competition is already "extreme", how far is it from conflict? This naturally makes people nervous.

Live: Yes, totally agree. But I think it's a pretty important initiative because we don't often look back at this history. It is worth remembering that more than 20 million Chinese died in that war. Do you have any specific ideas on how China and the United States can implement President Xi Jinping’s initiative?

Zhou Bo: Actually, President Xi Jinping has proposed four global initiatives. But I want to talk about two of them: one is the Global Development Initiative and the other is the Global Security Initiative. Many people in the West may think these are just empty and grand concepts without details. This is not the case.

For example, China’s global development initiative was preceded by the Belt and Road Initiative, in which China invested trillions of dollars. This is a big investment of real money. Regarding global security initiatives, what I want to point out is that if you look at the PLA's overseas operations, you will find that the PLA is only engaged in humanitarian missions, which are called "military operations other than war" in professional terms, such as peacekeeping, anti-piracy, and disaster relief. This is by no means an accident, but a deliberate choice, as the PLA wishes to focus on humanitarian assistance and thereby avoid the use or abuse of force.

If we only do humanitarian work such as peacekeeping and anti-piracy, everyone can understand. But if you start killing people with any excuse, who will remember those excuses in the end? People will only remember lives lost. The United States itself has criticized the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. But now, facing the dead, what can we say?

So my hope is that China is getting stronger and stronger now, and the People's Liberation Army is getting stronger and stronger, but even so, the People's Liberation Army will still stick to some long-term principles. The first is to use force with extreme caution. This is both for our reputation and to make the world a safer place. If China becomes another hegemon, it will just be history repeating itself, which is not a good thing.

So I hope China can create another miracle. The first miracle is China's peaceful rise. China has become the world's second largest economy without firing a single shot. This has never happened before in human history. We don’t know what we will encounter in the future, but we have a clear goal: to build a world-class military by 2049. Before that, I have a simple hope: Even if the PLA's international responsibilities are greater and China's overseas interests are broader, the PLA can still maintain the greatest degree of caution and not seek spheres of influence.

On September 22, relevant departments of the Navy announced that the J-15T, J-35 and KJ-600 carrier-based aircraft had successfully completed their first ejection take-off and landing training on the Fujian ship.

The United States attempts to establish and maintain spheres of influence one after another around the world, relying on its allies to act as the "world policeman." But if China did not have global hegemony ambitions, it would not need allies at all. Because today's China is already influential enough, it does not need a "sphere of influence." Many people confuse "influence" and "sphere of influence", but they are completely different. China is already very influential and does not need to establish a sphere of influence. In this way, China will not repeat the mistakes of the United States, and the cost will be lower. After all, alliances and spheres of influence are both difficult to build and difficult to maintain. Allies are not a flock of sheep, but more like a group of cats. It is easy to herd sheep, but it is very difficult to herd a group of cats.

Live: This is a very interesting metaphor. Obviously, this also echoes the increasing influence and economic strength of the so-called "Global South" countries, making it even more important for China and the United States to move forward along the path you suggest. Our show is coming to an end, but I have a very important question. In a few weeks, I will have the honor of moderating the China Roundtable at the 76th World Affairs Student Conference at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. This is a very important conference that has been held for 76 consecutive years, bringing together outstanding college students and West Point students from across the United States to discuss global issues. Many will become future leaders. If you were in my shoes, what would you want them to think about, given the issues we just talked about? What would you say to them to help push China-U.S. relations in a more stable and secure direction?

Zhou Bo: Thank you. This is indeed a very complex issue. I often think about this question: Has human nature improved? Steven Pinker of Harvard University is inclined to think so, because he found that the wars that were common in ancient times are becoming less common today, which may mean that human nature is also improving.

In today's world, people are more economically connected and no longer need to grab large amounts of land. At the same time, the existence of nuclear weapons is extremely terrifying and destructive. That's why professional soldiers like me, including cadets at West Point, should remember that peace can be fought for.

I think both China and the United States have a common desire, which is to avoid a direct war, because no one can truly calculate the consequences of a Sino-US war. The good news is that this appears to be a shared vision by the leadership of both countries. The question is: how do we achieve it? The answer is: a lot of conversation. This is also a view I wrote about in Foreign Affairs magazine.

The slogan during the Cold War was "trust but verify," meaning that because of a lack of trust, the number of nuclear weapons on the other side must be verified. And my mantra is “trust but dialogue.” Because China and the United States do not have equivalent nuclear arsenals, there is no need to verify the number of nuclear warheads with each other, but we must continue to dialogue.

Unfortunately, we don’t have enough dialogue these days, so we need to develop the habit of dialogue. Moreover, the content of the dialogue should not only include nuclear weapons, but also include new areas that did not exist during the Cold War, such as artificial intelligence and cyberspace. We can even cooperate in outer space like the United States and the Soviet Union did back then. You must know that there was still cooperation between these two enemies during the Cold War: one was to jointly eliminate smallpox, and the other was to use outer space for peaceful purposes.