Moderator: Mr. Yu, it’s a great pleasure to have you on the interview today because we’ve always had viewers mention at the bottom of our show that they would like us to invite you to talk about the U.S.-China relationship and the situation in China, so I’m glad to have this opportunity today.
Yu Maochun: I also feel very honored to be on your show, and I’m very grateful to your listeners for their encouragement.
Biden’s China Policy: “Sichuan’s Rules and Regulations”, Chinese Communist Party’s Own Behavior Wakes Up Americans
Moderator: Thank you, Mr. Yu, I’d like to ask you to talk about the Biden administration, which has been in power for about 100 days, because it just made its first speech in Congress a while ago. In fact, after taking office, the Biden administration has overturned the policies and practices of the Trump administration in many aspects. But in terms of attitude and strategy toward the Chinese Communist Party, it has so far retained much of the Trump-era approach. So the outside world says that this approach is “Trump’s rule and worship”, what do you think and why do you think this is?
Yu Maochun: In fact, the U.S. foreign policy is based on some very specific, very in-depth national discussions. And then form a foreign policy, this policy is sometimes between the two political parties, he has different expressions. But over the past few years, there have been no major differences between the two parties in terms of the formulation of policy on China. The Republican Party’s policy on China, which the Democrats maintained long before Biden was elected president, has been supportive.
In some of the areas of China policy that are very hotly contested between the two parties, basically, some of the leaders of the Democratic Party, like Senate leader Schumann and House leader Pelosi, he never really raised any objectionable criticism of Trump’s China policy. So we knew before the election that we were doing the right thing on China, and that it was very likely, to a large extent, to be endorsed by the Democrats, and that it would continue, and that’s actually what the facts tell us. So there’s nothing too surprising here.
Another thing is that we think there is a renewed understanding of China not just in American politics, but in American society, in American financial circles, in economic circles, in legal circles, and certainly in defense and intelligence circles, a comprehensive understanding of China, and this understanding is basically in place. And this nationwide reawakening of their understanding of the CCP is based on one fundamental fact, and that is the Chinese government’s own words and actions. So it’s hard to change some of the basic principles and practices of China policy that we’ve done under Trump in these areas.
Moderator: So in fact, the Biden administration’s China policy is to a certain extent under the pressure of public opinion in American society. Because there was a poll a while ago, not that more than 70 percent of Americans have a negative view of the Chinese Communist Party. And this kind of poll, I think, is not also can be said that one of the biggest political legacy left by the Trump administration. It is to confront the Chinese Communist Party, as well as a more sober understanding of the Chinese Communist Party?
Yu Maochun: I think there is certainly a factor in this, but the most fundamental thing is that it is not that the American society has become very belligerent all of a sudden and likes to pick holes, it is not like that. Because in recent years, the Chinese government’s approach to the world, especially after the epidemic, the Chinese government’s performance, is very, very disgraceful, so the American people can see very clearly. This is not only the United States, but also the whole world can see the Chinese Communist Party very clearly. So China’s international position is now very isolated, and unprecedentedly isolated.
So it is useless to put gold on its own face, no matter how much it puts on its own face, because some of its government’s internal and external policies actually show the essence of the Chinese Communist regime, which is very dirty and very much against international standards. In Xinjiang, in Hong Kong, the round-the-clock surveillance of the country, and some very unwise, even very dishonest, manifestations of the epidemic.
It has an illuminating effect, especially on the geopolitical practices of neighboring countries, which has raised the alarm of the world. China is now in the South China Sea, it is in the East China Sea, it moves, not only the United States is alerted up, neighboring countries are alerted up, even Europe, even NATO countries are alerted up. So the fundamental issue, the reason why we have considerable continuity and consistency in our policy towards China is the Chinese government’s own words and actions.
Moderator: That’s true, and also when it comes to the previous Trump administration, I would like to ask again, the biggest political legacy left by the Trump administration that I just mentioned, is that there is an analysis that confronting the Chinese Communist Party is really the biggest political legacy left by the Trump administration, including distinguishing the Chinese Communist Party from the Chinese. You and former Secretary of State Pompeo were the core figures of the Trump administration’s China policy, so is it fair to say that the China policy that you two formulated also played a big role in paving the way for the situation today?
Yu Maochun: I certainly can’t take full credit for this, but I think at least Secretary Pompeo is a very far-sighted American political leader. He listens very carefully to some of the recommendations and reports that his ministry puts forward, and the reports are really on point, and he will not hesitate to pursue them and to make them clear for the American people. So in many cases, this issue you just talked about, the distinction between the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese people, this is very simple to understand.
The Chinese people know that, but how to reflect it in the political level, in the policy towards China, I think this is certainly Secretary Pompeo, and we are below to do his staff these, are playing the role we should play, this is no doubt.
Moderator: Right. So I think in this regard, as you said, many Chinese people are aware of this, but for many Americans, maybe this layer of window paper a little bit broken, so that he can be more aware that many things are actually, as you said is the behavior of the Chinese Communist government, the Chinese Communist regime, rather than the behavior of the Chinese.
Yu Maochun: Yes, that’s why when we raised this at the beginning, the Chinese Communist authorities were very sensitive to this matter and reacted very strongly and violently. It feels that the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese people are one and the same and cannot be separated, but it does not dare to say so openly, because it will make many people unhappy.
In mainland China, the Chinese Communist Party is most afraid of its own people, so many of its policies are to take a severe suppression of the people, severe monitoring. So the whole country, is to put its people under surveillance.
Many of their moral behaviors, their daily lives, their economic activities, their relocation, their education, and their fertility, the Communist Party has kept its own people under strict control. So it is impossible to say that the Communist Party represents the interests of the Chinese people, and the interests of the Chinese people are actually not expressed in public.
Now when the people openly say they are dissatisfied with the Communist Party, then you are in jail, there is no doubt about it. So I think this reality is very simple, and it allows the United States to react clearly at the policy level. I think this is a very important political legacy of the Trump administration, recognizing the nature of the Chinese Communist regime.
The U.S. strategy towards Taiwan is clear in its ambiguity
Moderator: That’s true. So let’s look at a specific issue. At the moment, as you said earlier, the situation in the Taiwan Strait has become an ongoing hot spot because of the moves of the Chinese Communist Party, the expansion of the Chinese Communist Party. It’s also an area of direct confrontation between the U.S. and China, and two things stand out the other day, one is that The Economist magazine says Taiwan is now the most dangerous place in the world. The other is that this week Campbell, the Biden administration’s coordinator for the Asia-Pacific region, said that it would be inappropriate to change the U.S. policy of strategic ambiguity about the Taiwan Strait. I would like to start by asking you to talk about how risky you think the current situation in the Taiwan Strait is?
Yu Maochun: I think the situation in the Taiwan Strait, the mechanism of interaction between the two sides, is basically unchanged. The biggest reality is that Taiwan is a status quo, he is not moving towards Taiwan independence, nor is he moving towards unification with the Chinese Communist Party, he is maintaining the status quo. This is the will of the majority of the people, and this is also the biggest reality. Therefore, the Chinese Communist Party first wants to provoke, it says what Taiwan has Taiwan independence, there are not many people in Taiwan are now encouraging Taiwan independence, he just wants to maintain the status quo, the status quo is not the same as Taiwan independence. So there is no reason for provocation.
The other thing is that it also has to make a show to show their own pomp and circumstance. But this is also very unrealistic, because the people of Taiwan are now doing very well. I think the Chinese Communist Party is very angry with Taiwan because Taiwan’s success is evident to all and is gaining popularity in the world.
The U.S. relationship with Taiwan is also growing day by day, and mainly in the economic and technological aspects which, he has deeper cooperation. Of course, this U.S. commitment to Taiwan’s defense has not changed since the 1970s. So, the U.S. commitment to Taiwan, his basic policies, including these things like this strategic ambiguity are all there.
Strategic ambiguity does not mean that the United States does not have a clear policy toward Taiwan. The United States has a very clear strategy to deal with Taiwan’s geopolitical and defense situation in the Taiwan Strait. He is just in the expression, he is not willing to say it clearly, then China is actually very clear, Taiwan is also very clear.
So, this is a lot of things, there is no need to play these word games. I think this, for example, you say that U.S. arms sales to Taiwan have increased over the years. This increase is not that it seems to be unilateral, one of the most fundamental factors of this U.S. arms sales to Taiwan is to see the degree of threat to Taiwan from mainland China, it is proportional.
This is stated very clearly in the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, and the Chinese Communist Party is very clear about this. So, nothing much has changed. I think there is no need to deliberately exaggerate some of the risks of the situation in the Taiwan Strait, because some of the most basic defense moves in the Taiwan Strait are being made by everyone, so it has been going on for decades, and nothing much has changed.
Moderator: However, I think some analysis, indeed, think that after Xi Jinping came to power, as you said, is that he is provoking. In fact, this status quo, for the status quo, is the Chinese Communist Party is trying to change the status quo, and Xi Jinping came to power, for example, the 19th National Congress proposed this so-called national rejuvenation, to unify Taiwan and national rejuvenation tied together.
Including before, he used this connotation of “one country, two systems” to replace and steal this 1992 consensus. In many ways, people think that the Chinese Communist Party is trying to change the status quo, that the Chinese Communist Party is trying to turn this strategic ambiguity into strategic clarity. So in this case, if the U.S. government continues to maintain this strategic ambiguity, is it enough to contain the CCP’s expansion and its ambition?
Yu Maochun: I think, personally speaking, strategic ambiguity is not a particularly wise approach, and when appropriate, we should let provocateurs know what our sober response should be. There are many lessons in history, disturbing lessons, that strategic ambiguity leads to reckless warfare by aggressors, such as the Korean War and the Iraq War. But I don’t think we are totally ambiguous on the issue of Taiwan.
We’re not saying specifically what day you’re going to fight, we’re going to go to Taiwan in a few hours to reinforce, no. But I think the U.S. is going to be involved in that, and if something happens in that regard, this stuff is not vague, it’s very clear. It’s not necessarily the United States, a lot of U.S. allies now, he has dealings in this area.
NATO also says that in this peace and security, in the Asia-Pacific region, is also a kind of obligation for him. So I think in many cases, the clear will can be expressed in some more vague terms, but this will itself is very clear.
Moderator: Last time I interviewed another analyst of current affairs. He said that he thinks whether Xi Jinping himself will misjudge the situation is the biggest uncertainty in the Taiwan Strait. What is your opinion?
Yu Maochun: The leaders of the Chinese Communist Party like to misjudge the situation. Look at this, a little more sober is Deng Xiaoping, he said this to bide their time, recognize their own shortcomings ah. Xi Jinping is not this kind of temperament. He always feels that his time has come, he said the United States is a declining empire, a declining country, the democratic system is not as good as its own system. These things are without this particular vision of reality.
I think the Chinese Communist Party seems to be very strong on the surface, but in fact, it is relatively weak internally. If you really want to start a fight, there are actually many factors to consider. What the Chinese Communist Party needs most now is the so-called strategic opportunity, it says that now is the time for development, it actually has not yet developed to the end, so it actually if it really provokes a war, it will lose this strategic position, it is also very clear about this aspect.
And the Chinese Communist Party is now in the Asia-Pacific region, it and some neighboring countries, it launched a military conflict, other countries will be combined together against the Chinese Communist Party. The Chinese Communist Party is not alone in disliking one country, it is disliking all, many countries. You can see now Japan, and then of course Taiwan, Vietnam, India, and several other countries in the South China Sea region.
Moderator: The Philippines.
Yu Maochun: The Philippines, yes. South Korea also, plus the United States, like this Germany, Britain, Canada, which all indicate their interest in the so-called global commons, like the South China Sea, these international waters, they all feel their own interests in it. So I think that the Chinese strategist who is really clear-headed, he sees these things very clearly.
So I think there is an element of bluster in there, but it does have the will to change the reality. This will, and its ability, and its opportunity and timing, I think, are not the same thing.
Why did Xi Jinping abandon Deng Xiaoping’s foreign strategy of hiding the light?
Moderator: Why do you think Xi Jinping abandoned Deng Xiaoping’s foreign strategy of biding one’s time? Is it more of a personal reason or is it a factor of the entire Communist Party?
Yu Maochun: Xi Jinping is a very theoretically poisoned CCP leader, who rarely has such a realistic vision. For example, Xi Jinping thinks he is a Marxist-Leninist believer. A very important thing about Leninism is that the socialist system is very superior, the Communist Party is invincible. So you see after Xi Jinping came to power, he most emphasized the so-called superiority of the system.
He thinks that this is called centralized power to do great things, and that this authoritarian and centralized system in China is better than the democratic and liberal system in the West. So he thinks he can do a lot of big things, he thinks this system is superior, so this gives him a very arrogant idea. This is Marxist-Leninist ideology at work, this is ideological poisoning. This is one point.
The second point is, what he emphasizes very much, is that this has the element of self-deception in it. Because he thinks that the capitalist society, the United States as a country is rotting day by day, as Lenin said, is a decaying, is a degenerate political system, so he put forward the so-called east rise and west fall of these judgments, these judgments are actually in many cases unrealistic.
Although China has made great progress in defense, economy, and science and technology in recent years, there is a big gap between China and some advanced countries around the world in many of the aspects I mentioned earlier.
Therefore, I think they mainly have this great leap forward in this kind of head fever, the Chinese people have suffered a lot of losses in here. Xi Jinping, the leader, is a very strong ideological leader, he sees the problem from the perspective of their Marxist-Leninist theory, which actually harmed not only himself, but also the people of the country and to some extent the world.
Moderator: Yes. You just mentioned the superiority of the system, but for many Chinese people in China, of course, they are basically watching the propaganda of the Chinese Communist Party, so they may also agree that, for example, this time, because of the national system, the so-called national system, the so-called success of the fight against the epidemic.
Some of our commentators I know, when they talk to their relatives in China, many of them have reversed their thinking because of the epidemic, and they think that the CCP’s system of centralizing power to do great things still seems to be working. What would you say to such thoughts and ideas?
Yu Maochun: I think China is like this, that is, in a more authoritarian and dictatorial government, its influence on the people’s thinking, the control of information, it has a great impact on people’s ability to judge values, for example, in the time of Mao Zedong, the Chinese people if you ask him whether you are happy, the vast majority of people feel very happy.
After the death of Mao Zedong, the whole country wept, and he felt that this was a very great blow to them. So, I think in an autocratic system, the percentage of people who say good things about the autocrat is not that high, which does not tell the story. When you go to North Korea, the percentage of people who say good things about Kim Jong-un is 100 percent.
I read a report the other day that 95 percent of the people said the Communist Party was good. The five percent of people who say the Communist Party is bad are in prison. So there are a lot of problems in this, and in an authoritarian government, you do these polls, and your level of understanding of this information, I think, has a great impact on their value judgment.
For example, if you live in China, you watch Chinese TV every day, you watch Chinese internal propaganda, you watch Chinese reports, you watch the leaders’ speeches. But most people think that Uyghurs are terrorists because all they see every day is negative propaganda. Of course, this will form the perception of the whole society.
In an environment where there is a free flow of information, the perception is completely different. So this cover-up of the truth is a very effective way for the Chinese Communist Party to maintain power, and they are doing it with perfection. Therefore, I think this aspect should not be taken lightly.
Moderator: In fact, when you talk about the cover-up of the truth, many knowledgeable people in China have been calling for Western governments, especially the U.S. government, to try to break through the CCP’s firewall. This is a once and for all solution to let many Chinese people see the truth, so that is equivalent to the war without giving up such a practice, in this regard it seems that the U.S. government is also investing money every year, but why do not see any practical effect?
Yu Maochun: I think there is a big problem with this, and that is what? It is the Chinese Communist government, which controls the human and material resources of the whole China, it has a lot of things that can be concentrated in this firewall break very successfully.
The American system, like the Western countries, is a democratic government, the government does not have a very powerful tool of propaganda and public opinion, and propaganda is not a good thing in the West, in China it is a legitimate behavior and theory. So this thing, now various countries are also talking about these things, in thinking how to break the monopoly of the Chinese Communist Party on the completion of the information.
Of course, the firewall of the Communist Party of China is not as solid as gold, it has many loopholes. In fact, many knowledgeable people in the country want to go through the wall he can go through the wall. The key is that China does not have a free information flow environment. Many people found that after he came over the wall outside to see, he was unable to express in the country.
But this kind of information slowly, slowly, like a hundred rivers converging into the sea, he can form a very huge force, in fact, in Chinese society now, this kind of resistance to the lies of the Chinese Communist Party rule, although this is invisible, but very huge and very deep. So I think it looks like the regime is stable and prosperous on the surface, but in fact the social contradictions underneath are very sharp.
The U.S. and China must have a war? The misconception of Thucydides’ trap
Moderator: Speaking of U.S.-China relations, there is a question you want to ask, that is, there are many experts, he actually believes that the United States and China will have a war, of course, for different reasons. One way of thinking is based on the political theory of the Thucydides Trap proposed by Harvard professor Graham Allison, which I’ll explain to the audience very quickly, that is, the theory is that when the hegemony of the existing powers is threatened by the emerging powers, it is likely that war will break out between the two countries. Mr. Yu, do you think such a theory is applicable to the U.S.-China relationship?
Yu Maochun: This theory is very confusing, I think he is a very outdated theory, no sense of reality, and some of his basic premises are wrong. First, he said that the struggle between two countries, one is the existing old boss, by the rising of an aggressive second to steal the status of the boss, this way there will be a war, this is the Thucydides trap theory a fundamental starting point, this argument is wrong.
The United States is a society with great vitality, his political philosophy, his economy, his military, his culture, sports in the world in the middle of many very important indicators, he is the number one power. In many aspects, despite the problems he encountered, his ability to overcome, his ability to renew, his ability to strengthen himself, is incomparable to the Chinese society, so it does not necessarily mean that the Chinese society has posed the most fundamental challenge to the United States as a world power.
There is a challenge, but I think the American society is much stronger than China. So at this time the United States is not in decline, he’s actually on the rise, he’s on the rise to varying degrees. He’s actually on the rise, he’s on the rise in different degrees. He’s transforming on many levels, and after the transformation, this American society will be even stronger. You know, for example, the technological transformation, the economic transformation. This aspect of American society is constantly transforming, constantly progressing as a society. So the fundamental problem with this Thucydides trap is that it’s wrong.
It is true that the Chinese government has made great strides in economic, military, and technological progress, but this stride is based on a very weak theoretical and practical foundation, which is high-handedness and control over the people. Therefore, the people’s confidence in the CCP regime and the core bureaucratic system of the CCP to maintain the regime is not unbreakable.
Many in China have a chance to leave the country. I take anything to go, so I think this in China to make some money, he wants to get the money to the United States side. So I think the basic theory of this Thucydides trap in China is problematic.
The second problem is that this Thucydides trap theory, he is only limited to two countries, he said the United States and China, this is not right. The rise of China is a challenge to the United States, but the fundamental point is that China’s political theory and its way of governing is a challenge to the whole world, not just to the United States. So it’s not about this dispute between China and the United States, it’s about China and the existing political system and international system around the world, and it’s challenging that.
So, this you want to position him to the United States and China on this issue, this just fell into China’s trap, the Chinese he put everything to, he put China is now in some trouble, in the end on the United States. Australia proposed this to China, kindly proposed to seriously study and investigate the root cause of the epidemic, he said is Australia is the U.S. lapdog, and then European countries on China’s Xinjiang issue, this proposed this criticism, it feels that this is again with the U.S. singing tune.
It has no respect for the independence of some countries of their own, it feels that he China and the United States in this is the most fundamental problem. Therefore, this Thucydides trap is a very confusing and untrue political theory.
The Chinese Communist model of rule threatens the world
Moderator: The second point you just made is very interesting, you said this is not a problem between China and the United States, but a problem between China and the world, the Chinese Communist Party and the world. Earlier I remember you also said in this hearing held by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission that the Chinese Communist Party is now seeking to achieve global dominance to control the world economy, and that the free world will be changed by the Chinese Communist Party if it is not resisted. “So in your opinion, at this point in time, is it that the Chinese Communist Party wants to dominate the world, that it is not just an ambition, but that it is putting it into practice?
Yu Maochun: This means that communism has two basic systems, the first system is its political theory, its ideology. So during the Cold War, after the end of World War II in the 1950s and 1960s, it was this ideology, it was very powerful, so it was a kind of war in terms of ideology.
After the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, there was basically no one who believed in communist theories, and very few people in mainland China believed in communist theories, but the Chinese Communist Party was the truest believer in Marxism-Leninism. So in the 1954s, Mao Zedong said that the core force leading our cause was the Chinese Communist Party, and the theoretical basis guiding our thinking was Marxism-Leninism, which is still the case today.
If anyone challenges these two fundamental theses in China now in 2021, you are in danger and you are punishable by law. So the Chinese Communist Party does not believe in this political theory anymore, but the core ruling group of the Chinese Communist Party, it actually believes in it. So after Xi Jinping came to power he had to say I do not forget the original heart. What is the first heart? It is the belief of the Communist Party. He did not say that he would liberate all mankind, he used his economic power and military power and technological power to rule all mankind.
For example, his Huawei, his 5G, he can play a monopoly on the world’s communications platform. For example, there is also his Belt and Road, he has a hand in all these aspects, he has a global vision. He feels that if he doesn’t do that, the international anti-China forces will bury the Chinese (Communist) socialist cause. So he was totally based on a Leninist thinking to guide his domestic and international approach.
Moderator: Then you say that if you don’t resist the Communist Party, the free world will be changed by him. How was it changed?
Yu Maochun: For example, although the Chinese government is now using the rules of the free capitalist world to obtain their own interests, but if the Communist Party controls the world’s economic lifeline, then the Communist Party’s monopoly on domestic enterprises, the party secretary system, the united front system, and then the political study system, he will be in these international financial or economic institutions will be displayed.
In a nutshell, the Communist Party of China will shift its basic policy of governance from the domestic to the global level as it implements the dictatorship of the proletariat at home. In this way, it will influence many existing institutions in the international arena.
Confucius Institutes, for example, do not only teach Chinese language and learn Chinese culture. The DNA of Confucius Institutes is to be politically correct and not to have ideological problems. You must not talk about Tibet, Xinjiang, the Dalai Lama, Falun Gong, and anti-Party and anti-socialist things. So this is a kind of violation of academic freedom.
So if the Chinese Communist Party wants to extend the Confucius Institute to the whole world, then academic freedom all over the world will be in trouble. I just made a very specific statement, so that the threat of the Chinese Communist Party to the whole world, it is a political philosophy, that is, a threat of a model of rule, the so-called model of governance, which is very important in this. And it’s not just one company versus one company, it forms some kind of monopoly challenge, there are bigger and deeper political and economic things than that.
Moderator: In fact, I think many people have recognized this threat, but there are many Western companies that are not aware of it, or they may not care about it. Because we see that many American companies, including Wall Street or whatever, are still actively engaged in the Chinese market.
They don’t consider the ideological differences or even the threat to U.S. national security. Then we see a lot of U.S. media, he even intentionally or unintentionally spreads the big foreign propaganda of the Chinese Communist Party. So in your opinion how should the U.S. respond to this inherent crisis?
Yu Maochun: This is a big problem, because one of the biggest problems of a free society is the free flow of information and the fact that anyone can participate in the system, which gives the Chinese Communist Party an opportunity to exploit loopholes. So it has exploited many loopholes. Now, during the Trump presidency, we have done a lot of work on these things. We have developed a lot of strategies and we have reacted very strongly to the Chinese Communist Party’s actions against the world and against American companies. For example, during the trade negotiation phase, we also established rules with the Chinese Communist Party, that is, we also laid down a lot of red lines with it.
We also have a lot of defenses against some of the most critical sectors of the economic lifeline of the United States. So it’s not easy to oppose a totalitarian government under a free trade system. Unlike the Cold War, the Soviet bloc was completely isolated and basically incompatible with the free capitalist world. Now the Chinese Communist Party has penetrated into the free world, so it is very difficult to do so. So we did a lot of things in this situation with our last government.
Then the current administration I think in some of their fundamental approaches, he still hasn’t changed some of the things that we wanted to do in the beginning, still continues to accomplish what we didn’t accomplish, but we set a lot of landmark directions for him, so they are still continuing that aspect.
I think in the near future, some strategic considerations for U.S. national security, slowly, slowly on some U.S. technology companies, especially information companies to invest in China, and Wall Street investment in China. There are a lot of very specific measures, then this way it will form a more real protection for the national security of the United States.
Thank you for the encouragement of Chinese people, and hope that we can participate more to form an impact
Moderator: Yes, I hope that the U.S. government will have more analysts like you who have more insight into the nature of the Chinese Communist Party. And finally, I would like to ask you a question, Mr. Yu. You are now a household name in Chinese news circles, so to speak, because after all, there are only a few Chinese who can intervene and influence U.S. policy on China. Many Chinese are actually very proud of that, even though the Chinese Communist Party is not one of them. Do you have anything to say to people?
Yu Maochun: I think the Chinese people are very hardworking and very wise, and I am very honored to have the opportunity to be a household name, and I have received a lot of encouragement from many listeners or friends who have given me a lot of advice.
I’m too busy to respond specifically, and I always feel very guilty about this. But I hope that people will get more involved in this, especially Asian immigrants to the United States, so that they can be more involved in the political level of the United States.
I’m very fortunate that when I was doing things in the government, I felt that Chinese Americans in particular were really active and enthusiastic about their involvement in American government politics. Because they have experienced some very important life resources in China, so they see many issues very clearly. So I hope we can communicate more.
The fact is that the United States is fighting against the Chinese government, it’s not so much between two countries, but between autocracy and freedom. So people who have lived in the United States have a real experience, especially some of the programs like the one you hosted just now, Fang Fei, which were very good.
Moderator: Thank you.
Yu Maochun: Slowly, slowly, we can form a kind of political force that is relatively large, relatively directional. It has a very important impact on the U.S. policy towards China and the U.S. foreign policy. Just like in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, some of the intellectual elite and the general public who immigrated to the United States, played a very important influence on the U.S. Cold War policy.
Moderator: Okay, thank you, Mr. Yu. I feel very encouraged after listening to some of your explanations today. I hope we can invite you back again next time to continue to explain the latest situation to us.
Yu Maochun: Yes, you’re welcome, thank you.