The permanent presence of China, in the official American political discourse, coupled with anxiety, criticism and abuse, and its presentation as a “emerging force”, represents a military and economic threat, and the insistence on this image, in the American populist discourse, which included emotional appeals and huge of the dangers of Chinese American competition in order to mobilize voters, left all or some of this – a conviction that there is a struggle for dominating the world, Between two lonely powers; They are: Washington and Beijing, while the rest of the other world powers sit in the seats of viewers, and the end result is awaiting, expected that China will decide in its favor in a “unilateral” match!
Ten years ago, China launched what it described as “made in China 2025”, aimed at pushing China to the forefront of a group of super technological industries, including the aviation and space industry, electric cars, robots, and communications.
Beijing has not published an official evaluation of the “Made in China 2025” plan, and it is not known, whether it was keen on not provoking Washington “diverse”, or descending at the conditions of supposed secrecy. But an account conducted by the Washington Post last year found that 86% of the goals stipulated in the plan were achieved.
In a hearing, in the American Congress, on “Made in China 2025” last February, American experts expressed their annoyance at the rapid progress made by China in advanced manufacturing, and warned that America risked “the loss of the upcoming industrial revolution”, with the frequency of reports confirming that China “is preparing for the post -United States world.”
A segment of influential politicians and decision makers in Washington in reality agree that one of the goals of the Chinese dream is to remove the international system led by the United States, and thus Washington leadership and global strength.
The fact that for decades, China has already included, at the top of its longings and dreams, plans to undermine the influence of the United States in the international system, and the Chinese researchers agree that the American strategic competition is systematic, permanent, and determined for a new era.
Yan Yilong, a professor at the University of Tsinghua, describes it as “not just a dispute between two sovereign states”, but rather a “structural struggle between the great renewal of the Chinese nation and the American hegemony.”
Polish political actors believe that thanks to US President Donald Trump, China has ever been closer to achieving what he has contemplated in this framework.
And if his foreign policy – i.e. Trump – represents a return to the imperialism of the nineteenth century, then he also worked amazing, and with his own, to dismantle a global system that Beijing considered the most effective tool for American power.
However, the question, which, usually is absent amid the hustle and bustle of political literature, which celebrates the rise of China – or the Chinese alternative to the post -United States – is whether China is, already, to fulfill the conditions for global leadership, on the one hand, and whether America – in the current Trump state – is still outperforming all its potential alternatives, including China, in the ability to practice its hegemony over the world, and impose its political and military prestige And economic on it, on the other hand.
She often cited the speech of Xi Jinping in 2017, in front of the nineteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China, as evidence of Beijing’s intention, to change the role of America in the world, and in that speech, Xi China imagines a “global leader”, after “approached the lead center.”
The fact is that China is militarily, it cannot impose its power globally, as it is connected only by one official military alliance, with its neighbor, North Korea, compared to the 51th allies of the United States in the Americas, Europe and the surrounding region; Indian and calm, which limits China’s military activities.
Beijing also lacks the network of global rules necessary to extend its influence, and while US intelligence confirms that China is working to create bases, in eight other countries outside the existing arrangements, in Djibouti, and Cambodia, this will not represent a major difference compared to more than 750 military bases for Washington in 80 countries.
Not to mention that China is facing some internal challenges, foremost of which is corruption in the Chinese army, as more than twelve high -ranking military officers in the defense sector have been sacked from their positions in the second half of 2023, due to allegations of their involvement in corruption cases, which led to the obstruction of the progress of the People’s Liberation Army, towards the update targets announced for the year 2027.
In addition, the cost of global leadership, in the American way, which is estimated to be trillions of dollars, is very expensive. Historically, excessive expansion led to the fall of states and empires, which is the current China, less weight, value and stature.
During Trump’s first state, Beijing tried to exploit the isolationism of the United States, depicting herself, defending globalization and pluralism, and she is now seeking to do the same.
In the context, the Chinese Supreme Foreign Policy official, Wang Yi, said during the Munich Security Conference that China “provides the most certainty in this troubled world.”
According to the speech alone, there is no doubt that China is currently a more responsibility global party than the United States, but its global leadership approach is still selective, as China’s initiatives, which were often designed as opposition statements, are not yet representing reliable alternatives to the United States -led institutions.
For example, the Belt and Road Initiative is marketed to a loose group of bilateral agreements, instead of a framework for global governance, where Chinese initiatives- such as the Global Security Initiative, or the concepts of foreign policy, such as the “common destiny society” presented by Xi Jinping- are defined by its opposition to Western structures, instead of being proposals for something new.
While Beijing has established and expanded the scope of many international institutions, such as the BRICS Group and the Investment Bank in Asia, these institutions have been opened to new members who are likely to weaken China’s influence.
Because of its most limited ranges, the institutions created by China cannot replace the United Nations system, which Beijing recognizes as the first representative of the international system, Jacob Merdale said in the Chinese worker journal.
And if the different inputs will lead to different outputs, then the decrease in China’s productivity, the aggravating demographic crisis, and the limited natural resources, is difficult for Beijing to claim that it will be the center of the superpower by 2050.
Beyond China’s sayings and ideas, the actions of the People’s Republic of China show that they are unwilling or able to remove the global role of the United States.
At best, it combines a vision of a multiple system in which China has a field of influence in East Asia, and the superpower is the most respectable.
The opinions in the article do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al -Jazeera.