China’s economic and military rise over the past 30 years has propelled it to a position of great power and influence on the international stage. The conversation around U.S.-China relations has subsequently characterized China as not just a competitor for hegemony, but as an existential threat to American national security.This narrative, pushed by both Democrats and Republicans, has wrongly conflated China as a hegemonic challenger with China as a national security threat. Although China’s increasing influence does inherently challenge the U.S.’s position as the global hegemon, it is not the existential national security threat it’s often made out to be, but instead a responsible stakeholder in the current global system.
China’s growing influence on the international stage is due largely to its economic growth and military. China, the world’s largest trader and second-biggest economy,is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and has greatly increased its military capacity in the past decade. Yet, none of this poses an existential threat to U.S. national security, loosely defined as the ability of the government to protect the well-being, health and safety of its citizens.China does not have a military capability to match that of the U.S.,currently relies heavily on trade with the U.S. for economic stability and has a stake in maintaining the current international political order. For these reasons, China does not threaten the well-being of American citizens.
China can be considered a "responsible stakeholder”; because its economic growth can be credited to the liberal order, China depends on the stability of the system. China is incentivized to cooperate within the current bounds of the world order and avoid large-scale destabilization because of the robust gains it receives from international trade.China’s inclusion in the World Trade Organization is largely responsible for the economic power China wields today,and China and the U.S. are highly dependent on each other for trade stability:The U.S. is China’s largest export market, with about 19% of Chinese exports sold in the U.S. Additionally, China has been an active participant in and beneficiary of Western international institutions. As a permanent member of the UN Security Council and major contributor to UN Peacekeeping operations, China has expanded its soft power capacities abroad and has committed to long-term participation in the current world order. The Belt and Road Initiative, a massive infrastructure and energy investment project funded by China throughout much of the developing world, is another channel through which the state further expands its soft power influence. Because China benefits greatly from the current international system, it will be careful not to create large disruptions. China’s reliance on global stability is in the best interest of the American people, as it creates safeguards against an escalation of tensions between the U.S. and China.
Even if China wanted to challenge the U.S. in a way that threatened American citizens, it has neither the military capacity, economic resources, diplomatic ties nor internal stability to do so. China lags behind the U.S. in terms of military spending and technology; a sheer lack of resources prevents China from posing a significant military threat. As a middle-income country, China also is facing slowing economic growth, low productivity and low domestic consumption.This, coupled with the Chinese Communist Party’s ongoing systemic oppression of ethnic minorities in Xinjiang and Tibet, demonstrates the internal instability preventing China from seriously threatening the well-being of the American people. Lastly, China currently lacks diplomatic influence and secure East and Southeast Asian alliances to really challenge the United States’ international standing.
This is not to say that China hasn’t already posed some threats to American interests, including theft of U.S.-based technology and intellectual property. Instead, I am arguing that these threats are overblown in the popular narrative, and that, given the international context, China’s opportunities to act on this information are limited. Secondly, climate change as a global existential threat may provide more opportunities for cooperation between the two nations, increasing trust and stabilizing diplomatic relations.
It will be interesting to see if, and how, the Biden administration pivots from the Trump administration’s “tough on China” approach. It is in both the U.S. and China’s best interests to cooperate on as many fronts as possible, and for the U.S. to tone down the rhetoric of China as an existential threat.
Please join us in attending the EPIIC International Symposium from March 18–20. The “China-US-Russia: Multipolarity or Polar Opposites” discussion will be held Friday, March 19 at 9:00 am EDT.
Francesca Michielli is a junior studying economics. Francesca can be reached at Francesca.Michielli@tufts.edu.
