The Post-Cold War Era is Definitively Over. 

By: Patrick Bodovitz.

One of the significant shifts in the foreign policies of the United States, and many of its allies, is that they now view China as a major competitor, if not an outright threat. Former US National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien compared Xi Jinping to Josef Stalin and claimed that “We could not have been more wrong [about China’s liberalization]— and this miscalculation was the greatest failure of American foreign policy since the 1930s.”ⁱ Recent national security strategies released during the Trump and Biden administrations describe China as a long-term challenge for the United States’ national security.ⁱⁱ Politicians across the board sounded the alarm on China’s influence operations, its financial strength, military capabilities, and diplomatic initiatives in the Southern hemisphere. While the Biden administration has claimed that it does not want a new cold war, all the signs indicate that the world is headed in that direction. This could become very dangerous if policies are not handled intelligently and carefully. As the world enters this new era, an important question reigns above all: What does a responsible plan for the US approach to China look like in these turbulent times? I argue that the United States should treat China as a competitor without turning every dispute into a cataclysmic struggle. 

After years of friendship and cooperation between the US and China, there has recently been a marked shift in rhetoric and actions. Deng Xiaoping’s plan of “hide your strength, bide your time” has been replaced by a more assertive China— crushing dissent in Hong Kong, threatening Taiwan with diplomatic and military coercion, making more territorial claims in the South China Sea and Tibet, imprisoning the Uyghurs, and purging dissidents. These policies were always present in the history of China’s rule by the CCP, but they have become more open and aggressive in the past several years. As a result, many of the so-called “China Hawks” in Western governments, like Robert O’Brien, have become more and more convinced that this mirrors the post-WWII period and have urged the US government to spend more money on the military, increase intelligence operations, and create a more robust presence as part of the “Indo-Pacific Strategy”.  

Many of the proposed solutions – like banning Chinese students, increasing military bases in the Indo-Pacific, and making overt security commitments to Taiwan – are not helpful, could escalate tensions, and do not solve the problems this relationship poses. They are also an overestimation of China’s abilities. Dr. Anatol Lieven, while analyzing claims about expanding Chinese hard power, wrote that: 

When it comes to hard geopolitical influence and the expansion of Chinese military power, with one important exception China has proceeded with great caution. In the Indian Ocean, until now the Chinese program of port construction has been entirely commercial (except for a small refueling and repair station in Djibouti, next to a much bigger U.S. one). The Chinese naval presence in the region is insignificant compared to that of the United States, let alone the United States plus India.ⁱⁱⁱ  

 The only place where the Chinese military has a robust military presence is in the South China Sea. While its navy is very large – 355 ships and submarines^iv – the Chinese military has no battle experience.^v This means the capacity to combine different branches and draw upon previous campaigns will not be available. 

During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, many officials in the US and Australian governments blamed China for releasing the SARS-CoV-2 virus and trying to cover it up. This was largely an attempt to deflect blame from poor domestic handling of the virus. As Richard Haass noted “We can’t blame China for our own lack of protective equipment or our inability to produce adequate testing.”^vi If the United States wants to show other countries that we can compete with China, it would help to handle outbreaks of disease with far better competence. The US government could and should emphasize how it has a better system, not denigrate the Chinese for mistakes they make, especially while American democracy is not healthy. One of China’s main arguments in support of its ‘greatness’ is the claim that it lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. A counter-argument could be that pandemic aid has lowered the poverty level in the United States and increased people’s standards of living, without the controversies around Hong Kong and Xinjiang. It is critical that the US government highlights what it does better than China by showing the world that the democratic system is more flexible. 

Many of the Biden and Trump administration officials have promoted the argument that China is like the USSR and seeks to rewrite the world order, but the record does not line up to support that claim. Michael McFaul, former ambassador to Russia, wrote: 

Beijing has also invested tremendous resources in propagating its ideas, most of which are antithetical to liberalism and democracy, and provided surveillance technologies and economic aid to sustain autocracies in other countries. But Xi has yet to instigate a coup, arm insurgents, or invade a democracy and install a communist regime. Little suggests that he seeks to subvert American democracy.^vii 

 China’s active measures and intelligence operations are mostly designed to promote China’s positions on issues related to its foreign policy, not create governments that share its worldview. While it is necessary for the US and its allies to push back on Chinese disinformation and meddling, it should be done in a manner that does not create more divisions in American society or anti-Chinese sentiment.  

Increased military spending was a major hallmark of the first Cold War and that will most certainly be replicated in a new Cold War with China. This is a costly mistake in a number of ways. Senator Bernie Sanders noted in an op-ed “We are already hearing politicians and representatives of the military-industrial complex using this as the latest pretext for larger and larger defense budgets. I believe that it is important to challenge this new consensus.”^viii The United States already outspends China heavily in military expenditures and will continue to do so for some time. Additionally, the US military has much more warfighting experience and retains South Korea, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, India, and other countries in the Indo-Pacific as allies. On the other hand, China outspends the United States on infrastructure capabilities and diplomatic institutions.^ix This helps generate a lot of goodwill for China amongst large parts of the Global South, especially countries that have a history of fighting Western influence. These heavy military expenditures in the US dilute spending on social services at home and also take away from foreign development and aid spending. It is crucial to understand why soft power spending is as important, if not more so than military spending.  

As the US and China continue down this path, it is imperative that the United States pursues a well-thought-out course. The mistakes of the prior Cold War, such as vast military spending, proxy wars, turning every local problem into an intercontinental one, and the threat of nuclear war are possibly being repeated now. As is outlined above, a better approach would be to spend more on diplomacy and infrastructure, combat Chinese disinformation and espionage, and identifying China’s goals – increased pressure on Taiwan, naval barriers in the South China Sea, removal of internal opposition, control of the border passes between Tibet and India, and the Belt and Road Initiative – correctly. This leaves the door open to diplomacy on issues like climate change and ensures that peace is kept in the Indo-Pacific region. If the United States enters an era of total competition with China, then appropriate solutions, such as more spending on diplomacy, creating nuclear disarmament agreements, and identifying their goals, must be enacted to ensure that a hot war does not break out and that countries that wish to remain neutral do not become battlegrounds between Beijing and Washington.  

Bibliography 

Biden, Joseph R. “Biden-Harris Administration’s National Security Strategy.” Whitehouse.gov, 2022, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf. 

Haass, Richard. “A Cold War with China Would Be a Mistake.” The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 8 May 2020, https://www.wsj.com/articles/dont-start-a-new-cold-war-with-china-11588860761. 

Heath, Timothy R. “China’s Military Has No Combat Experience: Does It Matter?” RAND Corporation, 27 Nov. 2018, https://www.rand.org/blog/2018/11/chinas-military-has-no-combat-experience-does-it-matter.html. 

Lieven, Anatol. “Stay Calm about China.” Foreign Policy, 26 Aug. 2020, https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/08/26/china-existential-threat-united-states-xi-jinping/. 

Linda Schmid and Stephen Olson 16. “China Outpacing the US in Diplomacy.” Hinrich Foundation, 2018, https://www.hinrichfoundation.com/research/tradevistas/fdi/china-outpacing-us-diplomacy-development/. 

Lippman, Daniel. “Trump National Security Adviser Compares Xi Jinping to Josef Stalin.” POLITICO, 24 June 2020 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/24/robert-obrien-xi-jinping-china-stalin-338338. 

McFaul, Michael. “Xi Jinping Is Not Stalin.” Foreign Affairs, 13 Aug. 2020, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-08-10/xi-jinping-not-stalin. 

Sanders, Bernie. “Washington’s Dangerous New Consensus on China.” Foreign Affairs, 26 Sept. 2022, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2021-06-17/washingtons-dangerous-new-consensus-china. 

Shelbourne, Mallory. “China Has World’s Largest Navy with 355 Ships and Counting, Says Pentagon.” USNI News, 3 Nov. 2021, https://news.usni.org/2021/11/03/china-has-worlds-largest-navy-with-355-ships-and-counting-says-pentagon#:~:text=China%20Has%20World’s%20Largest%20Navy%20With%20355%20Ships%20and%20Counting%2C%20Says%20Pentagon,-By%3A%20Mallory%20Shelbourne&text=China%20has%20the%20biggest%20maritime,Defense%20Department%20report%20released%20Wednesday.