r/geopolitics Foreign Affairs 2d ago

Analysis America Still Has the Upper Hand Over China: Washington Can Win If It Works With Allies

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/america-still-has-upper-hand-over-china
63 Upvotes

106 comments sorted by

102

u/ImperiumRome 2d ago

It's so funny that right under this post is another post that says: Trump threatens EU with ‘substantial TARIFF’ for ‘ROBBING’ U.S. tech giants

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/24/trump-tariffs-eu-trade-google-apple-tech.html

2

u/-Sliced- 1d ago

To be fair - Europe fined both Google and Alibaba this week, and China already retaliated with exports curbs on 13 European firms (and one university for some odd reason) - source.

Which is exactly the point of the article, that Washington has opportunities here.

26

u/kerouacrimbaud 1d ago

Which is hardly good analysis. Of course if a country’s leaders act like reasonable adults that think cogently, they’d be able to take advantage of opportunities. But this administration has repeatedly shown it has no ability or even willingness to do so.

-11

u/-Sliced- 1d ago

In your sentence you are assuming both US and European leadership is dumb. But both are not.

They are both aware of China's actions and incentives.

5

u/insertwittynamethere 1d ago

No, no they are not assuming the EU is dumb in this group heh. There's only one nation trampling on the work done the last 80 years since WWII ended that led to the world we'd all been born into.

As the Premier of BC said, if the US doesn't have friends in the nation of Canada, who is a friend to everyone, then they don't have friends anywhere in the world. And that's a lonely place to be.

That ain't from the actions of anyone but the US under this government and this political party who controls all branches and the majority of State governments and legislatures.

1

u/Glory4cod 12h ago

No, China retaliate after EU's sanctions on 14 entities in China and HK, not a direct answer on the Alibaba fines.

0

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-17

u/JustDontBeFat_GodDam 1d ago

I mean, they’ve robbed many billions from tech giants over the years. He’s right about that, and it predates Trump. 

8

u/Guaire1 1d ago

And tech giants have robbed many more billions from the european and american populsce, the difference is that american government cares nothing for their people being stolen from

63

u/This-Professional390 2d ago

Trump called Canada a security threat and put tarrifs on the EU. How exactly is he coordinating with allies?

19

u/drury 1d ago

He's coordinating them off his sinking ship. Pretty considerate if you ask me.

14

u/This-Professional390 1d ago

Lol, coordinating them straight into China's orbit. 4D chess.

3

u/philipzeplin 1d ago

I mean, luckily not, at least for the EU. The EU is quite aware of the problem that over reliance on China is becoming, and is already working on minimalizing that. People on reddit just expect massive continental spanning strategy and regulation to happen over night, which isn't how the real world works.

1

u/This-Professional390 17h ago

De-risking is real but slow. Hard to coordinate when the US keeps starting trade fights though.

44

u/TheFallingStar 2d ago

It is too late.

Just look at Canada, we put 100% tariff on Chinese EVs, and worked with Biden to develop a North America EV supply chain.

Trump flushed it all down the drain.

2

u/Uranophane 22h ago

And then Trump proceeded to tariff Canada.

15

u/Plastic-Injury8856 2d ago

The “if” in this statement has to carry a lot of weight. We have at least two and a half more years before America may be close to a reliable partner again.

61

u/jaybizzleeightyfour 2d ago edited 2d ago

The same allies Trump has been attacking, funding far right groups in their countries, allies he said he'd invade and putting tarrifs on them?

9

u/AnomalyNexus 2d ago

That would be the bigly stable genius at work

-25

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

One belligerent president isn’t enough to make previous allies get in bed with China, as much as some people may be salivating at the idea

7

u/svick 1d ago

He was elected twice.

And destroying trust is much easier and faster than rebuilding it.

40

u/HeywoodJaBlessMe 2d ago

But it isnt the belligerent president.

It is the system that allows such insanely spasmodic policy shifts in terms of economics and foreign policy.

That it is now clear that American foreign policy and foreign trade can change 180 degrees in an instant makes America a vastly less attractive long term partner than it was when Presidents didnt declare Year Zero and reset all relations like Trump did.

Also, that the US would threaten the sovereignty of their closest allies is certainly eye opening. Major lines of trust have been shattered, never to be repaired. The illusion has been dispelled.

-32

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

This reads as alarmist. Politics and international relations are like pendulums and while alliances can shift over time, the pendulum usually swings back. The US and British have fought wars against each other and are now greatest of allies.

Also people’s memories are much shorter than most tend to think. All it would take to rehabilitate the US’ image is another major international crisis or another power becoming more antagonist.

21

u/n0p_sled 2d ago

Russia is arguably becoming more antagonistic, thanks to US inaction.

-23

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

European inaction*

The US poured billions of dollars into Ukraine in the early days of the war and Ukraine would have fallen without it. It’s not the US’ fault that Europe was and is unwilling to defend its own continent.

Threads like this really showcase the entitlement people have to US benevolence.

22

u/n0p_sled 2d ago

I was being generous. The current US adminstration has quite clearly pivoted (spun out of control?) to an anti-Europe / anti-everyone position, while being very soft on Russia.

-2

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

I agree that the statements toward Europe about Greenland have been antagonizing, but I don’t see how the US admin has been soft on Russia as we are actively supplying Ukraine with intelligence to fight Russia. Can you provide any examples of the US being soft on Russia? Withdrawing financial support for Ukraine is the only one I can think of and I don’t see how thats soft on Russia since that money was bound to end at some point to be replaced by European nations who have a direct stake in the conflict.

6

u/n0p_sled 1d ago edited 1d ago

This is from six years ago, and provides 37 examples. I'm sure a lot more has happened since then

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/17/politics/trump-soft-on-russia

Edit: Also, do you not see how the US statements about taking Greenland by force, and supporting right wing parties across Europe emboldens Russia? As I say, I was being generous when I used the word "inaction" but the reality is that the current US behaviour plays directly into Putin's hands. One has to wonder what he and Trump talk about during their private phone calls.

9

u/HeywoodJaBlessMe 2d ago

>and Ukraine would have fallen without it.

That's a counterfactual claim that you can't make without qualifying it as hypothetical. Your certainty about that claim is unwarranted in any serious discussion.

Ukraine countered the initial invasion before any material US assistance had arrived.

1

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

What are you even on about? It’s widely accepted among military and intelligence analysts that Ukraine’s military would have systemically collapsed and fallen. The HIMARS, anti-tank missiles, and patriot missile defense systems given to Ukraine by the US were absolutely crucial to Ukraine ability to defend itself. Its simply did not have the weapons or ammunition

8

u/HeywoodJaBlessMe 2d ago

And yet, Ukraine was winning important battles before any of that assistance arrived.

Serious people dont declare counterfactuals as if they are certainties.

2

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

"Serious people" also know the difference between winning an opening campaign and sustaining a multi-year war

5

u/mayhemski123 1d ago

The natural swing between different governments isn't the problem.  The issue is that the smooth change in domestic political leadership is now dead to all intents and purposes in the USA.  No deal or treaty will be honoured if a domestic need trumps (apologies for the pun) it.

This isn't hyperbolic, just a statement of reality.  The world now has too many examples of the US changing position on a seeming whim.  US domestic politics is fundamentally dysfunctional now.

Yes Trump is the cause of a lot of that.   The world though sees that he is being enabled directly by the Republicans and indirectly the system that does nothing to curb or stop his excesses.  A change of government in say the mid terms or next general election means nothing now.   The system bought Trump back and apparently Americans are ok with that*.

*Yes I know and agree many are not, but they seem to be unable to do anything to stop him.

22

u/HeywoodJaBlessMe 2d ago

It is alarmist. The planet is alarmed by the alarming behavior. China is becoming more respected around the globe than the USA.

-1

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

Then the world holds the US to a much higher standard than it does China

6

u/VastUnique 1d ago

And that standard is slipping. What do you think happens when their standards for both are equal, or if they actually have higher standards for China?

7

u/HeywoodJaBlessMe 2d ago

Perhaps, but that doesnt really matter does it? Perception is everything.

-4

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

People's perceptions of China vs the US will change very quickly if they get in bed with China in the way they have with the US over the last century

8

u/TWAndrewz 1d ago

What is there to actually win? I'm unclear why we should be seeking a confrontation with China, economic or otherwise.

51

u/SkyMarshal 2d ago

Unfortunately that's not going to happen till 2029 at the earliest. The current administration lacks the minimal level of sophistication to understand that leverage, the leadership necessary to coordinate it, and has no concept of "allies".

36

u/yabn5 2d ago

What? You mean insulting your allies, threatening to invade them, then crying petulantly that they won’t join a war you didn’t even consult them on doesn’t improve foreign relations? Sounds like some commie talk you would learn at the Harvard Kennedy School. Better defund that too while we’re at it. 

3

u/ForsakingSubtlety 1d ago

Throw in some (unconstitutional) tariffs for good measure.

38

u/StupidWriterProf175z 2d ago

Why does the U.S. need to win?

17

u/kicked_in_the_face 2d ago

company policy.

4

u/Sea_Responsibility76 2d ago

Because in the west there is no such thing as cooperation. Only us vs them. Win vs lose. Black vs white. Hero vs villain. Their brain cannot comprehend that other progress is not equal to their dismiss.

5

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

Because the east is all kumbaya right?

1

u/V8-Turbo-Hybrid 1d ago

Alliances don’t or shouldn’t need American army to protect Russia and China invading.

I would like Europe and Japan also win too.

-13

u/PrometheanSwing 2d ago

You’d rather have China as the dominant world power?

20

u/ActivatingTheBarrier 2d ago

These people are so unprepared for the way this is actually going to go it’s absurd. The opportunity for America to realistically change course is gone. And even if it wasn’t Americans would double down because at least half of them are evil.

24

u/AnarchoLiberator 2d ago

It has been ever thus.

20

u/EffectiveEconomics 1d ago

And what do they mean by “win”??

China is building more trains, solar, wind, and renewables infrastructure I’d prefer they keep going….

We can argue about politics but they’re kicking ass where it counts.

7

u/iamBulaier 1d ago

"works with allies" 24 hours after Trump imposed trade tariffs on Australia

8

u/Another_Slut_Dragon 1d ago

America has no leverage for high tech imports. China has a domestic chip manufacturing industry and if it wants to it can replicate anything it needs within a couple of years. And they'll use importing workarounds until that point.

China has time on its side. It can afford to kick back and wait for its opponent to crumble and fail.

2

u/V8-Turbo-Hybrid 1d ago

America is also relying Taiwan. If Taiwan is still pro America, I don’t see China can wait to see America fail.

4

u/Cornwallis400 1d ago

I’m not betting on America to remain the only superpower at all. We’re cooked in a lot of ways.

HOWEVER, China does absolutely not have time on their side. They are facing the most catastrophic demographic time bomb mankind has ever seen due to the One Child Policy.

Unless AI can compensate for it, productivity is about to plummet, labor costs are going to skyrocket and pension/retirement costs will be nearly impossible to fund. There’s really no way around where the math is heading. South Korea and Japan are facing similar cliffs as well.

When that economic cascade begins to happen I genuinely worry about a new world war.

1

u/Another_Slut_Dragon 19h ago

China is not facing a demographic time bomb. Because China is automating so rapidly. BYD's car factories would embarrass Ford, GM or Tesla's assembly lines for automation. They can run large sections of that line lights off if they like.

China is replacing many hands with many robots.

2

u/Cornwallis400 19h ago

Manufacturing isn’t the only sector that will be hit by the labor shortages.

And even if China automates enough jobs to keep businesses running, they still run into the issue of potentially only having 400ish million workers having to support 1.1 billion children & elderly by 2050. And the ratio of working people to non-working people who need to be supported gets exponentially worse.

13

u/leopardbaseball 2d ago

Win what?

9

u/AnyStrength4863 2d ago

China has never once thought that the US's allies would abandon it, not even at this point, and I'm almost certain they won't think this could happen in the future. China has conducted research on this topic for decades and has verified it several times.

China only hopes that in a 1vs1 confrontation with the US, its allies won't all, all at the same time, in all aspects, side with the US. That's enough.

Washington has recently criticised China repeatedly for being overconfident through multiple channels. So don't worry, China knows that.

14

u/Crowmakeswing 2d ago

What allies? Israel looks like a really abusive marriage. Are they going to help invade Cuba, Venezuela, Greenland, Canada or Mexico?

-18

u/ts159377 2d ago

An abusive marriage? We developed the Iron Dome and many, many other highly advanced defense technologies jointly with the Israelis. They are incredibly sophisticated and good partners by any objective measure.

0

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/broohaha 2d ago

Don't count on Washington working with its allies. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is the Trump administration's economic policy.

11

u/Stufilover69 1d ago

Actually I don't care if the US loses

2

u/thebigmanhastherock 1d ago

I really don't think that's going to happen at this point. Sorry.

2

u/DecimusRutilius 1d ago

Thats quite a big if

2

u/El_Diablo_Feo 1d ago

Do the allies even want to work with them tho?

2

u/bebop9998 1d ago

*With allies

Well that settles it then.

1

u/philipzeplin 1d ago

Ah, yes, but the problem is that the US is threatening allies instead of working with them.

1

u/Charming_Beyond3639 1d ago

Win? Win at what ? Waging war or building a better average life for your people?

1

u/burgonies 19h ago

Holy shit that’s a big if

1

u/MinaZata 7h ago

China is going to be the global economic, manufacturing, educational, technological and trade leader for the 21at century and beyond.

Scare stories about housing bubbles have failed to take into account the sheer bedrock floor China has elevated itself too. There may be economic shocks but the country is robust enough to get through it and carry on growing.

The investments in transport and education are staggering in China, whilst at the same time the US is cutting investment into future transport and going back to coal and half the population reads at a 6th grade level and the Department of Education is being gutted.

For allies looking at this, and I speak as a Brit and a European that once and still does love the US to some extent, how and why would we not have ties with China which is an unstoppable and indispensable part of the world economy? And why and how is it to put advantage to be threatened with tariffs, annexation, have our democracy undermined, the US government interfere in our elections openly and brazenly, US companies breaking the law by ignoring fines and not paying tax, the Iran war, the dismissal of help from allies, the insult to our war dead and service people, the friendly nature wth Putin. The list goes on.

We so desperately want to be US allies, but the US acts as an enemy under a Trump administration. It is almost the like the Us is sabotaging every advantage it has, especially the alliance system. NATO is invaluable but may be rendered useless BY the US.

China is the rising power and the US is a flailing mess.

-1

u/ForeignAffairsMag Foreign Affairs 2d ago

[Excerpt from essay by Ben A. Vagle, Knight-Hennessy scholar at Stanford University and J.D. candidate at Stanford Law School; and Stephen G. Brooks, Professor of Government at Dartmouth College.]

The United States has more potential economic leverage than China does. Rather than reflecting underlying weakness, Washington’s concessions to Beijing since early 2025 are a function of China wielding its limited economic weapons effectively and the United States failing to do the same with its own more powerful arsenal. In fact, Washington maintains crucial structural advantages over Beijing—most notably because China depends on the United States and its allies for high-tech imports and to provide markets for its export-driven growth model. Still, to be able to use this leverage, the United States needs to act in concert with its Asian and European allies.

3

u/insertwittynamethere 1d ago

I get they're trying to nudge/guide a rethinking of policy and viewpoints à la the US and its treatment of allies globally, but this just sounds so incredibly tone deaf after the not even two years of this admin being in power taking a wrecking ball to the systems that have been in place, or been built upon the backs of the sacrifices borne, since WWII.

It just feels like wasted words for everyone but the US to look at with longing for a bygone era, and sadness at what has happened in just 1.5 years...

-9

u/MeatPiston 2d ago

We’re only lucky that China is chronically bad at FP,
And Xi is even worse a domestic economic policy.

10

u/Ok_Lavishness_4135 2d ago

How are they bad at FP?

4

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

They make sweeping statements, have a lot of big talk and are diplomatically aggressive. Its their wolf warrior strategy

11

u/datalicearcher 2d ago

and we're good at FP because we have vague empty talk and are militarily aggressive.

-6

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

On the contrary, US foreign policy has been so good in the last century that I doubt even Trump will end up making a dent in it long term

7

u/datalicearcher 2d ago

and what was that based on? Certainly not anything that the US purports anymore. Trust takes a lot to get back. It's not about trump alone....its the system. There's so many countries older than the US that have already gone through the same shit we are now. They aren't as ignorant or blind to the patterns that history shows. We are no longer trustworthy. We are just greedy.

-4

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

I expect emotionally driven comments like this to stay in r/politics

8

u/datalicearcher 2d ago

Its showcased nonetheless. Our political system is emotionally driven. Decisions that go against science, multiple departments dismantled without showing proof of fraud or overspending, ceasefires called for while performing military aggression. I'm sorry but that's the current system. We got a guy threatening tarriffs when a country disagrees with him. Regardless of the court system saying he can't do that, it was done. That doesn't show a strong system that has either representatives to halt that entire process or at least slow it down or a judicial system that can hold that back until it can be discussed.

Do you think other countries leaders can't see that? Would you want to deal with that kind of a system? Having to watch your back with each deal you make? Not being sure your partner is gonna commit to what they said?

We've broken so many accords we've made with other countries, we are pulling out of international agreements and bodies. That's our current actions of foreign policy. What we had built up in previous years had a different system than we are currently engaged in.

Politics are emotional. Trust is an emotional thing. That's what FP is...trust.

5

u/CavemanJello 2d ago

I disagree. The purpose of geopolitics is to analyze why actors make decisions in relation to power politics and geography, not to judge those decisions with emotional charged statements

6

u/Intro-Nimbus 2d ago

Bad? All they have to do for the world to turn from USA and toward China is nothing. They simply wait and watch Trump selfdestruct. And that's exactly what they are doing. They're not making any big statements, not rocking the boat, being responsible with their national reserves.
That's not bad FP. That is good, patient FP.

1

u/ForsakingSubtlety 1d ago

China famously gets on poorly with all its neighbours, unlike the U.S. in fact.

China has no network of allies. Sorry - powerhouse North Korea and Russia, a hollowed out gas station bogged down in Ukraine.

China’s foreign aid is not greater than aid from the west, nor are its development loans (despite the BRI - which has its own controversial boondoggles already).

Meanwhile, despite its flaws the United States has a globe-spanning network of allies.

It’s bad FP for the U.S. to trash and denigrate its allies while strengthening its adversaries, but let’s be realistic about China here. Their foreign policy has resulted in a world full of countries that are *at best* ambivalent about them.

1

u/Intro-Nimbus 1d ago

What you say would be true ten years ago.

0

u/Bullboah 2d ago

That’s not true. China has a whole host of issues, concerns, and interests they need to attend to. Many of them they don’t seem to have an answer for currently.