Dr. Josef Braml. Photo:Feng Xuejun/People's Daily

Berlin(People's Daily)- Dr. Josef Braml, the editor-in-chief of the DGAP (German Council on Foreign Relations) Yearbook, has been a resident fellow of the Transatlantic Relations program for the past 11 years. As an expert in transatlantic relations and American views on world order, comparative governance studies like German and US political systems, Dr. Braml shares his observations on the past year and forecasts the coming year with People’s Daily.  

(Q: People's Daily, A: Dr. Josef Braml)

Q: Is a multi-polar world developing? What is your view? Some people claim the international powers are more balanced. Do you agree? 

A: I'm not sure whether it's going to stay a multi-polar world. I see a new confrontation between the US and China. There may be a new bipolarity; we can already see signs. 

We experienced a brief liberal internationalist order. America was leading this West rule-based system, but America has been too weak to uphold the order, which has become clear for some time now. Barack Obama was too weak to enforce the order. It wasn't Barack Obama; it wasn't America, it was the leadership. That leadership is now under Donald Trump, and America is strong enough to destroy what it has started because Trump’s America thinks these are free-riding problems. China and Germany can wait and watch.  

It had become clear that there is a zero-sum thinking in the US, when Donald Trump said, “America has to win,” and it can only win if others lose. This is zero-sum thinking. This is not win-win. 

Trump made it clear in his inaugural speech, and precisely at the same time, Chinese leader Xi Jinping defended the liberal order in Davos. Let's see whether China can step up and uphold this liberal internationalist order. It is on the way; it started with the Belt and Road initiative. But we will have to see whether it benefits others. And the Chinese authorities claim it is win-win. It will be harmonious. It would be necessary because Germany depends on this liberal internationalist order. Germany has to be stronger in Europe so that Europe can be stronger. To uphold this liberal internationalist order is especially important if you want free trade. It’s important when you want to keep your political system, be it in Europe or China or elsewhere. 

I was very impressed by how many foreign press offices attended the Media Cooperation Forum for the Belt and Road held by People's Daily over the last two years. That's because of Chinese soft power. Chinese officials obviously realized that it's not only about hard power, but it's also about soft power. It’s how you portray your image, how you explain your plans to the world. For this I would say, it's not only necessary to convince the media, but you also need think tanks because most of the time the press consumes what think tanks are portraying. But I also understand that in China the think tank business has been excellent. That's probably the most exciting part of this Belt and Road initiative. China also tries to portray this image and convince the minds and hearts of the people. 

Q: Recently, former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said that there were some Chinese who considered America's decline to be unavoidable, while on the US side, some thought a confrontation with China would be inevitable. Kissinger warned that if the two superpowers went to war against each other, it would be catastrophic, and worse than World War I. 

A: I also see a rising confrontation between the US and China. It’s great that Henry Kissinger also sees it, because his voice will be heard. I hope we will have good leadership on both sides to promote the relationship. We can win if we cooperate. We do have problems. Think about climate change and other things that may doom not only political regimes but also mankind. If we do not come to terms, and we have limited time, we may be in trouble. 

Q: Martin Schulz, the German Social Democratic Party (SPD) leader, calls for a United States of Europe by 2025. What do you think of the future of EU? 

A: There has been much talk about the European Union, which is necessary. We also need a political union. We have been talking about that for a long time. But now it is severe. The Americans say never waste a good crisis. We do have a real crisis. We are challenged not only from Vladimir Putin who is challenging the European order but are also challenged by the US. Donald Trump wants to divide Europe. We have two significant threats. We need to unite because it's the only way. I would like to say it not only benefits a single country but the world. We have shown the world what Europe can do when it's not united, when it's playing against each other. Maybe we can also be an example of what can happen if you let nationalism rise. It's not only relevant in Europe. I understand in Asia there's also nationalism, both in China and Japan and in other countries. And you know what's going to happen if you don't have a cool head and you let emotions rise. 

Q: What were the major security challenges faced by the world in 2017? Were there changes to regional hot issues? 

A: We still have the same old security dilemma: people think they can be more secure if they distrust others and engage in an arms race. But we should have learned from history; you can only be secure if you cooperate, and not work against each other. 

Q: In 2017, were the terrorist attacks on Western countries more frequent? And has the threat of terrorism grown? How do you evaluate the global performance in combating terrorism? 

A: There are two ways to look at the threat of terrorism. If you are emotional, you will believe this is a real threat. This is a significant threat portrayed by the media. If you are rational, you understand it's more likely that you will die in your bathtub than through an act of terrorism. You are more likely to die on a German highway than by an act of terrorism. That's a rational approach. Understand that people are not rational, and policymakers have to cope with the irrationality of people. Sometimes policymakers abuse irrationality for their own gains. Like what has happened before, may happen in the future. 

Q: In the non-traditional fields of security, what are the new changes to climate change and cybersecurity? 

A: I have difficulty distinguishing between traditional and non-traditional security issues. For example, climate change. When countries are threatened with disappearing resources, I guess I will say it's traditional because it has happened in the past. We have to understand that due to climate change we have people fighting against each other over resources. Climate change, as some people would have it, is traditional warfare. So, we have to be clear, those elements are already failing, and will threaten mankind if we are not careful. It may threaten the political system in China when you look at the climate. All the issues you have when people are already afraid for their children and others. That may produce an uphill battle no policymaker can control. So, people should be wise to take this very seriously. 

Q: What do you think of the relationship between Germany, the US and China? 

A: Germany is in a position between the US and China. It wants to create bonds with both countries. In fact, the biggest trading partner for Germany is China. Before China, it was US. If there were a confrontation between the US and China, Germany would suffer heavily. So, if elephants go to war, most likely an economic war, the grass tends to suffer. We are in between, and we would be very wise to play a mediating role to tell both superpowers what can happen. We are a good example due to our history of what can happen if people don't think beyond their own pocket.