Apes this is president nixon talking to his National Security advisor, dr. Henry kissinger of january of 1972, and month before the historic trip to china that february. [indiscernible] before we start the program, i want to introduce a special guest to our audience. President nixons younger brother, ed nixon. [applause] and with that, dr. Stoner, the stages years. Dr. Stoner thank you very much for having us here. We had a wonderful tour this afternoon of the library. We all enjoyed it very much. Im going to start our discussion by picking up on the tape that jonathan just played for us which was nixons idea of formulating friendly relations with china to counterbalance soviet power in the early 1970s. He turned out to be very precedent in not worrying about china necessarily in 1972, but worrying about china further down the road. We find yourselves now in 2017 with a new situation in both china and russia are important to the United States and global affairs. Since mr. Nixon was president of the United States and opened relations again with china rather infamously, we have had the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, we have had uprisings in Tiananmen Square of course. We have had the collapse of the soviet union in 1991. We have had a. O period of weak russia in the 1990s as it was struggling after 70 years of communism and the sudden collapse of communism. We have 15 successive states as a result come including russia. Forging global relationships and partnerships. Began a rather dramatic recovery economically. Came into office and has proclaimed that russia is once again a great power, a power to be reckoned with. Russia seized from their perspective, took back crimea. It had been sanctioned as a , thet by the United StatesEuropean Union but not by china. In the intervening period, 2014 and 2016, china and russia signed agreement on russian oils to china. Counterbalance to american power. States beganunited europe too asia from counter chinese power in the china sea. The south china sea. 2016, we elected a new president of the United States which hascommunism. Further thrown into question this trilateral relationship that mr. Nixon was obviously concerned about and very pressing about. My first question to get this conversation rolling is what is the state of this trilateral relationship in almost august of 2017 . Are we heading toward conflict, is conflict inevitable among the conflict, is conflict inevitable among the three powers to mayor is an alliance of two against one inevitable . Or is it possible we might be able to cooperate with china or russia . There are issues that should unite all three powers, north korea being one in its acquisition of nuclear weapons, yet it does not seem as though that has happened. I would like you all to comment if you can on the state of the trilateral relationship. Should we start with you . Sure. , jonathan andg the other organizers thanked mr. Nixon for coming and for your interesting program. We approach the question that catherine asked by posing one for all of us to think about. The extent to which the strategic insight that president on in theand acted late 1960s was essentially a a tremendous advantage from complicating the strategic calculus i opening up the relationship with china or as one that had continuing consequences for the way in which the countries interacted. It was mostly a frontend loaded, the u. S. Reaped substantial benefits from that relationship. In my answer to china, it was useful to chinas leaders to be able to pretend that they could use the strategic relationship ascounterbalance the u. S. China entered its Reform Program and accepted a high degree of dependence on the u. S. And the u. S. Led liberal national order. It was useful for domestic political reasons to say we can counterbalance the americans with first the soviets and now the russians. I think then and now are quite different. Both russia and china have far more at stake with their relationship with the United States than they do with one another. The area in which i see them having the greatest congruence of issues is in the u. N. , the un security council. Where both of them have a statutory seat and their desire to have issues in the u. N. I do not think there is a lot for americans to worry about in terms of the two against one alignment in which we are the odd man out. Add my thanks to jonathan for inviting us here this evening and to mr. Nixon for being here and for all of you to coming to the panel. Let me pick up at the point that , you said thebout u. S. Should not be too worried if russia and china had good relations. The first point to make is russia and china probably have better relations now than at any point since 1972 when president remark. De that in 1969, the soviet union and china had very nearly come to war over partly over border disputes, but also rather deeper ideological divisions. I spent the morning here working in the archives looking at documents relating to the u. S. Sinosovietd the conflict of 1969. It was difficult to know how dangerous the situation was at the time but we do know from subsequent testimony that the chinese leadership was very worried about the possibility of the soviet attack. I think president nixons move relations with china as an answer meant of pressure on the soviet union, i agree with tom, that worked and in the longer term, it was a very wise decision because his argument is an 15 years when china powerful and important country, we have to have lines of medication open to it and that was the extremely important element in the policy. If we look from there to the i mentioned,ee, as russian relations with china much closer than at any point since 1969 to a 1972. Earlier this month, before the g20 meeting in hamburg, there was a separate meeting in moscow where the chinese leader spent two days in talks with flat amir ir putin. Vladim the point that relations have been better than they had ever been. The question is what is the nature of that relationship, and is it harmful to the u. S. . Let me not go on too long. The nature of the relationship russia, china has become an important market for energy and for arms. It is also a big and important , it is in the russian interest to have good relations with china, not to get into situations of conflict which might threaten war. It is also in many ways a default relationship. Weaker than china economically, not militarily, not in terms of nuclear weapons, but economically, certainly much weaker. Its relations with the west are in a terrible state. Namely as a result of russias own policy in crimea and ukraine. From a Russian Point of view, this is not an entirely satisfactory situation. They would like to have good relations with the west and good relations with china. It is not a matter of saying yes, in the early postsoviet years we want to be Strategic Partners with the United States, that has not worked out, lets be Strategic Partners with china. They would like not to be forced into a relationship which is somewhat subordinate relationship to china. Thank you. Do you want to talk about china . Thanks to jonathan and the Nixon Library and thank you, mr. Nixon, for being with us this evening. Going back to the tape from talkdent nixon, as we tonight about this triangle or relationship between russia and u. S. , important to look back in history even as we talk about partnerships and alliances today and remember that we can often get it quite wrong and we have gotten it quite wrong. Ixon in 1972 had the strategic courage to go to beijing but it was evident to many scholars and many in the Intelligence Committee in the 1950s that there was an opportunity at that point as china and the soviet union at that time were having very sharp differences which were just missed until the 1960s. Relationship with china through the 1980s, there a kind of romantic notion of this relationship with china which the United States has had for its history through the 1700s when we began to trade with china, in the world war ii and these wild swings from world war ii to communism to the korean war. China, aopening of more romantic view of china, which was not sustainable and was not at all sustained as the thets of tianamen and strategic rationale disappeared with the collapse of the soviet union. Point is that the diffusion of global power that is ongoing today, so we talk about the rise of china properly am a there is a rise of india, there is a rise of many others, and on a relative basis, certainly europe is going down. We can have a debate about the United States in a relative basis. Any talk today about the triangular relationship also needs to come to grips with this triangle as in a greater strategic context and it is not just the three of us, it is a lot more than that. The third point is, with regard thehe relations between u. S. , russia, china today, in here, i would have a different take than my colleague tom where heo have more concerned than had expressed and maybe we can have a conversation about this this evening. Strategic relationship has and it since the 1990s, was called the axis of convenience. Now it is a Strategic Partnership and there is Real Security cooperation going on, from is arms sales to china to russian that continue, military joint exercises. I do not want to overstate them, but there is an idea about trying to cooperate globally to preclude the u. S. From gaining that translates, they have their own differences in how they should operationalize different parts of the world. Something i think is understated , i will finish here, i do anieve that there is ideological component to this relationship, at least between they are both tough autocrats. Both of them, whether it is Vladimir Putin looking at the ukraine or xi jinping looking at democracy and hong kong in hong kong. It is potentially undermining their grip on power. Thank you. We can mix it up a little bit. Issue to get back to this of the trilateral relationship and whether we are in a multi polar world or united polar world. We thought of ourselves as a bipolar world. China would be important globally in a few decades. It is interesting to think about when he made that decision in the context of a bipolar world and distribution of global power and authority between the soviet union and the United States. Here we are in 2017. When i was recently teaching a course last spring, i mentioned to International Policy students that i thought we were in a uni pohlad polar world. Half of ours students are for and foreign students. Their perspective was if we are in a multipolar world, the United States is not as powerful as it once was he who talked about russias resurgence and how we understand power. Another argument was that china is now over taking the United States in terms of its percentage of the global economy. Sia stayed put a relatively flat. The United States is about 19 . T is not per capita gpd gdp. China is on the rise as the cresting now. Is the United States so much more powerful than the two countries . ,hat this power means in 2017 when russia is a much poorer country and spend less on its military. It is very dependent on oil revenue for its budget, yet what we are talking about now in the United States is how it is able to shake the foundation of the United States democracy by the democratic nationalist community and electoral offices. Arend of world rem . We in . Is it multipolar . Is the u. S. Still the preeminent power . David, you are looking at me. You made the mistake of making eye contact. I will not make it again. [laughter] actually is an absolutely key question. What kind of world are we living in . Are we seeing the formation of an new International System . There is a huge amount of commentary on this. I am not sure with the new system will look like. I think we are not in the old system. It is not bipolar. Hink the unipolar moment it is not quite multipolar word multiplayer. In their meeting earlier this month, Vladimir Putin called for multipolar system. The fact they are calling for it means we are not quite there, at least to their satisfaction. We canond thing is, yes, talk about the triangular. The triangular relationship is important. Enormouslytentially important power in the coming decades. The European Union at the moment is economically powerful, but inward looking trying to cope with its own problems. Not a major force internationally. Japan is also preoccupied with its problems. I think we are seeing a world where we should not we should the triangle. Ust it is a broader picture. Is, we arething still something is not bipolar or unipolar. We have a changing cast of characters in terms of the states that matter. Think of china today, it is not china in 1969. When we think of russia today it is not rush of 1970. These are much more open societies are you yes, they are authoritarian. Societies. Yes, they are authoritarian. Like it was very different now everyone has access to the internet. Very high internet use in russia. Also in china, yes, there are sites that are blocked. Nevertheless, clever people find ways around those. I think, even the category of a state and the control a state can exercise, that is being challenged by technology. Of greatnother factor importance. Thisther thing is, whether President Trump is a symptom or a cause of a shift in american thinking about world order. Some of his statements have called into doubt two of the very important pillars in which was created. Rder mainly, alliances. Questions about nato and the commitment to south korea and japan. An issue has been raised. Agreements, trade which is also an important part of american policy. You do not know if there will be toeaction to this area this. That is always the question when you are in the middle of change are you you do not know what is transitory or long term. , what kindestion is of world order do we want . What kind of relationships would we like to have with china in 10 years time . What would be most advantageous to the United States . For country has to think its own interests. Are we headed for protectionism . Nevertheless, these issues are raised. To decide on ones own position on these things will have some sense of what would be an acceptable or more than acceptable world order to foresee. Four c want to look 15 years ahead . The question about russia and china, and the United States, assessing the other relations now through different indicators. In the area of defense military, you have given some metrics on economy. The United States with its Defense Budget 40 of the worlds total of spending. China is number two. It is about 15 of global spending. It is coming up steadily. Russia is number three. Military spending is not the sole indicator. That moneys what is being spent on and in what context . It is true in the case of russia, we do have very sharp differences that are a security concern. Those are mostly on russias periphery. Europe, it hasrn historical interest in syria and the middle east. It is simply because of the expansive russian territory. As it looks at all of its order areas, in a sense it is global in security concerns. In the case of china, china in terms of the way it looks at its security is primarily an asian power at this point. It is starting to get global interest, but primarily in asia. The United States, we are close truly a global power in every sense. In this domain of security globally, as i talked about who is spending what on defense, the top 10 defense spenders you have china and russia as two and three. The other 10 are either allies of the United States close partners and friends of the United States. Economy, theon the United States and china together are about 40 of the worlds gdp right now. If you look at global trade and investment, although the chinese are moving ahead in trade, between the two of us, still pretty dominant. Russia is number eight in the world in its gdp. During the cold war was constantly traded concentrated on security issues. Weak playing a week economic hand. The third point, would be the soft power that we have to bring to bear. In the United States, still today with all of our difficulties we are facing, inspirationaly model. There is no inspirational chinese model. Some talk about it about mental model a developmental model. At times, especially as we are having difficulties in this moment in our history, that we can take stock of our fears and thatecognize how strong soft power is. If the United States still wants to show the leadership to continue to manage the remarkable set of diplomatic institutions and put in place at the end of world war ii, i have atrip to singapore i had trip to singapore a few years ago. I met with a good diplomat. I was talking to tommy about the united rates in asia United States in asia and competing with china. Say we need would to get three more Aircraft Carrier is out here. Tommy said, you need to get the new York Philharmonic orchestra here. That was his point entirely. The ploy the new York Philharmonic orchestra. The new York Phil