The leading role of a great power does not last forever. For over a century, the U.S. has been the world’s leading economic power. After WW II it became also the international political power. Looking at China it was already once the dominant empire at least in the eastern part of the world for a thousand years. The Roman Empire disintegrated but parts of it remained centers of power. The Nazi “Drittes Reich” could not make it for two decades. Also, it is rather rare that one single power is emerging. So, chances are that more centers of powers are coexistent. I was an excited reader of Huntington; I am not a great fan of him. Still, the rise (or resurgence?) of China into the leading power of the Eastern World alongside the United States as the leading power of the Western World could make sense.
While earlier it was the trade, later the industry, nowadays it is the technology and knowledge-based sectors which define economic leadership. Developing technology comes at a significant cost, but whoever succeeds to take the lead in this competition can set the direction for the future. China is focusing on IT, automation, aircraft, electrical equipment, energy-saving vehicles, biomedicine which is also declared in its technology strategy. Achieving leadership by the set deadline would make China from the workbench to the technology leader of the world as soon as 2025. 5G plays an important role as the knowledge-based world needs that technology. Therefore, without attacking or defending the China policy of the USA, there was some logic in the government actions to protect American IP against Chinese espionage and buyouts.
However, how can a shrinking and protectionist US economy, a country loaded with social tensions compete with China and keep high import tariffs? It is also no secret that the Chinese economy was sturdier than the American during the pandemic and COVID could be a game-changer for China. An IMF comparison of the GDP growth statistics gives a clear picture[1]
While the influence of partisanship on the foreign policy of the USA is also represented in the hiccups with international conventions (Bush: No to Kyoto. Obama: Yes to Paris. Trump: No to Paris), and the protectionist, separatist line would most likely continue if Trump wins, I am not sure that at least some parts of it would not infiltrate into Biden´s more conciliatory foreign policy. Whoever makes the run, he must find an answer on how to answer the Chinese challenge and maintain America’s leadership in the world. A brief answer to the Shifrinson piece “Should the United States Fear China’s Rise?”[2] would be: Yes and No. Yes, it could disrupt the American Dream about what the world makes go round. No, because it is the nature of the power that it comes and goes. And China comes again.
Trump, China, Pandemic. We live in times, we could not have imagined some years ago. As Heinz Alfred (Henry) Kissinger told the Financial Times in Manhattan two years ago[3]
I think Trump may be one of those figures in history who appears from time to time to mark the end of an era and to force it to give up its old pretenses. It doesn’t necessarily mean that he knows this, or that he is considering any great alternative. It could just be an accident.
[1]https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDP_RPCH@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD/CHN/RUS/EU/USA
[2] Joshua Shifrinson, “Should the United States Fear China’s Rise?,” The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 65-83
[3] https://www.ft.com/content/926a66b0-8b49-11e8-bf9e-8771d5404543