There are areas that China simply cannot reach, and one of them is finance. China's financial sector cannot disregard Western capital and expect to achieve anything significant. It feels like the atmosphere is reminiscent of the 2020 elections, where Trump, as the sitting president, did not concede. If a similar situation occurs this time, we may face civil unrest. If there is a third scenario, the likelihood that Xi Jinping will take action regarding Taiwan is very high. 

How do you view the current state of the U.S.-China hegemonic war? The term U.S.-China hegemonic war itself might be slightly misphrased. No matter how much China claims to be a G2, it is not a viable power to contend with the U.S. on a global stage. It is not on the same level as Germany and the UK during World War I. However, in the Pacific region and South China Sea, China can definitely be considered a G2.

In terms of the situation, there is currently a reconfiguration of the order between the US and China taking place. To put it bluntly, the US's response to the challenge posed by China is its strategy of containment, which is ongoing. This is causing various difficulties for China. While it is often said that China is ahead in areas like manufacturing and AI, there are certain domains where it is absolutely unable to catch up. What could that be? This is where China is currently struggling, and that area is finance. In Chinese finance, it cannot disregard Western capital and expect to make any significant progress. This is what we are seeing in the Hongda crisis and the real estate issues; they are all interconnected. This raises the question that the late President YS of our country once posed: why does Japan behave in such a way?

We shouldn't provoke Japan like that. Although they may seem gentle, they have a history of being fierce. They appear calm now, but there must be something behind that demeanor. They are sharpening their knives. They only showed us their true colors once, during the foreign exchange crisis. At that time, our country was in a very urgent situation on a weekly basis. Normally, Japan would lend us money when we asked for it. That's how our relationship has been. However, we are not a country that feels grateful to Japan, right? It’s fortunate if we don’t have to criticize them. Back then, YS made comments that stirred up the situation, and Japan was very agitated about the money. They delayed lending it to us for a week, but eventually, they went bankrupt and couldn’t provide the funds. So, there is a perspective that if Suga hadn't spoken in that manner, things might have been different, and I agree with that to a significant extent. The words of a national leader should carry weight.

Location is important. That's why people from our country and Japan view Japan's status through its soccer ranking. The soccer ranking has risen significantly, and soon we may find ourselves facing an opponent that we cannot easily overcome. Japan has a certain status, especially in finance; it is an impressive country. It has one of the highest amounts of government bonds issued relative to its GDP, and there is no risk of default. This is because the Japanese people buy them. Many of Japan's wealthy individuals are descendants of traditional aristocrats, and they possess a sense of patriotism that is fundamentally different from ours. So when the government issues bonds, they buy them, even covering potential losses. Therefore, Japanese bonds are primarily purchased domestically rather than by foreign investors. This is a significant strength for Japan. Similarly, no matter what China tries to do, it cannot easily compete.

There are some counterparts that do not exist. In the Western context, if President Xi Jinping had acted a little differently, I would have finished explaining everything by now. There were things that could have been done invisibly through finance, but they haven't been done. So we continue to face the visible real estate crisis. The crisis will keep coming. What are the geopolitical risks and challenges that China has to address? They cannot resolve them. China is a country that is very unfortunate geopolitically. Therefore, we don't need to worry about China, but geopolitical studies are conducted with the United States in mind. Compared to the U.S., China faces significant geopolitical challenges. This is because among the neighboring countries that share borders with the U.S., there are no nuclear-armed nations. Canada has no nuclear weapons, and Mexico has none either. However, China has five nuclear-armed neighbors, including North Korea.

Russia, Pakistan, India, and Iran—these countries do not share borders, but there’s another aspect to consider. Anyway, the surrounding areas are all in conflict, and the sea is blocked for expansion. If you look at the map, China must have Taiwan to advance into the South Pacific. Without it, they are trapped. The South China Sea may seem vast, but it is surrounded by islands, creating a confined maritime space. Therefore, China does not have advantageous geopolitical conditions compared to the United States. However, geopolitics is such that countries cannot simply relocate, so we must continue to coexist with China. From China's perspective, there is no way to overcome this geopolitical crisis. How likely do you think a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is? That could be extremely risky, as has been discussed recently through platforms like YouTube.

Experts in the field gathered to work on a book that was planned to be published on the very day the U.S. presidential election concluded. They didn't come together to write the book; instead, each brought their presentation materials to share. The book, along with the YouTube content, was set to be released simultaneously. On Day 1, it was a bit of an adventure. If Trump were to win, the content would align with Trump; if Harris won, it would align with Harris. However, I was focused on Bitcoin. At that time, Harris did not have any policies. The attention was on whether Trump would win or whether Truss would emerge as a contender. Have you ever considered the possibility of a third option? Let me outline a scenario for you regarding this third possibility. This is what it looks like: the atmosphere would be similar to the 2020 election, where on that day, during the vote counting, Trump was in the lead.

It was a situation where Trump was present while Biden was giving a speech about mathematics. However, Biden asked everyone to wait a little longer, and I want to clarify that I am not supporting any conspiracy theories; I am just stating facts. Several swing states flipped, and that is a fact. This is referred to as the Biden peak. After the Biden spike in votes, he started to emerge, and several states turned over, including Nevada, which recently ruled that it was a fraudulent election. In that atmosphere, you know that Trump, as the sitting president, did not concede. Inside the Capitol, everyone gathered in front of the Congress, and the crowd came to the Capitol. If something similar happens again, we could be heading towards a civil war. This is a third scenario. If there is a third scenario, the possibility that Xi Jinping will take action against Taiwan is very high.

There are three to four scenarios left. When I mentioned this, experts said they had never heard of it before. This is not something I made up; it has been discussed for five years in the war game scenarios contracted by the U.S. Department of Defense. They said the likelihood is low, but it does exist. So, we shouldn’t just think about whether Trump or Harris will win the U.S. presidential election. There is a possibility of a civil war. Whoever wins will not have an overwhelming victory, and if the election results are not accepted, the U.S. could enter a state of civil war. Since Americans have guns, if a civil war occurs, weapons will come out. This could lead to chaos and military deployment. If the U.S. is heading towards such a state of civil war, it won’t be able to send fleets to the South Pacific. The likelihood of this happening is quite high; I currently see it as over 10%. Normally, even a 1% chance of such a scenario should raise significant concerns.

Right now, at 10%, it may be subjective, but this is quite significant. Experts don't seem to worry about it. If China were to win the US-China hegemonic war, what kind of world order would be led by China? The possibility of that is almost nonexistent. I believe that China is unlikely to exert global influence in place of the United States. Nonetheless, China might take over US hegemony in the South Pacific region and could organize that area. In that case, we would have to give up a lot of the freedoms we currently enjoy, such as press freedom and voting rights. What is Korea's role in the current geopolitical situation? Well, I'm not a geopolitical expert, and I have no particular expertise in that area. I think those in charge will handle it as they see fit. So, don't worry too much; after all, it probably won't happen anyway.

There is no suspense at all. I clearly think that in terms of the mission issue, it will be more horrific than I expected. So, there is no suspense at all. However, we are a country that has a very unique fortune, so it's not that dark. Back in 2010, when I was deeply studying geopolitical issues, the reality of American realism was overwhelmingly focused on withdrawing from the South Pacific. To withdraw from the South Pacific means to give up on Korea. And Trump, who represents that stance, became president, which made me quite worried. But now, even among the two parties, and even from Trump's side, there seems to be a consensus that a rapid withdrawal of the U.S. from the South Pacific in order to counter China would not be beneficial for the U.S. According to recent surveys, Trump supporters have some views on Taiwan.

When China invaded Taiwan, the American public was asked whether troops should be sent. About 40% said they should be sent, while around 30% said they should absolutely not be sent, and another 30% were unsure. The percentages are higher for Harris, but weaker for Trump. The characteristic of those who are rallied around Trump is isolationism; they think, Let them handle it themselves. So, would Trump, thinking like his supporters, say to Xi Jinping about Taiwan, Okay, why didn't you go earlier, and now you have? I don't think he would. Interestingly, a similar poll showed that when it comes to global issues, Trump is less skilled, while Harris is slightly more skilled, and Harris wins by a narrow margin. However, in terms of details...

If you look into it, Trump is ahead in everything. This is a bit strange, but if you know how to read statistics, you understand what it means. Overall, health is fine, but if you dig a little deeper, Trump is winning in all areas. Especially in the swing states, it's said that Trump will respond better. Those people believe that the leadership is not like in the past, where it was clear that the U.S. would say to China, You stay in your place, and we will protect Taiwan, and so on. There used to be something called the Acheson Line. Back during the Korean War, the U.S. drew a line including Japan and Taiwan, stating that this area was vital to our national interests. However, Stalin in the Soviet Union and Mao in China misinterpreted this. They thought, Oh, so they are giving up on the Korean Peninsula.

This is the case that realists in international politics categorize American interests into vital interests, important interests, and just resources. While this categorization is realistic, it has its blind spots. The problem is that when you draw a line around vital interests, it creates a notion that everything else can be disregarded, which can actually lead to war. Therefore, even though the U.S. should be transparent in certain areas, ambiguity can be beneficial. When the opponent is making a judgment, they might wonder, If I take this, will the U.S. send troops or not? This uncertainty can deter them from taking action. For example, with Hitler, taking Czechoslovakia might have been ambiguous, but Poland was a different matter. In that case, he went ahead and took it. Thus, a clear signal can ironically provoke war.

But look at Trump; he seems clear, right? That’s Trump’s strength. The American people need to see that, especially in terms of geopolitics and international hegemony. When you look at Trump, it feels like he would hit back. Xi Jinping, go ahead and try Taiwan. In fact, during Trump's presidency, there were no wars. Once the Biden administration took over, look at what's happening in the Middle East and Ukraine. Americans are realizing that while Biden speaks softly, it actually doesn't help the global situation. That guy Trump, while he may speak harshly on Twitter, is actually bringing peace. That's what it is; he makes it hard for the opponent to predict his moves. I believe that if Trump is elected, Xi Jinping won't be able to dream about anything. It feels like he would really hit back. People say that if Trump is back in power, it might be better.

It seems that Taiwan could be a point of contention for negotiations, or perhaps it could be used ambiguously. If this happens, it could lead to a confrontation. This is because leaders like Trump have a charismatic type of authority, and they cannot tolerate any damage to their reputation. However, if he were to invade Taiwan, it would certainly tarnish his image. He would likely not accept that, and Xi Jinping probably understands this ambiguity. It seems that the public is starting to grasp this through their experiences. That said, it doesn't mean that Trump will become the next leader; it could happen, but it’s not certain. Interestingly, when delving into Trump's foreign policy, American citizens feel more at ease with the details. I would like to ask for a word for our viewers from Shin Saimdang. But right now, I need to talk about Bitcoin, and as I listen to the conversation…

I may seem like a great expert in geopolitics, but I'm really not. What I've done is organize the information I've studied in a way that's easy for you to understand. Now, in the midst of all this, what is Bitcoin? You need to understand that during geopolitical crises, Bitcoin's price tends to drop. Looking at past patterns, whenever a geopolitical crisis erupts, Bitcoin is usually the first to fall. This happens because it can be liquidated quickly and operates 24/7. However, as these geopolitical crises continue, the world's super-rich realize they need to hold onto valuable assets. At some point, this will shift. When that shift happens, if a banking crisis occurs, Bitcoin's price will definitely rise. There is no direct connection between a banking crisis and Bitcoin, but it has become ingrained in people's minds. So, when a bank...

If that's the case, I don't know about Bitcoin. Similarly, at some point, if a geopolitical crisis occurs, the price of Bitcoin will have been affected. However, for the time being, if a non-geopolitical crisis happens, Bitcoin tends to drop, while the dollar rises. Therefore, investing in Bitcoin is difficult; it shouldn't be taken lightly. Shall we discuss this a bit more?

"중국은 결국 전쟁 일으킨다" 현금 반드시 '여기로' 옮기세요 (오태민 작가 / 4부)

* 출연신청 & 제휴 및 광고문의 : ssid@dpnstud.io
