Podcasts about Ezra Vogel

Will Bachman talks to Tai Wong, a Harvard and Radcliffe class of 1992 alumni. Tai has been a trader for thirty years but  believes that his best trade was asking his high school girlfriend to marry him. They married after she finished business school and they now have four children. Tai shares that his family has been together for 27 years and have had the opportunity to travel to many places together, but one of his favorite locations is Norway.  A Career in Finance as a Trader Tai initially became interested in finance after a summer internship at JP Morgan where he worked on the foreign exchange trading desk. Tai is a sell side trader, meaning he works for a bank and prices and facilitates client business, as well as making bets with the institution's money. He has eight years of experience in currency trading, and five years experience in helping to build a successful large scale client trading platform for currencies at UBS. He has also been trading precious metals like gold, silver, platinum, and palladium, as well as base metals like copper, aluminum, and nickel, for the last 15 years. Being a trader has had a significant impact on his personality, teaching him to be direct, loud, and decisive. He considers his 'real' job to be being a father, husband and son, but he loves his day job too.   Spoofing and Manipulating the Market Tai discusses how the past 10 years have seen a shift away from human trades in markets such as gold, silver, crude, and natural gas. He explains that 80% of trades are now done by machines, which take the human element out of trading and make it more anonymous. He also mentions spoofing, a crime where traders will show false offers or bids to try to manipulate the market. He explains that traders have tried to fool the machines by using techniques such as spoofing, though this has been made illegal since 2000. The shift to machines has resulted in fewer one and two lot trades, as well as fewer requests for quotes as machines can be programmed to execute trades over time. Tai describes his daily routine which involves waking up to check Bloomberg on his phone to see what has moved since he last checked, and then scanning the headlines. Using the Bloomberg Tool for Trading Insight Bloomberg is a remarkable tool which tracks an immense amount of data and is used by 250,000 people per month, making them around $8 billion. When in the office, the Bloomberg tool is used to log in overnight and use pricing tools for options, sheets that show risk, futures and liquidity. It can be confusing for those who have not used it before, and is similar to what air traffic controllers have to do. The conversation then shifted to an example of a moderate potential trade. Bloomberg allows traders to monitor the market and look for opportunities to buy and sell, and can use a variety of tools to determine the best time to enter and exit the market. For example, a trader might monitor the market and look for a particular stock to rise or fall after an announcement, and use technical analysis to determine the best time to enter the trade. The trader can then use limit orders and stop loss orders to protect their capital and maximize their profits. Life as a Trader and The Big Short Tai reflects on his experience as a trader, discussing the rapid decisions that are often made and the importance of developing a thick skin. He talks about traders' skepticism of authority and dislike of arbitrary rules and notes how their experience impacts their personality.  Tai remembers the many crises he has witnessed and the feeling of watching the markets move in response, and he reflects on his experience at Lehman Brothers when it went bankrupt in 2008. He noted that the movie The Big Short did a good job of recounting the episode and was almost 100% accurate except for the empty trading floor scene. He further explained that many people continued to go to work each day after the bank went bankrupt and that the paychecks kept coming.  The Complexities of Trading in the Metals Market Tai  discussed the complexities of trading in the metals market, and the need to understand the nuances of each metal type. He broke metals trading into two parts: precious metals and palladium. He explained that palladium is expensive, and prices rose when Russia invaded Ukraine due to concerns about supply. He noted that the U.S. government did not put it on a restricted list, meaning supply was not interrupted. He concluded that it is important to understand the jargon and nuances of each metal market in order to be a successful trader. Influential Professors and Classes Tai remembers certain classes and professors that he found inspiring include Martin Feldstein and American Economic Policy, John Shearman, Professor of Fine Arts with whom he took a course on Michelangelo, Ezra Vogel who taught Industrial East Asia Foreign Cultures 26, and Richard Pipes who taught about the Russian Revolution.  Timestamps 04:30 Exploring Norway in the Summertime  05:53 30-Year Wall Street Trading Career  11:17 Exploring the World of Metals Trading  18:57 Exploring the Impact of Automated Trading on Financial Markets  24:20 Bloomberg Trading Tools and Risk Management  25:05 Hedging Gold Futures: A Discussion of Trade Mechanics 31:29 Counterparty Reputations in Financial Trading  34:23 Exploring the World of Commodity Trading:  36:31 Colorful Traders and Jargon on the Trading Floor  39:36 Experiences on Wall Street and Regrets of Not Taking Certain College Courses  CONTACT INFO: linkedin.com/in/tai-wong-cfa-9547641 Tai.wong@post.harvard.edu  

In this month's episode of Japan Memo, Yuka Koshino is joined by Martijn Rasser, Senior Fellow and Director of the Technology and National Security Program at the Center for New American Security, Meia Nouwens, IISS Senior Fellow for Chinese Defence Policy and Military Modernisation, and Mariko Togashi, Matsumoto-Samata Research Fellow for Japanese Security and Defence Policy at the IISS.Yuka, Martijn, Meia and Mariko provide US, Japanese, Chinese, Taiwanese and European perspectives on their respective geoeconomic landscape and economic security policy; their views towards and preparations for a Taiwan contingency in the context of economic security; and offer their assessment of potential national and multilateral responses to such a contingency.Topics discussed include:The economic security policies of the US, China, Taiwan and JapanUS, Chinese, and Japanese views on the impact of a Taiwan contingency on economic securityThe global and regional semiconductor landscape and its impact on reactions to tensions in the Taiwan StraitA potential sanctions regime against China in a case of Taiwan contingency The following literature is recommended by our guests to gain a clearer picture of the topics discussed:‘Rich Nation, Strong Army' by Richard J. Samuels‘Middle Kingdom and Empire of the Rising Sun: Sino-Japanese Relations, Past and Present' by June Teufel Dreyer‘China and Japan: Facing History' by Ezra Vogel‘自衛隊最高幹部が語る台湾有事' /岩田 清文 ,武居 智久, 尾上 定正, 兼原 信克 (‘JSDF Top Executives Talk About Taiwan Contingency' by Iwata Kiyofumi, Takei Tomohisa, Oue Sadamasa and Kanehara Nobukatsu)We hope you enjoy the episode and please follow, rate, and subscribe to Japan Memo on the podcast platform of your choice.Date of Recording: 10 November 2022Japan Memo is recorded and produced at the IISS in London. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

0:00 -- Intro.2:10 -- Start of interview.3:00 -- Henry's "origin story". His other book "China's Superbank: Debt, Oil and Influence - How China Development Bank is Rewriting the Rules of Finance") (2012)5:03 -- His current role at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence.6:09 -  The origin of his book Volt Rush: The Winners and Losers in the Race to Go Green (2022).10:09 --  On the new battery age and the origin of lithium-ion batteries for EVs.12:53 -- On Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL) and its founder Robin Zeng.18:34 -- On the Chinese lithium industry and its champions Ganfeng Lithium and Tianqi Lithium. "They had a golden period where they could pick up assets globally, but now the West is catching up." Example: Government of Canada orders the divestiture of investments by foreign companies in Canadian critical minerals companies.21:10 -- About Tianqi's $4bn acquisition of SQM's stake in Chile. [Disclosure: I wrote about this case in 2018 here, here and most recently in my latest newsletter, here.] On the future of the Lithium Triangle (Chile, Argentina and Bolivia) for the global lithium supply chain. The unclear future of lithium in Chile, the government has hinted on the creation of a new Chilean national lithium company. "It's a once in a 100-year opportunity, are they just going to sit back and lose out on market share? This opportunity does not come very often."27:09 -- On the new US industrial policy to foster the EV and battery industry (and divest from China). The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, CHIPS & Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act (“the single largest investment in climate and energy in American history”) combined will invest more than $135 billion to build America's EV future, including critical minerals sourcing and processing and battery manufacturing. The impact for the global supply chain, particularly in Latin America, Africa and rest of the world.33:03-- On geopolitics, ESG and sustainability of the global battery supply chain and EVs generally. The problem of greenwashing. Amnesty International's report on Cobalt in Africa (2016) "This is What We Die For" (on human rights abuses in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the global trade in Cobalt). "Chinese consumers are also getting more environmentally conscious."38:02  -- On the challenges of the energy transition from ICE vehicles to EVs. The importance of renewable energy. "Clean energy clusters will become very important."40:09  -- On energy security, cleaner battery producers (example Northvolt from Sweden), the rise of Gigafactories, the shift to EVs from global OEMs (A Reuters analysis of 37 global automakers found that they plan to invest nearly $1.2 trillion in electric vehicles and batteries through 2030) and the future of jobs in this industry. "Vehicle manufacturing employment, which stands at 13.6 million globally, already employs 10% of its workforce in the manufacture of EVs, their components and batteries." (see IEA world energy employment report). "It is a race for the jobs of the future, and that's where the West has lost out. That's what making this industry so critical." "But the West will definitely catch up, I'm very optimistic about the U.S."46:03 -- On whether the U.S. will encourage more mining in the US to bridge this gap. "The mining industry has not done a good job at convincing the public that this is what is needed. People who support clean energy find it hard to support mining. That's the crux of the issue."48:14 -- On Tesla, and whether they will move upstream in the supply chain with more refining or mining. And their China operations and supply chain dependence.53:19 -- The 1-3 books that have greatly influenced his life:The Quiet American, by Graham Greene (1955)Books by Somerset MaughamDeng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China, by Ezra Vogel (2011)Other books he recommends on the battery global supply chain:Bottled Lightning: Superbatteries, Electric Cars, and the New Lithium Economy, by Seth Fletcher (2011)The Powerhouse: America, China, and the Great Battery War, by Seth Levine (2016)The Shadows of Consumption: Consequences for the Global Environment, by Peter Dauvergne (2008)55:28 -- Who were your mentors, and what did you learn from them? Michael Forsythe, now with the NYT. When he was in China working for Bloomberg, working with investigative journalists.56:23 -- Are there any quotes you think of often or live your life by? "Sooner or later...one has to take sides – if one is to remain human." by Graham Greene.57:18 --  The person he most admires: Greta Thunberg.Henry Sanderson is a journalist and author of Volt Rush, the Winners and Losers in the Race to Go Green. He's currently an Executive Editor at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, the leading provider of data and information on the battery industry. Before that he covered commodities and mining for the Financial Times for seven years in London. He was previously a reporter for Bloomberg News in Beijing, where he co-authored a book about China's financial system and state capitalism, China's Superbank. He grew up in Hong Kong and lived and worked in China for seven years.  __ You can follow Henry on social media at:Twitter: @hjesanderson__ You can follow Evan on social media at:Twitter: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

India Policy Watch #1: Futility Of Fighting Lies Insights on burning policy issues in India— RSJI have been following the case of Mohammed Zubair, the co-founder of the fact-checking site Alt News with interest. He was granted interim bail by the Supreme Court a couple of weeks back. You can read more about the story here. I border on free speech absolutism, so my opinion on this case, as with many other similar cases in India, is simple. No one should be jailed for any speech unless they are violating Mill’s harm principle. In his essay On Liberty, Mill wrote:“That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind is warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.”But free speech is not the only reason I have brought up the case of Mohammed Zubair here. The case illustrates a point I have made before in this newsletter: while countering lies with fact checks is a noble, worthwhile endeavour, it means nothing in an environment where people are intoxicated with half-truths and grand illusions about a ‘real’ past or an ‘imagined’ future.A few years back, I came across this wonderful essay ‘Monopolize the Pretty Lies’ by Bryan Caplan. While I understood it back then, reading it again now is insightful. Caplan writes:What then is the primary purpose of censorship?  It’s not to suppress the truth – which has little mass appeal anyway.  The primary purpose of censorship is to monopolize the pretty lies.  Only the powers-that-be can freely make absurdly self-aggrandizing claims. Human beings like to say – and think – whatever superficially sounds good.  Strict censorship allows rulers to exploit this deep mental flaw.  If no one else can make absurd lies, a trite slogan like, “Let’s unite to fight for a fantastic future!” carries great force.  Truthful critics would have to make crowd-displeasing objections like, “Maybe competition will bring us a brighter future than unity,” “Who exactly are we fighting?,” or “Precisely how fantastic of a future are we talking about?”  A rather flaccid bid for power!  Existing rulers tremble far more when rebels bellow, “Join us to fight for a fantastic future!”This is why I think this case won’t go anywhere. It will fizzle out here because fact-checkers don’t really matter. What will matter is if there is a counter-narrative based on dubious claims of an equally fantastic future. It explains why AAP is seen as a credible threat by the BJP.Caplan ends his essay with a rather pessimistic view of free speech:Doesn’t this imply that free speech is overrated?  Yes; I’ve said so before.  While I’d like to believe that free speech leads naturally to the triumph of truth, I see little sign of this.  Instead, politics looks to me like a Great Liars’ War.  Viable politicians defy literal truth in virtually every sentence.  They defy it with hyperbole.  They defy it with overconfidence.  They defy it with wishful thinking.  Dictators try to make One Big Political Lie mandatory.  Free speech lets a Thousand Political Lies Bloom.Yes, freedom of speech lets me make these dour observations without fear. I’m grateful for that.  Yet outside my Bubble, dour observations fall on deaf ears.  Psychologically normal humans crave pretty lies, so the Great Liars’ War never ends.I guess once you’ve gotten into the chakravyuha of the Mahabharata of lies, there’s no way of getting out. You will only find an avalanche of prettier lies from all sides engulfing you in future. India Policy Watch #2: Nature Of Representation Insights on burning policy issues in India— RSJDroupadi Murmu, the NDA presidential nominee, was elected as the 15th President of India a couple of weeks back. Murmu, a tribal leader from Mayurbhanj, Odisha, had earlier served as the governor of Jharkhand. That a woman from a historically marginalised section of the society now occupies the highest constitutional post is a moment to celebrate in the 75th year of Indian independence. It shows a kind of deepening of democracy. This is because we associate democracy with representation. It was no surprise therefore that a lot of opinion pieces reflected this sentiment while talking about her. Here’s Aditi Narayani Paswan writing for the Indian Express:“Droupadi Murmu is not just a source of inspiration for us; her life and struggle, determination and success in the face of great odds represent the hope and promise of New India.Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Indian democracy has become more representative and inclusive. The BJP represents the New India of prosperity, equality and socio-economic mobility, reflecting the true embodiment of samajik samarasta (social harmony). A tribal woman succeeding a Dalit to the highest constitutional post of the nation is a remarkable testimony to the deepening roots of Indian democracy.”And here’s a piece in Outlook:“What is really significant for us to understand here is that Murmu’s victory is not merely the victory of a specific party to power. Rather its implications can be drawn deep down to the very philosophy of what India as an independent nation has been striving to practically achieve. Whether or not her victory can bring goals of that philosophy to fruition is a matter of time to tell. But at the moment, from the point of view of a modern, multicultural, multi-ethnic nation-state, Murmu’s victory is the victory of representation.”Origin StorySince we are all talking about the victory of representation, I thought it would be useful to go deeper into the idea itself. What does representation mean in a democracy? How useful is it? Does an increasing emphasis on identity in society mean a greater opportunity for democracies to be truly representative? Is there such a thing as too much representation? To understand this, we will go back to the modern conception of the state and, therefore, to Hobbes. There are good reasons to go back to ancient history and the Roman republic or the Roman empire while talking about representation. But the political theory of the time concerned itself with the question of who was fit to rule us from among the people who should be ruling us. It didn’t answer the question of how we find who was fit to rule us. The process didn’t matter much then. So, we start with Hobbes again. This is a familiar territory for this newsletter so forgive me for going over it again. For Hobbes, human life in the state of nature is ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short’. We would be a ‘fractious multitude’ forever at war with each other for scarce resources because there would be no powerful force to keep us in order. The solution, Hobbes wrote, was for people to come together to form a pact, let’s call it the ‘commonwealth’, where they voluntarily give up some of their freedoms to a powerful entity called the ‘sovereign’ in exchange for protection against the violence that’s inevitable in the state of nature. So that’s how the State worked. There were the multitudes, a notion of the commonwealth, and then there was the sovereign. The sovereign was all-powerful but ruled because of the legitimacy of the commonwealth. If the sovereign itself became brutish, the multitudes might dismantle the commonwealth and look for another. Hobbes didn’t care much about how to search for the sovereign. It could be through a parliament, or it could be a monarch; it didn’t matter so long as it had absolute power to maintain order which was in turn voluntarily offered to them by the people. The enlightenment thinkers who followed Hobbes concerned themselves with two big ideas. One was individual liberty and how it should be protected and championed in the face of a powerful sovereign. The other was the separation of the ‘church’ from the State or how to ensure the sovereign doesn’t bow down to another power in the name of God. The revolutions and political reforms in the late 18th century Europe and North America were a result of the excesses of the sovereign and the propagation of these ideas within those societies. The primacy of individual liberty, the weakening of monarchy and the separation of the church led to the evolution of the modern, representative democracy where the people chose who would lead them. The people would be sovereign through the mode of representation. A system of checks and balances between the legislature, executive and judiciary would limit the concentration of power in any one person. This became the democratic model to emulate. The Problem Of RepresentationThe problem of representation wasn’t too difficult to solve in the early days of democracy. There was no universal suffrage, people lived in villages over generations, their representatives knew their issues well, and the people chose someone who presented the best option to address their concerns. There was very little information asymmetry. This model started fraying with increasing industrialisation and deepening of capitalism leading to greater social and geographic mobility. Cities with diverse populations, new professions, break down of the feudal structure in the countryside and universal suffrage followed. This meant it was difficult for any representative to know their people as well as before. Even the people couldn’t keep pace with all the information around them. Like Walter Lippman would write, there was a world outside, and there was a picture of it inside our heads. We make our decisions based on this picture which is a second-hand view of the world because we cannot see all of the world. Because of this, we search for an authentic messenger who can explain the real world to us. The elites use the media to present themselves as the authentic messengers and shape public opinion. It is this elite then who influence representation for the public. Once this model got established, we saw the elites dominate representation in democracies for most of the 20th century. This wheel turned in the last decade when the excesses of the financial system, the concentration of the benefits of globalisation, the proliferation of media and greater disparity in opportunities led to a populist backlash against the elites.The Three NarrativesThere are now three competing narratives on representation today. The first is the old Burkean point on the role of a representative of people. His speech to the electors of Bristol in 1774 is a classic on the role of a representative:“Certainly, gentlemen, it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”This is the model of an independent representative with a mind of his own. They work with autonomy using their judgment to do what they think is best for their people.The second narrative is about the representative being either an expert or who will rely on experts for finding the best answers to the concerns of the public. This narrative strengthens when a nation is in crisis because of a war, economic failure or an emergency (health or environment, for instance). These don’t last long, and an expert eventually falls out of favour unless they reinvent themselves. The last narrative is that of a representative who is like you and me, the proverbial US politician who you could have a chat with over a beer. This is the literal interpretation of representation where fealty to someone is drawn because of how closely they resemble us. In a world where every expertise can be questioned, where independent thinking is viewed with suspicion, and tribal loyalty is the highest virtue, this literal view of representation is the strongest. Of course, this isn’t to say that these narratives of representation cannot come together in the shape of a single person who could satisfy all of them. But that looks increasingly rare around the world these days. What’s easier is for a representative to fashion themselves in closer affiliation to a particular identity among the people and use that to come to power. Over-indexing on any one of these narratives and choosing representatives on that basis is bad for democracy. It weakens the state. It is something we must keep in mind while celebrating representation.  Matsyanyaaya: A New East Asian TransitionBig fish eating small fish = Foreign Policy in action— Pranay KotasthaneThis week’s news was dominated by the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. If you weren’t sleeping under a rock, you would have already read many views, claims, blames, and counter-claims around this event. Here’s another one, but from an Indian realist perspective.The dominant narrative sees this visit as another episode of the ongoing US-China great power rivalry. In this narrative, Taiwan by itself, is secondary. All that matters is to place the blame either on China or the US for the escalations. One framing is that this visit was unnecessary, provocative, and irresponsible. The argument goes that the US has worsened the security situation of China’s neighbours by inviting the latter’s aggression. The opposite framing suggests that the blame rests solely on China’s expansionist tendencies over the last five years. China’s response of activating a military response ahead of the upcoming 20th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party only shows what this event is really about.Both frames of the dominant narrative are missing a crucial element: the choices of the Taiwanese people. The great power rivalry framing often ignores that other nation-states also have the agency to make their sovereign choices, even if doing so sometimes involves playing one great power against another. Ukraine’s case is similar. Some people blame NATO’s expansion on Russia’s borders, while others point out that an invasion has no justification (I share this view). But we forget that most Ukrainians themselves want to move away from Russia and get closer to the West. Any final analysis needs to take this factor into account. My colleague Nitin Pai made a critical argument in early March: ““NATO/EU shouldn’t have expanded” is an insult to the agency of countries that have willingly exercised their choice to join. Accepting their sovereign decisions is also realism. Pretty silly to call yourself a ‘realist’ while pretending sovereign states don’t exist/lack agency.”So is the case with Taiwan. Some analysts are stuck in the old times, believing that Taiwan is China’s “internal issue”. They haven’t been paying enough attention to Taiwan’s domestic polity. The Taiwanese “nation”—the imagined community in Benedict Anderson’s conception— has been carefully constructed over the last few years. Democracy, freedom, and deep connections with the broader world are key foundations of Taiwanese nationalism. This kind of nationalism is antithetical to the mainland’s nationalism. The two consecutive electoral victories of the ruling party—Tsai Ing-wen’s DPP—is a sign that this Taiwanese identity has taken shape. The DPP defeated the grand old Guomindang, a party that has been soft on China. This is what Taiwan’s foreign minister, Joseph Wu said in a BBC interview a couple of days ago:"We want to maintain the status quo, which is that Taiwan has no jurisdiction over mainland China and the People's Republic of China (CCP) has no jurisdiction over Taiwan. That is the reality… On the index of freedom Taiwan is ranked number one, on economic freedom Taiwan is also at the top. Taiwanese people enjoy democracy, freedom and the value of human rights, that put Taiwan in the democratic world…. We have the will and the capability. We need other countries to provide Taiwan with defensive articles, but defending Taiwan is our responsibility, we are not asking other countries to sacrifice their lives to protect Taiwan."Read the lines again. They are definitely not about a small internal issue or a minor historical, ideological tussle. What About Pelosi’s VisitHaving understood the categorical shift in Taiwan’s politics, we can better understand Ms Pelosi’s visit. The Taiwanese government knew what they were getting into. Taiwan orchestrated the visit precisely to clarify to the world that its differences with China are irreconcilable. Even the Guomindang came out in support of the visit. Having been under the threat of a mainland invasion for over 73 years, the Taiwanese know China’s intentions and actions better than most others.The visit, by itself, was just symbolic. It didn’t involve a leader from the Biden administration. Moreover, both Pelosi and the Biden administration made it clear that they are not reversing the “One China” principle. It was China that raised the stakes. China could’ve opted to let it pass by with a strong statement alone. But it chose to ratchet tensions, hoping that this tried-and-tested strategy would stare down Taiwan.But that was not to be. Taiwan and Pelosi called China’s bluff. And when that happened, China began conducting massive military drills, fired missiles and withdrew from important dialogue forums with the US. All this in response to just a symbolic visit by a legislators’ group! Just like the unsportsmanlike kid who walks away with his bat, ball and wickets after being adjudged out. (I know I’m breaking my injunction against anthropomorphising international relations.)How Should We in India Process This?Thus far, we have opted for our favourite position of taking a stance by not taking a stance. Foreign ministers of the US, Australia, and Japan jointly condemned China’s launch of missiles. The fourth Quad member was conspicuous by its absence.From an Indian perspective, Taiwan standing up to China’s expansionism is encouraging. India is familiar with China’s tantrums over visits by foreign diplomats. On every occasion a US Ambassador to India visits Arunachal Pradesh, the Chinese government gets riled up. Pelosi’s visit should be seen in the same context. China’s unreasonable demands and the disproportionate escalation when the demands aren’t heeded, deserve strong criticism short of any change in the “One China” formulation. At the same time, India should close the long-pending free-trade agreement with Taiwan. Its strategic value far outweighs the benefits of haggling over import duties.These words from Joseph Wu serve as a useful reminder to India and Indians:“Look at their[China’s] behaviour over Hong Kong, or claiming the East China Sea and the South China Sea. It is the typical expansionism of an authoritarian state.. Countries in this region need to watch out for what China is trying to do. Taiwan is not going to be the last piece in Chinese dream of expansionism.”Want to find out more about India and Taiwan? Start with this Puliyabaazi episode we recorded with Sana Hashmi, an Indian scholar of East Asian international relations (it’s in Hinglish). Earlier this year, Sana also anchored a comprehensive policy report analysing the India-Taiwan partnership for the Taiwan Asia Exchange Foundation. The report has twenty chapters on various facets of the relationship. I have co-written a chapter on semiconductors, while my colleague Shambhavi has a chapter on bilateral cooperation to tackle future pandemics. Finally, my colleagues have analysed a few cross-strait scenarios from an Indian national interest perspective in an excellent Takshashila Intelligence Estimate. Course Advertisement: Admissions for the Sept 2022 cohort of Takshashila’s Graduate Certificate in Public Policy programme are now open! Visit this link to apply.HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters[Blog] If you are interested in the semiconductor angle in the Taiwan-PRC tensions, we have a post on it in our High-tech Geopolitics newsletter. [Book] Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China by Ezra Vogel is necessary reading to understand China better. [Tweet thread] Common mistakes we make in pronouncing Chinese names. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit publicpolicy.substack.com

If leaders are to be judged by their actions, PV Narasimha Rao was our tallest leader. Vinay Sitapati joins Amit Varma in episode 283 of The Seen and the Unseen to discuss how Rao showed  conviction and political skill in going against the tides of the day to enable the 1991 reforms, which brought hundreds of millions of Indians out of poverty Also check out: 1. Half-Lion: How PV Narasimha Rao Transformed India -- Vinay Sitapati. 2. Jugalbandi: The BJP Before Modi -- Vinay Sitapati. 3. The BJP Before Modi -- Episode 202 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Vinay Sitapati). 4. The Insider -- PV Narasimha Rao. 5. The Importance of the 1991 Reforms -- Episode 237 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Shruti Rajagopalan and Ajay Shah). 6. Gandhi's Assassin: The Making of Nathuram Godse and His Idea of India -- Dhirendra Jha. 7. Ascetic Games and Ayodhya: A Dark Night. 8. How the BJP wins: Inside India's Greatest Election Machine -- Prashant Jha. 9. The BJP's Magic Formula -- Episode 45 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Prashant Jha). 10. India's Problem is Poverty, Not Inequality — Amit Varma. 11. On Inequality — Harry Frankfurt. 12. A Life in Indian Politics -- Episode 149 of The Seen and the Unseen. 13. Gita Press and the Making of Hindu India — Akshaya Mukul. 14. The Gita Press and Hindu Nationalism — Episode 139 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Akshaya Mukul). 15. The Life and Times of Vir Sanghvi -- Episode 236 of The Seen and the Unseen. 16. The Clash of Civilizations? (the article) -- Samuel Huntington. 17. The Clash of Civilization and the Remaking of World Order -- Samuel Huntington. 18. Cut the Clutter with Shekhar Gupta. 19. Headley And I -- S Hussain Zaidi and Rahul Bhatt. 20. Wanting -- Luke Burgis. 21. Abhijit Bhaduri Breaks the Algorithm -- Episode 279 of The Seen and the Unseen. 22. René Girard on Amazon and Wikipedia. 23. Amit Varma's tweet on winning the Asian Championships of Match Poker. 24. The Blue Bedspread -- Raj Kamal Jha. 25. The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda's Road to 9/11 -- Lawrence Wright. 26. Modi's Domination – What We Often Overlook — Keshava Guha. 27. India's Lost Decade -- Episode 116 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Puja Mehra). 28. The Alchemy of Finance -- George Soros. 29. Sturgeon's Law and Survivorship Bias. 30. The Loneliness of the Long-Distance Libertarian -- Amit Varma. 31. Ancient India: Culture of Contradictions -- Upinder Singh. 32. Somanatha: The Many Voices of a History -- Romila Thapar. 33. Romila Thapar, DD Kosambi and Irfan Habib. 34. A Culture of Discrimination Or A Culture Of Emancipation? -- Aravindan Neelakandan on Romila Thapar. 35. The Wire -- David Simon etc. 36. Dekalog — Krzysztof Kieślowski. 37. The Fissures of Modern Hinduism -- Pratap Bhanu Mehta delivers the DD Kosambi Memorial Lecture. 38. Upinder Singh, Nayanjot Lahiri and Iravatham Mahadevan on Amazon. 39. The Power Broker -- Robert A Caro. 40. Robert A Caro on Amazon. 41. The World Is What It Is -- Patrick French. 42. Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China -- Ezra Vogel. 43. Lessons from an Ankhon Dekhi Prime Minister — Amit Varma. 44. Sex tape: Andhra Governor N D Tiwari resigns. 45. Bad liver and a broken heart -- Sunil Murthy on Leela Naidu. 46. The Law of Truly Large Numbers. 47. Unlikely is Inevitable -- Amit Varma. 48. Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln -- Doris Kearns Goodwin. 49. To the Brink and Back: India's 1991 Story -- Jairam Ramesh. 50. Brideshead Revisited -- Evelyn Waugh. 51. Brideshead Revisited, the TV series. This episode is sponsored by CTQ Compounds. Check out The Daily Reader and FutureStack. Use the code UNSEEN for Rs 2500 off. Check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing. And subscribe to The India Uncut Newsletter. It's free! The illustration for this episode is by Nishant Jain aka Sneaky Artist. Check out his work on Twitter, Instagram and Substack.

This week on Sinica: Chén Dìngdìng 陈定定, professor of international relations at Jinan University in Guangzhou, offers his perspective on how Beijing views the war in Ukraine that began on February 24 with the Russian invasion. He concludes that while Beijing's short-term alignment with Russia is fairly locked in and unlikely to shift soon, the long-term prospects for the partnership are far less certain. Kaiser and Dingding discuss where Russian and Chinese worldviews are congruent, the unlikelihood that China will put itself forward as some kind of mediator in the war, and China's domestic considerations in the Russo-Ukrainian War.4:37 – China's assessment of Russia's comprehensive national power8:09 – Has the course of the war and Russian underperformance caused Beijing to recalibrate?10:37 – When did the Sino-Russian convergence really happen?24:47 – India and Vietnam as complicating factors in the Russo-Chinese relationship27:26 – Does Xi's personal relationship with Putin matter?29:16 – The leaks of alleged intel showing Russia asked for Chinese military assistance38:23 – The significance of the Hu Wei essay calling for Beijing to break with Moscow over the war46:38 – Domestic considerationsA transcript of this interview will be available soon on SupChina.com.RecommendationsDingding: The late Ezra Vogel's Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of ChinaKaiser: Kingdom of Characters: the Language Revolution That Made China Modern by Jing TsuSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Perhaps no one in the twentieth century had a greater long-term impact on world history than Deng Xiaoping. And no scholar of contemporary East Asian history and culture is better qualified than Ezra Vogel to disentangle the many contradictions embodied in the life and legacy of China's boldest strategist. Once described by Mao Zedong as a “needle inside a ball of cotton,” Deng was the pragmatic yet disciplined driving force behind China's radical transformation in the late twentieth century. He confronted the damage wrought by the Cultural Revolution, dissolved Mao's cult of personality, and loosened the economic and social policies that had stunted China's growth. Obsessed with modernization and technology, Deng opened trade relations with the West, which lifted hundreds of millions of his countrymen out of poverty. Yet at the same time he answered to his authoritarian roots, most notably when he ordered the crackdown in June 1989 at Tiananmen Square. Deng's youthful commitment to the Communist Party was cemented in Paris in the early 1920s, among a group of Chinese student-workers that also included Zhou Enlai. Deng returned home in 1927 to join the Chinese Revolution on the ground floor. In the fifty years of his tumultuous rise to power, he endured accusations, purges, and even exile before becoming China's preeminent leader from 1978 to 1989 and again in 1992. When he reached the top, Deng saw an opportunity to creatively destroy much of the economic system he had helped build for five decades as a loyal follower of Mao—and he did not hesitate.

This week on the Sinica Podcast, Kaiser welcomes former Acting Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs Susan Thornton to discuss a recently published audit of the Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED), the annual set of high-level meetings with Chinese officials that were convened during the Obama administration by the U.S. Departments of State and the Treasury. The audit's two lead authors, representing the two organizations behind the audit, the National Committee on U.S. Foreign Policy and the American Friends Service Committee, also join the conversation. Rorry Daniels is the Deputy Project Director at the National Committee on American Foreign Policy's Forum on Asia-Pacific Security, where she organizes research and Track II discussions on security issues and conflict mediation in the Asia-Pacific. Daniel Jasper is the Public Education and Advocacy Coordinator, Asia, for the American Friends Service Committee, where his work focuses on China and North Korea. Susan, Rorry, and Dan make a strong case that, contrary to an emerging bipartisan consensus in Washington that engagement with China was a failure, the policy of engagement actually bore substantial fruit.6:12 – The SED and the S&ED — why the ampersand matters10:37 – The rationale behind the S&ED16:15 – In the room at the S&ED meetings30:12 – Critiques of the S&ED process36:47 – The mechanics of the S&ED audit44:13 – Five major accomplishments of the S&ED1:01:38 – Other surprising U.S. gains from the S&ED1:10:51 – How could the process be improved?A transcript of this interview is available on SupChina.com. Recommendations:Rorry: The Good Place (a TV show by Michael Schur) and the eponymous podcast hosted by Tara Brach.Dan: Silence: The Power of Quiet in a World Full of Noise, by Thich Nhat Hanh, and The China Hustle, a documentary on China-focused short sellers, by Jed Rothstein.Susan: The Incredible Dr. Pol, a reality show about a veterinarian on National Geographic; Hidden Forces, a podcast hosted by Demetri Kofinas; and China and Japan: Facing History, the last book by the great scholar Ezra Vogel.Kaiser: Wildland: The Making of America's Fury, by Evan Osnos, especially in audiobook form, read by the author, and Grand Tamasha, a podcast about current affairs in India, hosted by Milan Vaishnav.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The National Committee held a virtual program on February 10, 2021 with Dr. Graham Allison, Dr. Thomas Gold, Ms. Melinda Liu, and Dr. Michael Szonyi to celebrate and remember teacher/mentor/public servant/friend Professor Ezra Vogel.

听李慧玲和韩咏红聊享誉国际的美国著名学者、中国问题专家傅高义（Ezra Vogel），于美东时间20日去世，享年90岁。 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

听李慧玲和韩咏红聊享誉国际的美国著名学者、中国问题专家傅高义（Ezra Vogel），于美东时间20日去世，享年90岁。 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In today’s episode: how the Harvard professor spent much of his life trying to bridge Beijing and Washington; China faces calls for tougher controls on laughing gas amid rising number of recreational abuse cases; and more fintech giants follow Ant Group’s example by pulling the plug on bank deposit products.

①More countries impose UK travel restrictions amid concern over virus mutation. ②US Congress agrees on $900 billion economic relief package. ③Dozens die during India farmers' protests. ④Ezra Vogel, prominent US expert on China, dies aged 90.

Australian Standfirst Guest, Prof. Ezra Vogel (Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences Emeritus at Harvard) & Stirling Larkin discussing China, Japan and US relations In May 2020 recorded at Australian Standfirst’s Infinity Black Digital Studio.

The Sinica Podcast this week features an exclusive recording of a China Institute event in New York on September 17 that sought to answer this question: How can the United States live with a rising China, an ideologically different country that is home to one-fifth of humanity? Joe Kahn, the managing editor of the New York Times and the paper’s former Beijing bureau chief, moderates the discussion with Ezra Vogel, the eminent Harvard University professor and author, and Orville Schell, author and the director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society.What to listen for on this week’s Sinica Podcast:10:50: Changing rhetoric: Harmful or helpful?24:32: The future of the “China model”33:09: Trump’s impact on U.S.-China relations38:24: The legacy of engagement41:04: A case for reengagement with China

Professor Ezra F. Vogel begins his new book on China and Japan in the sixth century when the Japanese adopted basic elements of Chinese civilization. Throughout the ensuing centuries, China generally took the leading role. Tables turned by the end of the 19th century, when Japan’s modernization efforts surpassed those of China, leading to Japanese victory in the 1895 Sino-Japanese war. Despite recent efforts to promote trade and even tourism, the bitter legacy of World War II has made cooperation difficult. In China and Japan: Facing History, Dr. Vogel argues that the two nations must forge a new relationship as the world confronts transnational issues including climate change, disaster relief, global economic development, and scientific research. Without acknowledging and ultimately transcending the frictions of the past and present, tense relations between China and Japan jeopardize global stability. On September 4, 2019, Dr. Ezra Vogel presented his findings on how the history of Sino-Japanese relations informs the present, and on the need for a reset for the future. Professor Ezra F. Vogel is the Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences Emeritus at Harvard University. He has had a long association with Harvard, receiving his Ph.D. in sociology there in 1958, and then teaching at the university from 1967 to 2000. In 1973, Dr. Vogel succeeded John Fairbank to become the second director of Harvard’s East Asian Research Center. He also served as director of the U.S.-Japan Program, director of the Fairbank Center, and founding director of the Asia Center. He was also director of the undergraduate concentration in East Asian Studies from its inception in 1972 until 1991. He taught courses on Chinese society, Japanese society, and industrial East Asia. From 1993 to 1995, Dr. Vogel took a two-year leave of absence from Harvard to serve as the National Intelligence Officer for East Asia at the national intelligence council in Washington. In 1996 he chaired the American Assembly on China and edited the resulting volume, Living With China. The following year, Dr. Vogel began serving on the board of directors of the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations. He rotated off in 2002 after serving two terms. His book Japan As Number One (1979), in Japanese translation, became a bestseller in Japan, and his book Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China (2011), in Chinese translation, became a bestseller in China. Among his other works are Japan's New Middle Class (1963), Canton Under Communism (1969), Comeback (1988), One Step Ahead in China: Guangdong Under Reform (1989), and The Four Little Dragons: The Spread of Industrialization in East Asia (1991). Professor Vogel has spent a total of more than five years in Asia conducting research. He lectures frequently in Asia, in both Chinese and Japanese as well as English. He directs a weekly speaker series for the Fairbank Center on “Critical Issues Confronting China.” He has received numerous honors, including eleven honorary degrees.

Speaker: Ezra Vogel, Author; Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences Emeritus, Harvard University With brief presentations by: Richard Dyck, former President, Teredyne, Japan Paula Harrell, School of Continuing Studies, Georgetown University Moderator: Elizabeth Perry, Henry Rosovsky Professor of Government; Director, Harvard-Yenching Institute Sponsored by the Harvard University Asia Center. Co-sponsored by the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies, the Harvard-Yenching Institute; the Program on U.S.-Japan Relations Read and download the transcript for this event on our website: https://fairbank.fas.harvard.edu/events/ezra-vogel-china-and-japan-facing-history/

If you enjoyed ‘Now’ Ep 13 with Susan Thorton – and I am sure you did - I expect you equally will enjoy this podcast with Michael Swaine. Michael was central to the preparation and publication of ‘China is not an Enemy’, the Open Letter in the Washington Post (WP) by Michael, Susan and their colleagues Taylor Fravel, J. Stapleton Roy and Ezra Vogel. With Michael we not only explore the reasons for this Open Letter but look at the various publications and views out of Washington that this Open Letter takes on. Michael responds to views expressed by WPs John Pomfret, former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley and Kurt Campbell and Jake Sullivan, former officials of the Obama Administration that declared ‘engagement’ with China ‘dead’. Michael Swaine is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a prominent American analyst in Chinese security studies. Formerly a senior policy analyst at the RAND Corporation, Swaine is a specialist in Chinese defense and foreign policy, US-China relations, and East Asian international relations. He has authored and edited more than a dozen books and monographs and many journal articles and book chapters on US-China relations.

On July 3rd, 5 principals published a Scholars’ and Experts’ letter (Letter) in the Washington Post (WP) entitled ‘China is not an enemy’. Taylor Fravel, J. Stapleton Roy, Michael D Swaine, Ezra Vogel and Susan Thornton were the five who shepherded the letter to publication in the Opinion section of the WP. The Letter raised a fair degree of notice as it pushed back against those in the Community and in the U.S. Administration, who urged support for the Trump China policy including support for the current U.S.-China Trade War. This podcast with Susan was designed to understand how the principals came to consensus over the content of the Letter, the objectives of the Letter - its 7 propositions and what might be a better U.S. policy toward China. Susan is currently a Visiting Lecturer in Law at Yale Law School and Senior Fellow at the Paul Tsai China Center. Thornton was a career diplomat who worked at the United States State Department. She served as the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for East Asian Affairs from 2016 to 2018 and before that she worked as the Deputy Chief of Mission to the United States Embassy in Turkmenistan. In leadership roles in Washington, Thornton worked on China and Korea policy, including stabilizing relations with Taiwan, the U.S.-China Cyber Agreement, the Paris Climate Accord and led a successful negotiation in Pyongyang for monitoring of the Agreed Framework on denuclearization

The Washington Post recently published an open letter signed by five scholars and former government officials: M. Taylor Fravel, Stapleton Roy, Michael Swaine, Susan Thornton, and Ezra Vogel. The letter laid out seven main arguments for why the U.S. should not treat China as an enemy, and not surprisingly, the letter got a lot of pushback from more hawkish China-watchers. This week on Sinica, Kaiser and Jeremy talk to Michael Swaine, the primary author of the open letter, about the origins and intentions of the letter and the reactions to it. Michael is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.   What to listen for on this week’s Sinica Podcast:   17:40: Michael expands on a point highlighted in the letter that was met with criticism from the wider community — “We do not believe Beijing is an economic enemy or an existential national security threat that must be confronted in every sphere” — which he says was “in part intended to try to get at [the] point that [China] is not a predatory economic entity, as the White House tends to describe it.” He acknowledges economic malfeasance by China, but pushes back on prevailing opinions on Pennsylvania Avenue regarding China’s approach to trade with the United States, noting that “of course, it’s based upon this one-dimensional, categorical, hair-on-fire notion that the Chinese are this predatory economic entity that’s out to screw everybody except themselves. It’s a fundamentally cartoonish depiction of what China is.”   27:27: What do Chinese leaders think of the United States leadership and its change of posture in the past few years? Michael speculates on where he thinks the Chinese bureaucracy’s mind is regarding foreign policy, arguing that, while there may be two highly polarized parties on either end of the spectrum, Xi Jinping lies somewhere between the two: “Xi Jinping may actually be in that middle ground, not in terms of domestic policy, but in terms of foreign policy. That is to say, he recognizes, or he thinks that, China can’t get out of the world, it can’t un-integrate from the world, it’s got to keep on trying to work with the world. And there are very concrete reasons why the United States and China, even though they may not like each other in terms of values and such, they have to cooperate.”   He goes on to explain the shock that the leadership felt from the policy shifts after the 2016 election: “The Chinese leadership were taken aback by the rapidity and the extremity of the shift in the Trump administration against China. They didn’t quite expect it. They didn’t see it coming.”   36:52: What of the U.S.-China relationship beyond the current era of Trump? What should U.S. policymakers and interlocutors be articulating to their counterparts in Beijing? Michael provides his view: “We from China, a country with whom we can engage on issues that are vital to both countries and the world, we want a China whose interests are going to be supportive of continued global economic growth and development, and we want a China who is not bellicose or intimidating, through military arms, its neighbors…and that it needs to work with other parts of the international order in order to establish a more common approach to these security issues, economic issues, et cetera,”   46:05: What is the most effective approach in the U.S.-China relationship? Has the West “created a monster,” as described by Janos Kornai in a recent Financial Times article, or is there a case for reciprocity? Michael says that we “need to implement policies that are more based upon the idea of mutual accommodation,” and emphasizes the “problematic” view that “there is no such thing as mutual accommodation with the Chinese, because the Chinese will take what you give and they will pocket it and give you absolutely nothing in return.” He adds, “I think the historical record does not support that.”   Recommendations:   Jeremy: Read the letter ‘China is not an enemy’ in the Washington Post.   Michael: Check out the exhibit on the pre-Raphaelites in the United States, located in the National Gallery in Washington, or just check out some art in general.   Kaiser: The music of Anais Mitchell, a folk singer/songwriter, and the musical author behind the musical Hadestown.  

As President Trump returns from his first visit to China as Commander-in-Chief, how is U.S. foreign policy reacting to a new administration in Washington and a new rising power in Beijing? The Harvard Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation present Ambassador and Harvard Kennedy School Professor Nicholas Burns, in conversation with Jeeyang Rhee Baum, Ezra Vogel, and Odd Arne Westad, moderated by Michael Szonyi. Speaker: Ambassador (Ret.) Nicholas Burns, Roy and Barbara Goodman Family Professor of the Practice of Diplomacy and International Relations, Harvard Kennedy School; Former U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Discussants: Ezra Vogel, Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences Emeritus, Harvard University Odd Arne Westad, S.T. Lee Professor of U.S.-Asia Relations, Harvard Kennedy School Jeeyang Rhee Baum, Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School Moderator: Michael Szonyi, Director, Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and Professor of Chinese History This event was sponsored by Harvard’s Ash Center for Democratic Governance, and the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies.

The world is moving faster than ever, and democracies are struggling to keep up. Meanwhile, China's rise has been facilitated by the heavy hand of its one-party leadership. In a conversation moderated by Zócalo California editor Joe Mathews, Deng Xiaoping biographer Ezra Vogel, attorney and activist Christine Pelosi, and civic participation expert Janice Thomson discuss whether the EU and the U.S. could use a little more authoritarianism.

Perhaps no person in the 20th century affected more people or had a greater long-term impact on world history than Deng Xiaoping. Drawing from his latest book, Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China, award-winning social scientist Ezra Vogel argues that the economic reforms instituted by the Chinese leader resulted in more people rising out of poverty than in any other period. Presiding over unprecedented economic expansion and engagement with the West, but also the authoritarian crackdown in Tiananmen Square, Deng was single-minded in his drive to modernize his county. Called "a masterful new history of China's reform era" by the Washington Post, Vogel's 2011 accounting of the parallel rise of Deng and the world's second-biggest economy provides the basis of the lecture.

Today we conclude our eight-part overview of Dr. Ezra Vogel’s recent biography of Deng Xiaoping. In this installment, we focus on Deng’s dramatic and brilliant Southern Tour of January-February 1992.

Today we conclude our eight-part overview of Dr. Ezra Vogel's recent biography of Deng Xiaoping. In this installment we focus on Deng's dramatic and brilliant Southern Tour of January-February 1992. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

After a holiday delay, Laszlo is back with the 7th and almost final episode of our overview of Ezra Vogel's new biography of Deng. In this episode we look at the meat and potatoes of the Reform years from 1979 to 1989. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ezra Vogel has published hugely influential books on both China and Japan. In his latest, he examines the key role played by Deng Xiaoping in moving China away from a thoroughly planned economy, a transition that required becoming much more open and engaged with the rest of the world. In his Nov. 9, 2011 presentation at the USC U.S.-China Institute, Vogel focused on how Deng's foreign policies were very much driven by his assessment of the desperate need China had for better trained personnel, foreign capital, and foreign technology. Distinguished Harvard sociologist Ezra Vogel offers his assessment of Deng's leadership. J. Stapleton Roy, former ambassador to China, wrote of Vogel's book, "Deng Xiaoping's skill, vision, and courage in overcoming seemingly insuperable obstacles and guiding China onto the path of sustained economic development rank him with the great leaders of history. And yet, too little is known about the life and career of this extraordinary man. In this superbly researched and highly readable biography, Vogel has definitively filled this void. This fascinating book provides a host of insights into the factors that enabled Deng to triumph over repeated setbacks and lay the basis for China to regain the wealth and power that has eluded it for two centuries." Ezra Vogel is professor emeritus of sociology at Harvard University where he taught 1964-2000. He is one of the most influential scholars of East Asia, contributing vital books on China and Japan. His China-focused titles include Canton Under Communism (1969) and One Step Ahead in China: Guangdong Under Reform (1989). His books on Japan include Japan's New Middle Class (1963), Japan as Number One: Lessons for America (1979), and Is Japan Still Number One? (2000). In addition to these seminal works, Vogel has edited a number of others, including Living with China : U.S./China Relations in the Twenty-First Century (1997). Professor Vogel is a member of the USC US-China Institute Board of Scholars. The event was co-sponsored by The Pacific Council on International Policy.

Ezra Vogel has published hugely influential books on both China and Japan. In his latest, he examines the key role played by Deng Xiaoping in moving China away from a thoroughly planned economy, a transition that required becoming much more open and engaged with the rest of the world. In his Nov. 9, 2011 presentation at the USC U.S.-China Institute, Vogel focused on how Deng's foreign policies were very much driven by his assessment of the desperate need China had for better trained personnel, foreign capital, and foreign technology. Distinguished Harvard sociologist Ezra Vogel offers his assessment of Deng's leadership. J. Stapleton Roy, former ambassador to China, wrote of Vogel's book, "Deng Xiaoping's skill, vision, and courage in overcoming seemingly insuperable obstacles and guiding China onto the path of sustained economic development rank him with the great leaders of history. And yet, too little is known about the life and career of this extraordinary man. In this superbly researched and highly readable biography, Vogel has definitively filled this void. This fascinating book provides a host of insights into the factors that enabled Deng to triumph over repeated setbacks and lay the basis for China to regain the wealth and power that has eluded it for two centuries." Ezra Vogel is professor emeritus of sociology at Harvard University where he taught 1964-2000. He is one of the most influential scholars of East Asia, contributing vital books on China and Japan. His China-focused titles include Canton Under Communism (1969) and One Step Ahead in China: Guangdong Under Reform (1989). His books on Japan include Japan's New Middle Class (1963), Japan as Number One: Lessons for America (1979), and Is Japan Still Number One? (2000). In addition to these seminal works, Vogel has edited a number of others, including Living with China : U.S./China Relations in the Twenty-First Century (1997). Professor Vogel is a member of the USC US-China Institute Board of Scholars. The event was co-sponsored by The Pacific Council on International Policy.

Laszlo is happily back in Cali with a new episode that looks at the early years of Deng Xiaoping. Most of the narrative is based on passages gleaned from Ezra Vogel's new biography of The Great One.  Inspired by the events of May Fourth, 1919, Deng Xiaoping was a lifelong revolutionary and by the end of his days had personally seen to it that China ended up the nation it was meant to be on the world stage.  In this multi-part series on the life of Deng Xiaoping, we'll trace his life, all the triumphs as well as the tragedies. We'll look at why he is lionized as one of the greatest 20th-century world leaders and also why some have vilified Deng for his actions. His life itself is an interesting prism from which to view 20th century China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Laszlo is happily back in Cali with a new episode that looks at the early years of Deng Xiaoping. Most of the narrative is based on passages gleaned from Ezra Vogel’s new biography of The Great One.