The relations between China and the US are often and extensively talked about and for a good reason, their dynamic is the most significant driving force of geopolitics nowadays. Yet it seems to me that the western press is so deeply rooted in ideals of individual freedom and human rights that it fails to understand the legitimacy of China’s fears. China, like all countries, is haunted by the ghosts of its past, and by not addressing its concerns, the west is risking a miscalculation that could lead to enormous destruction. I’ll look at both countries to gauge what makes them unique today. Then I’ll try to understand their inherent interests and how their current actions help facilitate them. Lastly, I’ll try to provide a possible course of action for countries to both avoid conflict and minimize destruction.

What makes a global power powerful?

Clearly, the U.S. and China currently hold the no. 1 and 2 spots, but what makes them so powerful and influential?

Economy
The U.S. and China are economic giants, unrivaled by any other country. China is the world’s leading country in exporting goods, and its production rate is the main growth factor of its GDP. The U.S. is the leading Importer in the world, a highly developed country with a skilled workforce, innovative technology, and a global economic center – the U.S. dollar is the backbone of much of the global financial systems. The American and Chinese economy has a semi-symbiotic relationship with the US being a giant consumer and China being a huge supplier, both countries benefit immensely from that relationship but are wary of the other side gaining an advantage over them through trade.

Population
This is the first category in which China has a clear advantage – more than a billion people inhabit mainland China and millions more live in Hong Kong and Macau which China sees as part of itself. The US has a population exceeding 350 million, and while China has implemented the disastrous 1-Child Policy for decades before abandoning it, the birth in the US doesn’t seem able to allow America to catch up to China’s population.

Military & Geography
Both countries have massive military forces and while the U.S. army is technologically superior, the Chinese aren’t far behind and prefer to steal American developments whole cloth rather than develop expensive weapons themselves. The American security network is spread thin while the Chinese forces are built exclusively to handle domestic and regional threats. In this category it’s also worth laying out their defense partners, the US has many allies in the NATO alliance which includes the infamous article 5 – an attack on one country is an attack on all. NATO includes 3 nuclear-armed countries: the UK, US, and France. China has no significant formal military alliances and prefers to be a weapon supplier to belligerent sides around the world, supplying cheap and useful weaponry. Countries often rely on geography to both defend their borders, feed their people, and facilitate trade with neighbors. The US owes much of its success to its first line of defense and a key Geographical feature – the ocean. During the age of sailboats, England sat on the edge of a turbulent European continent with confidence that maintaining the best fleet will prevent any amphibious invasion. Even Napoleon at the height of his power, drafting all eligible French men into a machine of total war, couldn’t overcome crossing the channel – 40 miles of water separating England from Europe. The US has two massive oceans on either side of itself, allowing for American isolationism for most of its existence. Over the years, the US has engaged in wars of conquest or wars designed to protect national interests.

Historic view
Let’s review major conflicts that have started with the pretext of guarding the oceans, allowing open maritime trade, and protecting American vessels:
1st and 2nd Barbary wars (Protecting Trade)
War of Independence (Protecting free trade & American vessels)
Quasi-war against France (Protecting free trade & American vessels)
The war of 1812 (Protecting free trade)
The second Opium war (Protecting Trade) – Specifically to China
The Boxer Rebellion (Protecting trade) – again, against China
The Spanish American War (sinking of the Maine)
Monroe Doctrine / Good Neighbor Policy / Banana Wars (Protecting Trade)
World War 1 (Lusitania, Protecting American Vessels and trade)
World War 2 (Pearl Harbor, Protecting American vessels and trade)
The cold war (Communist ideology threatening free trade)
Tanker war (87-88) – fought with Iran (Protecting free trade, protecting American vessels)
Invasion of Panama (89-90) – (Protecting free trade)
War on terror (2001-today) – (protecting free trade & American vessels, initiated by an attack on the WTC)
Operation Ocean shield (09-16) – dealing with Somali pirates (protecting trade and vessels)

In stark contrast, China has historically avoided naval conquest and was looking to close itself off to foreign influence (much like Japan). The European powers and the US forced them to open ports and allow trade. China’s Geography is complicated but some similarities to the US do arise, most of the population lives on the coast, and large open plains allow for an agrarian area to supply food, they both also have an inland capital. China and the US are comparable in size but while the US has 2 neighbors, both substantially weaker and who subscribe to the ideology of capitalism and free trade, China has countries large in both area, population, and might on its doorstep such as Russia, Japan, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Korea, Philippines and more which have a substantially bigger population and aren’t sympathetic to the Chinese communist ideology.

National Cohesion and Political Tradition
Continuing this point, both China and the US wield impressive performance records in this regard. China is arguably the oldest standing political structure in the world with its roots set millenniums ago and the US is the oldest true democratic republic, a nation based on the idea of individual freedom rather than an ethnic basis. Both countries have different levels of national cohesion, but China seems to be more unified than the US regarding domestic and foreign issues. While the US government aims (in theory) to reflect the wishes of the populous through voting, the Chinese government does so (in theory) through one-party rule, guided by a modern infusion of Communism and free market trade. Both countries have a strong tradition of the rule of law – with no citizens being above the law (again, in theory). Both nations entrust enormous executive power and privilege to the hands of their leaders, especially when guiding foreign affairs.

China was historically never a military power that sought conquest but due to its immense size and population struggled to stay united under one rule. That is not to say Chinese conquest is impossible, among other factors. the nature and instruments of war changed dramatically during the last 80 years. Even so, their history suggests an ideal of China as the center of the world, a hegemon, but one that does not seek to change the internal affairs of other nations surrounding it. Here it’s also important to mention that this ideal might be compromised as well if China will seek to implement the root of communist ideology which is universal and global in nature.

Interests and Actions

US: America’s 4 Main Interests

The US has 4 major national interests in this order:

This hierarchy of interests has guided the US since its inception and even though different routes were taken to achieve them, this structure remained. Now let’s back this up.

National security over Domestic Democracy

On several occasions, the US has suspended the democratic rights of its own citizens to “protect” the security of the nation at large. For example: Internment camps during WW2, extensive breach of personal privacy through surveillance following 9/11, the draft during WW1 and WW2, McCarthy’s red scare and arrests, and Guantanamo Bay holding prisoners with no Habeas Corpus.

Domestic Democracy over US prosperity

This one is tricky and can be argued to not have a clear hierarchy since often the two support each other and aren’t contradictory but I think a few key examples can be made to support this claim: The US choosing to succeed from Britain, The US finally rejecting slavery and fighting a bloody civil war, maintaining influential state legislatures that can levy taxes, sanction Russian firms and individuals who sought to undermine American confidence in democracy.

US prosperity over Democratic guard dog

t can be argued that during the cold war guarding democracy became a more imminent goal but primarily as an extension of US prosperity. The examples here are countless but this doesn’t mean that the US doesn’t take its role as the leader of the free world lightly, it just believes that being the strongest economy allows them to take that role. Examples: supporting undemocratic regimes for political or economic gain like Iran, Iraq, much of south and central America, Saudi Arabia, and so on. It needs to be said that much more often the US will come to the aid of a democratic country that’s about to stop being democratic (Korean war) than try and force regime change (like Iraq in 2003).

China: The Mandate of Heaven

China’s concept of a divine right to rule is ancient and it’s implemented ad-hoc and legitimizes a ruler or a regime by getting to a position of having authority. Those familiar with Thomas Hobbes and his seminal work “Leviathan” might find many similarities between the Leviathan’s right to rule and the people’s right to rebel against a ruler which put them in jeopardy. Modern China is shaped by the ghosts of the Opium wars, in which the western powers demanded and fought for free unobstructed trade. China was used to seeing itself as superior to other nations and now faced a century of national humiliation by the west. Nowadays China has one overarching interest and 2 goals that serve that interest.

China’s interest – National Pride

China is looking to restore its national pride and achieve historical redemption by being a world leader, a status that is theirs by divine right.

Chinese goals in order of importance:
1) Economic prosperity and leadership
2) National Security

Why is China preferring economic power over military power?
China is correctly operating under these assumptions:
– The US is further ahead in weapon tech development
– The US won’t ever allow another country to achieve military superiority
– The Strategy known as MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) is applicable, nuclear deterrence exists in full
– Developments in tech and maintenance of advanced or large armed forces have to be backed by a strong economy.
– other players like India are ready to step in to fill the gap if China shifts its focus from manufacturing to military buildup.

Thus, the conclusion: engaging in an arms race with the US is futile and can be destructive to both countries, it’d be wiser to rely on copying/stealing conventional US capabilities to stay on par or one step behind without the costly development phase. China maintains a credible nuclear threat to ensure its survival against all state actors.

Avoiding a disaster: stopping miscalculation

The US and China both understand that a miscalculation could result in a lose-lose situation and wish to avoid such a scenario. Those who truly value peace should understand that war isn’t always unjustified and clashing interests will, eventually, result in conflict. The US must decide which interests it can compromise to maintain peace and which it cannot – or in other words, what will America fight for?

The US obviously must maintain its main interest – US national security, it also can maintain its democratic nature without clashing with Beijing’s interests. After that it gets complicated. American prosperity is a loose term, but we can tie it to a growing, stable economy. The US must decide whether Chinese conventional actions are grounds for sanctions and if so, what Chinese action will lead to which sanctions. This ties directly to US democracy and national security as well so this is the leading dilemma for decision-makers and the issue should be reflected fairly in the press.

Now on to being the guard dog of democracy – the most emotional and inspiring calling of America around the globe, but from my point of view the simplest to settle. Democracy relies on the idea that a rule of the people, living with individual freedom and equal rights under the law, is the justest form of government. The American ethos doesn’t rely on geography or ethnic bounds – such is his beauty. This interest, in guarding democracy wherever it sprouts and even pushing for regime change in undemocratic countries is dangerous. This interest, as romantic as it may seem shouldn’t ever compromise US national security for it has to remain a global safe harbor, a democratic beacon for all the people looking to live free.

I think the limited US and NATO limited aid in Ukraine is a worrying sign. It suggests a sort of unwillingness to compromise. Of course, the Russian invasion is unjust, but the US isn’t willing to risk nuclear conflict over maintaining Ukrainian democracy. The victims of the Russian invasion continue to be the Ukrainians which NATO will sacrifice slowly to punish Russia but rightly won’t step in to salvage.

China has every right to fear the US and act aggressively, in the last centuries the US has shown a remarkable ability for growth, expansion, and military conquest. China itself suffered personally from the US and western countries forcing trade within its borders and committing violent acts in the name of free trade. China has seen repeatedly how the US pushed for and achieved successful regime change in Japan, Germany, and the Soviet Union during the 20^th century and how during its reign as a singular superpower it has launched a global war on terror, toppled governments, controls global institutions and build military outposts all around the globe.

We cannot blame China for mistrusting the west, nor should we justify the abhorrent actions of its government, but we must face ourselves and what we hold most valuable. Should the US go to war over Taiwanese independence? In my view, it shouldn’t. what should they do then?

The Case for a Democratic Alliance

Currently, the main issue facing the US as I see it is the clash between the first 3 interests (national security, domestic democracy, and US prosperity) and the 4^th – safeguarding democracy around the globe. National security is essential for every nation, and since it’s safe to assume for now that the US wishes to remain democratic and keep prospering – the US will need to be flexible on the 4^th core interest.

The US can resolve its dilemma with minimal compromise by unifying the countries already under democratic rule in a large economic-military block and solidify a clear geographic, cultural and strategic border. The democratic alliance (or DA) will include all central and western Europe, the Americas, and industrialized nations across the world like Japan and South Korea. This Alliance should recognize the immense importance of India and the US should offer it a leading role with regards to military strategic deployment of forces in the Pacific. Creating a clear border between democracies and autocracies will allow greater unity against outside threats originating in an understanding that democracy is constantly under threat.

The Problems with a democratic alliance

Who’s a Democracy?

Many countries who hold elections aren’t democratic in the slightest such as Russia and Iran, while some monarchies are politically democratic like the UK and Sweden. I have little hope objective guidelines could be reached and so I propose giving veto powers to the US, India, and a seat for each geographic region (South America, Europe, Pacific, Africa). That way the DA will be based on firm political traditions and give power to the strongest powers among it.

Why would sovereign nations relinquish authority to an international alliance?

Traditionally it has been the strongest powers that were most resistant to this idea and the veto powers are there to appease them. That being said, the US needs to make sure that the lessons of NATO and the EU are implemented in the DA and create a mechanism for ensuring fair contribution by all members as well as a mechanism for kicking out countries.

But what about the cultural identity lost to those fleeing autocracies?

This is a hard compromise, but its advantage is creating a clear dividing line that should ease political and military turmoil around the world. As a person of Jewish descent I can testify to the enduring power of culture and its remarkable ability to flourish in any place on the globe and be preserved through the ages. Thankfully the free world isn’t short on unoccupied liveable land, it’ll be challenging but diasporas of countries that’ll remain autocratic could preserve their customs and even petition for a land of their own. Giving up land in this reality would still not come naturally to countries but the broad cooperation inside the DA should make it easier emotionally and politically.

Should countries like China be able to join?

No, and no diplomatic pressure should be levied on non-democratic countries to join. The US needs to recognize the legitimacy of sovereign non-democratic countries to exist as long as they allow any willing citizen to migrate to one of the DA countries. Democracy will remain safe and available for those who seek it, but sensible people might choose to migrate to non-democratic countries.

A Free World and a neighbor

The US needs to formalize its status as the leader of the free world and allow it to live up to its name. Individual freedom should be the unifying factor of the free world, the importance of nation states was primarily to allow for cultural diversity and collective security. A democratic alliance built right would provide a safe frame work for these goals and allow for both national sovereignty in domestic matters and a unified front to work alongside the autocracies. Two neighbors living in disagreement, the DA as giant tower with flats, occupied by roommates with equal votes, and the autocracies as a suburban neighborhood with each house having a head of the family. The neighbors will squable but no one is allowed to interfere in the domestic life of the other. One of the roommates can never own his own apartment, neither does a regular member of a family, but he is allowed to leave and be a roommate in the tower of liberty.