What would you consider as the greatest challenge in international politics in 2019? The world seems to be losing its sense of direction and purpose as conflicts of interest between major countries surge to the surface. The changes that emerged in 2018 will continue to evolve this year. We may use “choices” to define what’s confronting us. Among the many choices we need to make, the following two are most prominent:

Firstly, will China and the United States choose to escalate tensions in their relationship and “decouple”—the direction some in the US are pushing for—leading the world into division and ultimately all-out confrontation? Or will they seek coexistence within the unified world economic system by making adjustments and returning to the track of cooperation?

The choices that China and the US will affect not only their respective economies but also where the world will be heading. I believe it’s also the hope of the rest of the world that China and the US choose wisely and responsibly. The recent tensions between China and the US have been escalating faster than many expected, and the frictions are spilling over from trade to other areas. The outcome will be one of the determining factors for the future direction of the world.

Secondly, will the world continue to “advance” toward or “retreat” from economic globalization and multilateralism? Countries are pondering this big question, wondering if closer cooperation can lead to improved global governance and fairer benefits. Will we have a better future if we choose to “retreat”? The answer is most likely to be negative, as “retreat” will lead to vicious competition, making the world fall back into division and isolation. As one of the long-standing driving forces for multilateralism, Europe’s choice will be of critical importance.

In an evermore complex world, do you think every country should rely upon itself–or do you see a better future in more international cooperation? And do we need new institutions? In a globalized world, self-reliance and openness/inclusiveness cannot be absolute and should not be mutually-exclusive. Rather, they should be complementary to each other. It’s natural that countries and enterprises build their own research and development capabilities, but it should be an open, rather than isolated, effort. In today’s world, scientific and technological advances are built on previous progress. And this should be furthered through open cooperation and be confined by commonly accepted norms and ethical standards.

As for China, one critical condition that allowed the country to embark on reform and opening-up forty years ago was that the world had entered the era of peace and development. Today, this remains the main trend, as does China’s commitment to reform and opening-up. Now China and the US are each other’s most important trading and business partners, it is unrealistic for them to “decouple”. Global resources, industries, and markets have become so integrated and interdependent that it would be unimaginable to sever the bonds among countries. As a case in point, the design, manufacturing, assembly, and sales of an American iPhone is a journey that best reflects “globalization.” In the field of security, “decoupling” may also have serious consequences. Many global problems will have to be addressed by a concerted effort of the international community. If major countries insist on seeking exclusive security, new security dilemmas will ensue, pushing mankind into the shadow of Cold War or even hot war again.

Indeed, international cooperation faces some difficulties. But cooperation remains the better choice. On one hand, this is the inevitable path for coping with global challenges such as climate change, pollution, and security threats; on the other, the coming technological revolution will create more synergies for international cooperation. The international institutions and rules established after World War II, such as World Trade Organization (WTO) and International Monetary Fund (IMF), are still broadly accepted and supported, but adjustments and reforms are also necessary. It is neither feasible nor necessary to scrap the existing institutions and start all over again. But new reinforcement is needed, i.e., new rules to regulate competition and cooperation in new areas, such as deep sea, deep space, polar region, cyber and artificial intelligence.

Do you agree that we’re living in times of groundbreaking change, and what‘s driving it?
 Among the most important ground-breaking changes in the world today are the industrial transformation brought about by scientific and technological innovations that are changing the ways people live and communicate. By the end of 2016, 140 million Chinese were connected through the Mobile Internet of Things. The number of M2M (machine-to-machine) application terminals in China had reached 100 million, accounting for 31 percent of the world’s total.

Driven by internet, big data, blockchain, and Artificial Intelligence, the new, ever-ongoing, and unpredictable transformation can erupt at any time–and it’s hard to know which new technology will break through, or whether they will do so individually or at the same time. All of them are constantly changing our understandings about the world, and hopefully for the better.

The fundamental driving force for such change is “mankind”—its aspiration for better lives. Infinite aspiration inspires infinite creativity. Admittedly, there will always be times when some can’t suppress the urge to apply new technologies for war. Therefore, the rapid progress of modern technologies has set higher requirements for mankind’s self-discipline and moral constraint. There is no doubt that the majority of the young generation who grew up in the internet era do not want to see war. The questions is whether and how human creativity can be used to maximize the prospects of world peace and the benefits for the widest possible population, rather than to cause inequality and even war.

As Chinese President Xi Jinping explained, “the principal contradiction facing Chinese society has evolved. What we now face is the contradiction between unbalanced and inadequate development and the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life.” To some extent, this is also true about the world. While the new technologies have been greatly improving our lives, they are also bringing about risks in security, privacy, and other unpredictable areas. Only by strengthening cooperation can countries achieve compatibility between technology and growth and, through consultations, jointly address the challenges caused by unbalanced and inadequate development. Only in this way can we march toward a community of shared future for mankind.

This year’s MSC will take place on February 15-17. Berlin Policy Journal and its sister publication Internationale Politik are again the MSC’s media partners.

Click here for an overview of our reporting from the MSC.

The post “Are the US and China ‘Decoupling’?” appeared first on Berlin Policy Journal - Blog.

What are the greatest challenges in international politics in 2019? It’s very tempting to point to the current US administration as the greatest international challenge today. Indeed, Washington has been very active in challenging the foundations of the contemporary world order. Pursuing its immediate goals, the United States does not seem to care much about international law or about multilateral institutions. It unilaterally withdraws from critically important agreements and tries to impose its unilateral decisions on other countries and on international organizations. The White House does not hesitate to bluntly pressure its partners, which leads to less stability, greater risks, and less predictability at the global and regional levels.

However, in my view, it would be a dangerous oversimplification to blame all the world’s problems on Donald Trump and the United States. The reality is much more complicated. These days, the world is going through a profound technological, economic, social, and cultural transformation—and our final destination is unclear. The increased pace of change calls for a new level of global governance, but old political habits still prevent us from moving to this level. I would venture to say that the greatest challenge of our times is a deficit of solidarity between nation states, including those entrusted by the United Nations Charter with a special responsibility to maintain global peace and security. Until these states can put their disagreements on specific matters aside and stand up to the common challenge, the world will not be a safe place.

What is driving the changes you’re describing? It would be difficult to single out just one factor that drives the profound changes in the world that we all observe today. In most cases, we focus our attention on new problems rather than on new opportunities. For instance, we talk a lot about the growing tensions between US and China are much talked about, about how there are implications for the whole world, including a global recession and a new geopolitical bipolarity. It’s unclear where the Middle East is heading socially and politically, but it’s apparent that what is happening there is likely to affect all of us.  We should also not underestimate the danger of a US-Iran or a Saudi-Iran clash. Regretfully, the Ukrainian crisis remains unresolved, and the limited progress on North Korea’s nuclear program is still very fragile and reversible.

Each of these conflicts, threats, and challenges has its own roots, participants, trajectory, and dynamics. They might look completely unrelated to one another. However, this is not the case. All of them feed into each other, destroy trust among major international players, paralyze international organizations, and complicate cooperation at various levels. I think that a “perfect storm”–the cumulative impact of several crises taking place simultaneously –is the greatest challenge of 2019 and the years to come.  We may end up completely destroying the old international system before we’ve even got started building a new one.

In an evermore complex world, do you think every country should rely upon itself, or would you see a better future in more international cooperation? And do we need new institutions? In the 21st century, states remain the most important international players. That means that we should keep states strong and efficient; they have to be indispensable building blocks in the emerging world order. Nevertheless, there are certain limits on what even the most powerful states can accomplish unilaterally. In times of accelerated globalization, these limits become more and more apparent–both in the area of social and economic development and in the area of international and even domestic security. Unfortunately, today we see many powerful countries creating more problems than offering solutions. The US is arguably the most graphic example of a state taking explicitly unilateralist, shortsighted, egotistic foreign policy decisions.   Given the US’s unique role in the modern international system, this obsession with unilateralism in Washington appears particularly dangerous.

However, let me underscore once again: this is not about the United States only. All states – big and small, rich and poor, in the West and in the East–have to work together in the very condensed, crowded, and interdependent world of today and of tomorrow. So far, none of us can convincingly claim that his or her country has fully mastered the difficult art of multilateralism. We now see that even in the European Union–the recognized leader of multilateral diplomacy–multilateralism faces serious and diverse challenges. It would be better for all of us to study the art of multilateralism jointly, not separately. This might sound unrealistic under the current dire political circumstances, but I see no other way–neither for Europe, nor for the world at large. In the world of today, security is indivisible, and so is prosperity.

This year’s MSC will take place on February 15-17. Berlin Policy Journal and its sister publication Internationale Politik are again the MSC’s media partners.

Click here for an overview of our reporting from the MSC.

The post “A Perfect Storm Is the Greatest Danger” appeared first on Berlin Policy Journal - Blog.

© REUTERS/Michaela Rehle

What do you see as the greatest international political challenge of 2019? It’s not a single issue but a general problem: the world lacks an anchor of stability. Rules are being broken, institutions ignored or maligned. That creates instability and unpredictability, and it’s dangerous. I’m not sure whether we would really be capable of keeping a real crisis in check. On what–and on who–could we rely on in an emergency?

Do you agree that we live in a time of great upheaval? And what is driving this development? Yes, one day people will look back on this time as an epochal watershed. Many foreign policy certainties are all of a sudden in question. That has partly to do with global, strategic power-political shifts, but partly also with domestic political developments in important countries.

In an ever more complex world, should every country reflect on itself, or is more cooperation the future? Do we need new institutions? Efforts to find our salvation in a new nationalism will lead to a dead end. I hope that we don’t have to learn this lesson over again. But unfortunately, at present, the principle of multilateralism is well and truly under pressure. New institutions won’t solve this problem, though. We need to make better use of existing institutions.

Which three issues are a special focus for the 2019 conference? The future of transatlantic relations, the self-assertion of the EU, and the danger of escalating great power rivalries.

Do you have a favorite memory from a Munich Security Conference, a greatest moment? Joe Biden’s 2009 appearance at the first security conference where I was chairman is a special memory for me. Biden gave the first important foreign policy speech of the new Obama administration and generated a feeling of optimism about a reset–not just with Russia but also in the transatlantic relationship. One result of that was the New START treaty.

What have you found especially unpleasant? The increasing tendency of top politicians from the EU to refuse to sit on the same stage as certain colleagues. In the past that only happened when countries had been enemies for decades. That massively upsets me¾and makes me sad.

Which result of a conference were you particularly pleased about? One of the principles of the MSC is that we don’t produce any communiqués. We try to offer the best possible platform for an exchange, thereby creating or keeping open possible courses of political action. That frequently works, but it often takes years before we see the results. The American-Russian disarmament negotiations or the rapprochement between Kosovo and Serbia are good examples. If it all culminates in something years later, it makes me really happy.

When the world is doing badly, it’s good for the MSC, right? The attention over the past few years has certainly increased even further. But we would love to be able to have a conference totally dedicated to long-term challenges rather than dominated by the many crises roiling daily politics.

What’s the one thing an MSC can’t go without? The big names!

What is never allowed to happen there? If we are in danger of stirring up tensions around an issue rather than having a positive influence, then our sense of responsibility demands that we don’t even spark such a debate.

Is there a guest still missing from your “collection”? The Pope! So far, though, we haven’t had a US or Chinese president as a guest. I’m really pleased about the huge interest we get from every part of the world–from Australia to Iceland, from Rwanda to Mongolia.

John McCain will really be missed at the MSC–do you see anyone as a potential successor? John McCain was the best friend the MSC had in the US Congress. He leaves a big gap behind. But Senators Lindsey Graham and Sheldon Whitehouse have been coming for many years. They will–and I’m very confident about this–continue to bring a strong “co-delegation” to Munich in the coming years, fully in the spirit of John McCain!

This year’s MSC will take place on February 15-17. Berlin Policy Journal and its sister publication Internationale Politik are again the MSC’s media partners.

Click here for an overview of our reporting from the MSC.

The post “The World Lacks an Anchor of Stability” appeared first on Berlin Policy Journal - Blog.