Gideon Rachman is the Chief Foreign Affairs Commentator for the Financial Times, a renowned author, and winner of the Orwell Prize for Political Journalism. In this episode, Gideon talks about how he got to where he is now, and how he ended up at The Financial Times.
00:00:16.300And this is the show for you if you're bored of people arguing on the internet about subjects they know nothing about.
00:00:22.840At Trigonometry, we don't pretend to be experts, we ask the experts.
00:00:26.980We're here at the world-famous Angel Comedy Club and our amazing expert guest this week is Gideon Rachman,
00:00:34.140who's the Chief Foreign Affairs Commentator for the Financial Times, a renowned author and winner of the Orwell Prize for Political Journalism.
00:00:41.860Gideon Rachman, welcome to Trigonometry.
00:01:10.700So, well, I was born in London, but my parents were South Africans, South African Jews, and their parents had been Lithuanian, Latvian.
00:01:19.180So it's a kind of typical immigrant story.
00:01:21.760There was a whole bunch of Lithuanian, Latvian Jews who, I think, intended to go to America and gone on the wrong boat, end up in South Africa.
00:02:44.760Yeah, so then, so that then meant that I wasn't quite kind of focused about sort of getting the right things on my CV, editing the student paper, da-da-da-da-da.
00:02:54.560And then I got a job at the BBC World Service when I left, which was like the biggest fringe element of the BBC.
00:03:01.680You know, I got rejected for the mainstream bit of the BBC, for ITN, for Reuters, et cetera.
00:03:05.760I eventually got the last thing and did that for a while.
00:03:09.180And actually, that was good because it made, although it was the most obscure bit of the BBC, it was concerned with international affairs.
00:03:15.100And so that got me interested in not doing domestic politics, but looking at the wider world.
00:03:20.180And then, for a mixture of sort of personal and professional reasons, decided to leave the BBC and go freelance and go to Washington.
00:03:27.720The personal bit was my girlfriend, then now wife, was studying at Georgetown, so I wanted to be with her.
00:03:33.900And also, I wanted to get to America and I wanted to be in print.
00:03:35.800And then, you know, a couple of lucky breaks along the way.
00:03:38.940So the paper I went mainly to write for went bankrupt after 18 months.
00:03:42.960It was a paper called The Sunday Correspondent.
00:03:45.120And I kind of, in the moment of desperation, picked up the phone and just rang everybody I knew and said,
00:04:27.280And so the boom in Southeast Asia had happened and the boom in China was just beginning.
00:04:33.700And although Thailand's actually a few hours' flight from China, it's a very powerful ethnic Chinese business community who were very tuned into what was going on.
00:04:42.120So I quite quickly got interested in this, what was clearly kind of world-changing development.
00:04:48.200And it was the right time to get interested in it because it's something I then followed for like 20 years on.
00:06:43.480But he's certainly given himself the ability to do it.
00:06:46.240They've changed the Chinese constitution.
00:06:47.660And the Chinese, you know, although they never said that we will become democratic, they did say, or the kind of official line you would hear in Beijing is,
00:06:58.360well, we've solved the problem of succession that, you know, the problem with, obviously, what authoritarian countries keep running into is eventually you get a sort of Stalin or a Mao
00:07:06.320who just sits there and screws the whole place up, and it's a disaster.
00:07:09.420And they said, no, we have got a collective leadership now of the Communist Party, and the leader will change every eight years.
00:07:17.580We had, you know, Deng step down, and then you had Jiang Zemin for eight years, and then he stepped down, and then Hu Jintao for eight years.
00:07:34.160But in fact, a lot of Chinese liberals, and they exist, you know, are dismayed, really dismayed, because they sort of are very worried about the direction the country is going now.
00:07:45.800But equally, and quite sinisterly for us, and it comes back to the question you asked, well, does this begin to affect us?
00:07:51.060One of the ways that Xi Jinping is consolidating power is by stoking up nationalism and saying, you know, China's strong again, we're standing up for ourselves, we're going to reclaim these territories we should have had.
00:08:07.200And, you know, they're not as dangerous or as aggressive as the Russians in their behavior, I think partly because they're playing a longer game.
00:08:15.520I think mine, sort of one of the ways I read Russian behavior is they feel like a knife's at their throat and that they've got to do anything, whatever.
00:08:23.880I mean, I don't agree with their assessment, but that's their sort of view.
00:08:27.260I think the Chinese feel on the rather differently, that they're in the ascendancy and they're not going to screw it up.
00:08:33.580So by frightening the West too much, they're just going to gradually build up a position of strength.
00:08:38.860Now, Trump's really disrupted that by the trade war he's declared because just as we assumed that China would become democratic, wrongly, they maybe not assumed but certainly hoped and built their policy around the idea that the West would keep its markets open because, you know, whatever.
00:09:00.060That we either genuinely believed in globalization or that the mutual economic interests would persuade everyone to do that.
00:09:07.240And now Trump's come in and said, you know what, I'm going to slap tariffs on steel and aluminum.
00:09:11.180I'm going to block you on intellectual property and so on.
00:09:13.980And how China responds to that is going to be a big, big story in the next five to ten years because I think it's potentially kind of dangerous.
00:09:22.100Of course, I don't buy the idea that free trade guarantees peace, but it creates an intersection of interest, which makes it much less likely that countries will start, you know, going to war.
00:09:33.840Therefore, if the Chinese feel actually now the Americans are trying to take down their economy in some way, there's much less incentive for them to say go easy in the South China Sea, for example, which the Americans still regard as their American lake, as some American guy put it to me in the Pentagon.
00:09:55.820Yeah, but it's a curious thing because if you remember Kilconomics last year, you remember Harold Malgram, who's the father of one of our future guests, Pippa Malgram.
00:10:05.680He was talking about the fact that he felt that Obama was weak on the South China Sea.
00:10:11.980And what he was talking about is basically the Americans can see through the satellites exactly what's happening there.
00:10:17.300And the Chinese would incrementally step up their presence.
00:10:20.660They would see that there was no response, even though they knew that the Americans had seen what was happening.
00:10:24.780And what we're what we're now seeing is an emboldened China as a result of Obama's presence.
00:10:29.380Well, you know, so many different. He's right to a degree, but I don't think Obama would have been correct to challenge them.
00:10:35.680But there's a different there are different ways of looking at it.
00:10:38.340He's right. What he's right about is that the Chinese did it very cleverly because they moved incrementally.
00:10:44.780And each little step would not be enough to confront them on.
00:10:49.280And I remember talking to an Obama guy who was who was following all this and he was, you know, senior Asia advisor who said to me, you know, how am I meant to there was the time they were worrying about something called the second Thomas Shoal, which is something that the Philippines used to reassert their claims.
00:11:09.840Anyway, it's a sunken ship, which they resupply as a way of saying, you know, this bit of water is Filipino.
00:11:16.280And they were that they the Americans were worried that the Chinese were going to sink the ship or something crazy like that.
00:11:22.000Anyway, this guy said to me, how am I meant to go and tell the president that he should risk a war with China over a sunken battleship in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, which is underwater half the time?
00:11:32.120He's not going to do it. And he's right not to do it.
00:11:34.760But so what the Chinese did was over time, advance, advance, advance.
00:11:39.740And each little step creates sort of facts in the water.
00:11:42.040But then I think there's a broader question of, well, you know, are they you know, you said wonderfully arrogant comment, American Lake.
00:11:48.980Yeah, maybe maybe the Americans should just say, you know what, we have dominated the Pacific since 1945, but China's rising.
00:11:55.940It's not going to be like that anymore. And we should come to some sort of tacit agreement with them about or maybe even explicit agreement about spheres of influence and so on.
00:12:06.160Because otherwise, the only other way to stop that is to eventually have a war with them. And we're not up for that.
00:12:10.280So I don't. That's the debate that's got to be had, really.
00:12:15.020But what I find quite fascinating about China is this.
00:12:18.400Like, for instance, my mother's from Venezuela, which is a communist country in inverted commas.
00:12:22.940And China is a communist country. But having been to China, it's in many ways the most consumerist capitalist society that I've ever encountered in my life.
00:12:32.380I mean, could you explain that dichotomy a little bit for us as to how you can be both communist and, you know, have a Gucci bag on you?
00:12:40.500Yeah, well, that's that's that's their genius.
00:12:42.420But no, look, I would say they're communist only politically now in the sense that they or even Leninist, that they believe in a one party state with a sort of communist party structure, which is a very real thing.
00:12:58.080So that, you know, that in universities, for example, the communist party operates, ambitious students will join the communist party organization, companies will have a communist party member on the board.
00:13:12.260You know, it's it's it's it's a thing.
00:13:13.940But it's a it's a mechanism of political control rather than an economic system anymore.
00:13:22.200And I think that there are probably still vestiges of the sense that, well, we're doing it for the people.
00:13:28.880You hear that in, say, she's rhetoric about their greatest claim is how many people they've lifted out of poverty.
00:13:35.740Hundreds of millions, they will say. And I think the World Bank would agree.
00:13:38.380And they'll so that's sort of communism by other means, communism by capitalist means, but trying to create more wealth.
00:13:47.240And so, you know, I don't think they're completely cynical, but but I would say they're communist primarily in political terms.
00:14:03.560So I guess what we'll start with is Trump is in power at the moment.
00:14:07.460And Russia are behaving like a supervillain in a cheap airport novel.
00:14:11.820And we have Kim Jong-un in charge of North Korea.
00:14:16.160Is the world coming to the end or is this how it's always been?
00:14:20.060It's definitely not how it's always been.
00:14:21.900I mean, it feels like a very strange time.
00:14:25.500I mean, I guess for me, the defining period of my sort of adult life, journalistic career was 1989.
00:14:31.920You know, the fall of the Berlin Wall and so on.
00:14:33.420And that marked the end of a period that I'd grown up in, the Cold War.
00:14:37.080And then really, I'd say from 89 to 2008, there was a sort of continuity.
00:14:42.040We felt like, you know, famously Fukuyama said there was the end of history, even if that's a bit of an overstatement.
00:14:47.280But that the Western ideas had triumphed.
00:15:26.720I mean, it would have been unimaginable, really, until very recently, that somebody like Donald Trump could become president of the United States.
00:15:34.960Mainly, actually, because of his personal style, which I think sends a very negative political message.
00:15:39.200But also, he is reversing all sorts of kind of shibboleths of American foreign policy about free trade, whatever.
00:15:46.180And then I think there's also a wider rot in the West.
00:15:49.420I mean, I think that the whole connection between Brexit and Trump is a complicated one.
00:15:53.400But there is some sort of connection in the sense of discontent that fired it.
00:15:57.660But equally, if you look in Europe, I mean, the politics of countries that seem relatively stable to quite recently, Spain, Italy, looking really dodgy.
00:16:06.420And in Eastern Europe, countries that we thought, OK, they've joined the democratic camp, pretty solid now.
00:16:12.440Hungary is really, I think, slipping away from democracy.
00:16:17.300And then finally, you've got this, I think, sense in the West, which maybe is sort of loosely connected to what's going on generally,
00:16:24.400that our period as the dominant bloc in the world, Europe and the US, is coming to a close.
00:16:31.780You've got the rise of a new power in China, which is now, by some measures, the largest economy in the world.
00:16:36.860You've got a much more assertive India.
00:16:38.140And in themselves, those needn't be threatening things.
00:16:42.680But China does, is not a democracy, is in a way a kind of wounded country, which has a lot of, you know, wants to put behind what it calls itself,
00:16:52.660the century of humiliation and feels that it was humiliated by the West.
00:16:56.380So there's a shift of economic and political power as well, which I think in itself would be destabilizing.
00:28:14.860Like, the only – I mean, I like to say, you know, Clinton's frightfully well.
00:28:17.700I don't, but there was – the only time I've ever sat in a room with Hillary Clinton for an extended period was, oddly enough – it's a complicated story.
00:28:28.080But I ended up watching the Women's World Cup final with her in her hotel room in Greece.
00:28:32.740And with a bunch of, like, her entourage and, you know, people who were traveling with her.