When Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called for a reset of bilateral relations with the US, a White House spokesperson replied that Washington saw the relationship as one of strong competition that required a position of strength. It is clear that US President Joe Biden’s administration is not simply reversing former US Donald Trump’s policies.
Citing Thucydides’ attribution of the Peloponnesian War to Sparta’s fear of a rising Athens, some analysts believe the US-China relationship is entering a period of conflict pitting an established hegemon against an increasingly powerful challenger.
I am not that pessimistic. In my view, economic and ecological interdependence reduces the probability of a real cold war, much less a hot one, because both countries have an incentive to cooperate in a number of areas. At the same time, miscalculation is always possible, and some see the danger of “sleepwalking” into catastrophe, as happened with World War I.
History is replete with cases of misperception about changing power balances. For example, when then-US president Richard Nixon visited China in 1972, he wanted to balance what he saw as a growing Soviet threat to a declining US. However, what Nixon interpreted as decline was really a return to normal of the US’ artificially high share of global output after World War II.
Nixon proclaimed multipolarity, but what followed was the end of the Soviet Union and the US’ unipolar moment two decades later. Today, some Chinese analysts underestimate the US’ resilience and predict Chinese dominance, but this, too, could turn out to be a dangerous miscalculation.
It is equally dangerous for Americans to over or underestimate Chinese power, and the US contains groups with economic and political incentives to do both. Measured in US dollars, the Chinese economy is about two-thirds the size of the US economy, but many economists expect China to surpass the US sometime in the 2030s, depending on what one assumes about Chinese and US growth rates.
Will US leaders acknowledge this change in a way that permits a constructive relationship, or will they succumb to fear? Will Chinese leaders take more risks, or will Chinese and Americans learn to cooperate in producing global public goods under a changing distribution of power?
Recall that Thucydides attributed the war that ripped apart the ancient Greek world to two causes: the rise of a new power, and the fear that this created in the established power. The second cause is as important as the first. The US and China must avoid exaggerated fears that could create a new cold or hot war.
Even if China surpasses the US to become the world’s largest economy, national income is not the only measure of geopolitical power. Beijing ranks well behind Washington in soft power, and US military expenditure is nearly four times that of China. While Chinese military capabilities have been increasing in the past few years, analysts who look carefully at the military balance conclude that China will not be able to exclude the US from the western Pacific.
On the other hand, the US was once the world’s largest trading economy and its largest bilateral lender. Today, nearly 100 countries count China as their largest trading partner, compared with 57 for the US. China plans to lend more than US$1 trillion for infrastructure projects with its Belt and Road Initiative over the next decade, while the US has cut back aid. China will gain economic power from the sheer size of its market, as well as its overseas investments and development assistance. China’s overall power relative to the US is likely to increase.
Nonetheless, balances of power are hard to judge. The US will retain some long-term power advantages that contrast with areas of Chinese vulnerability.
One is geography. The US is surrounded by oceans and neighbors that are likely to remain friendly. China has borders with 14 countries, and territorial disputes with India, Japan and Vietnam set limits on its hard and soft power.
Energy is another area where the US has an advantage. A decade ago, the US was dependent on imported energy, but the shale revolution transformed North America from an energy importer to exporter. At the same time, Beijing became more dependent on energy imports from the Middle East, which it must transport along sea routes that highlight its problematic relations with India.
The US also has demographic advantages. It is the only major developed nation that is projected to hold its global ranking (third) in terms of population. While the rate of US population growth has slowed in recent years, it would not turn negative, as in Russia, Europe and Japan. China, meanwhile, rightly fears “growing old before it grows rich.” India will soon overtake it as the most populous country, and its labor force peaked in 2015.
The US also remains at the forefront in key technologies (bio, nano, information) that are central to 21st-century economic growth. China is investing heavily in research and development, and competes well in some fields, but 15 of the world’s top 20 research universities are in the US; none is in China.
Those who proclaim Pax Sinica and US decline fail to take account of the full range of power resources. American hubris is always a danger, but so is exaggerated fear, which can lead to overreaction. Equally dangerous is rising Chinese nationalism, which, combined with a belief in the US decline, leads Beijing to take greater risks. Both sides must beware miscalculation. After all, more often than not, the greatest risk we face is our own capacity for error.
Joseph Nye is a professor at Harvard University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS