The U.S. has become the sole superpower since it won the Cold War with the collapse of the Soviet Union. The U.S. has the strongest military power with hundreds of military bases all over the world. Its intelligence organization led by the Central Intelligence Agency operates everywhere. Of course, the U.S. dollar being the principal world trading currency has a pivotal influence on the world’s finance and economy. However, entering the twenty-first century, terrorism surfaced which had an impact on the U.S. Relatively, many countries had developed their economies at a faster rate than that of the U.S. On the world scale, the U.S. economy decreased from above one-third of the world economy to below one-fifth, measured in terms of the world GDP. Most notably, as a surprise, China became the world’s second-largest economy in 2010. Today, China is still growing at a fast rate approaching the economic size of the U.S. in any coming year soon.
With all the strength the U.S. possesses, why is the U.S. surprised that China as the most populated nation will rise someday? The U.S. national strategy has been aggressive, a hegemony strategy: Watch out for competitors and suppress them before they rise. But China survived and rose by applying its anti-hegemony strategy: A low-key manner of fending itself and working extremely hard in economic development. Although the U.S. succeeded in suppressing Germany and Japan and collapsing the Soviet Union, it failed with its hegemony strategy against anti-hegemony. Hegemony requires resources to project to the entire world, yet anti-hegemony only needs to defend oneself against the hegemon. Therefore, the U.S. as a superpower is caught by surprise by the rapid rise of China. Currently, U.S.-China relations are at their lowest point with a danger of erupting into a military confrontation. Can the U.S. continue with its hegemony strategy against China? Can the U.S. handle the surprises in the future?
In this article, we will first discuss and understand the surprises caused by the U.S.-China confrontation. Then we may address whether the U.S. should reconsider its assumptions and strategy. At present time the following events have certainly brought surprises and challenges to the U.S.:
- Though the Russian-Ukraine war was not a surprise to the U.S., the U.S. did not seem to have a solution for managing or ending it before encouraging NATO and the EU to support Ukraine and escalate the war. The fighting has been over two years now with a devastating impact on Ukrainians and Russian military forces as well. The surprise came in February of 2023 when China made a 12-point peace proposal to bring the two parties to a ceasefire and negotiation. It is a good plan with good intentions from a neutral party. Now the U.S. needs to handle this surprise. Hopefully, Blinken’s effort to make a China trip will produce a workable solution together with China. After all, a ceasefire is always better than a continuous battle that not only kills many lives but also damages the world economy.
- With China’s mediation and years of quiet effort, it was a big surprise that Saudi Arabia and Iran re-established diplomatic relations. The two countries signed the accord in Beijing last year. This is a history-changing surprise not only affecting the Middle East and Middle Asia politics and economies but also enhancing world peace. Can the U.S. (with or without Israel) handle this surprise? Should the U.S. revise its Middle East foreign policy to work with China? A further surprise is coming, that is, the formation of the Persian Gulf Navy Alliance among the eight Arab nations. Should the U.S. and Israel take a confrontational approach or adopt a peaceful co-existence plan?
- Last September during the Russian-Ukraine war, there was a bombing of the Nord Stream gas pipeline which had a devastating impact on Europeans' lives. This June, the Ukraine Kakhovka Dam controlled by the Russian military in Ukraine was again bombed causing many deaths and property loss. Who has done these terrorist acts? How would these bombings be investigated? Can the U.S. handle these surprises and future findings? Should the U.S. continue pushing the expansion of NATO into Asia while the EU has second thoughts about supporting the Ukraine war? Can the U.S. handle the changing hearts of Micron in France and Shultz in Germany regarding the U.S.’s China policy?
- The U.S.’s current foreign policy seems to target Russia and China at the same time which is making Sino-Russia relation getting closer. After the start of the Russia-Ukraine war, it is obvious that Russia needs China as a trading partner while being sanctioned by the U.S. and EU. Although China never wanted to form military alliances (an anti-hegemony strategy), the U.S. military alliance and their exercises in the China Seas pushed China and Russia to increase their joint military exercises. Can the U.S. handle this Sino-Russia pseudo-alliance? Will letting Japan expand its military strength be a smart strategy or a sinister plot likely leading to a nuclear WW III?
- France and Germany have learned enough lessons from the Russian-Ukraine War that the U.S. may not always have a good intention or solution for the EU. Hence, it should not be a big surprise that France and Germany would adopt their own China policy, as shown by their visits to China with a huge business delegation, clearly, at the minimum, they are separating politics from economics. Can the U.S. handle this new development that comes so soon before the Russian-Ukraine war is over? Should the U.S. also rethink its China policy?
In analyzing international relations, one should always follow causality principles. However, due to secrecy in diplomacy, one cannot always see the causal correlations before the affairs are over, sometimes decades or even centuries later. The above-cited surprises may have been a premeditated plan, but their developments can add twists and turns producing surprise elements. One can only collect the known facts and diagnose the situation. At this point, judging by the busy itinerary of Biden’s cabinet officers, many eager to have a dialogue with China or better yet visit China, the U.S. hegemony strategy is not working well against China’s anti-hegemony plan. The U.S. must reflect on its foreign policies, for example, the Middle East policy, and how it failed under its hegemony approach. China, on the other hand, is succeeding with its anti-hegemony strategy, not only in the Middle East but also in other parts of the world such as the African Continent and among island countries. The flip-over of Honduras last year, severing its diplomatic ties with Taiwan, and recognizing Mainland China, is another surprise to the U.S. But it was inevitable if analyzed from Honduras' economic needs. Thus, it seems apparent that the U.S. needs to reevaluate its fundamental assumptions about China (and anti-hegemony) from an economic point of view rather than persistently adheres to a 'fake' national security argument (hegemony theory). Is the U.S. facing more threats than all other countries in the world?!
RSS Feed