By Jin Canrong

Biden administration's release of the first complete National Security Strategy Report on October 12, 2022 marked that the US had unilaterally launched a "new Cold War" against China.

Four commonalities of the old and new Cold Wars

This "new Cold War" against China has four commonalities with the old one in the last century. First, they both determine a unique global adversary, that is, the Soviet Union for previously and China for now. The US' new National Security Strategy Report clearly states that China is the only competitor with the intention and capability to reshape the international order and "presents America’s most consequential geopolitical challenge."

Second, the US implements complementally internal and external mobilization. In the internal term, it promotes anti-China ideology, with toughness against China as "political correctness". More and more US politicians are attempting to gain political capital by discrediting China, while those advocating for a rational approach and speaking objectively about China are constantly marginalized. 

In the external term, firstly, it attempts to build an Asia-Pacific version of NATO, prioritizing facilitating reconciliation between Japan and KOR and pushing cooperation among Australia and these two countries on this basis, then stepping up coordination with some other countries with the triplex as the core to form a certain "3+N" mode. Secondly, it continually strengthens NATO's presence in the Asia-Pacific. In spite of existing deterring factors such as opposition from France, the US has not changed its intention and actions to promote NATO's expansion into the Asia-Pacific. Thirdly, it forces neutral countries to take sides and makes calculated moves based on specific areas and agendas, for example seeking to establish the "Chip Quartet Alliance" (CHIP4).

Third, it endeavors to put pressure on China in all directions without leaving any space. Individual US government departments sometimes used to deviate from the White House on policies towards China because of particular interest conflict and other issues, but now this is almost no longer the case, as the US is forming an “all government” strategy to contain China.

Fourth, it avoids a hot war while exerting pressure on all fronts. During the "old Cold War" period, the US used to seek the so-called "detente" with the Soviet Union, correspondingly it is also constantly advertising installing a "guardrail" for bilateral relations with China now. The reason is that the country is clear that it would pay for a huge price should a "hot war" break out.

The two-way "new Cold War" has not yet started

However, it should be noted and distinguished that a two-way "new Cold War" between China and the US has not yet initiated. A key factor lies in China's consistent attitude toward rejecting a "new Cold War" or even never allowing the world to slide into this path. China's post-strike response strategic thinking is also playing a role in responding to provocations and arbitrary oppression from the US.

Moreover, the internal and external mobilization of the US has not gone smoothly. From the internal perspective, major large enterprises of the country are generally rational in their relations with China. Some time ago, relevant US executives visited China intensively despite pressure from the US government and anti-China politicians, reflecting the reluctance of some social forces in the US, including the business community, to cater to Washington's anti-China mobilization.

From the external perspective, at least major traditional European countries are unwilling to openly follow the US in its China policy, while almost all ASEAN countries are clearly opposed to taking sides. Besides, the US itself is inseparable from China in some international affairs. All these make the US even more interdependent with China than with the Soviet Union.

Coupled with the Russia-Ukraine conflict and other constraints, all the described factors result in US' "new Cold War" strategy difficult to be mobilized and implemented and failing to be initiated in two-way.

Why is America getting hysterical about China

So why does the US react so strongly to China's rise, even to the point of launching a "new Cold War"? First of all, the answer can be found in the development and change of the US itself.

The peak of strength for the country happened in 1945, but now it has passed. The author believes that the Nixon shock occurring on August 15, 1971 should be regarded as an important moment of the postwar national development of the country. Then US President Richard Nixon suddenly announced the decoupling of dollar from gold, which directly led to the collapse of the Bretton Woods System. This operation by the Nixon administration was a serious breach of contract, but at that time Europe and Japan were strategically constrained by the US and could not do anything about it although dissatisfied, and there was no strong opposition in the US owing to their benefits from this "default".

However, the subsequent impacts of the "Nixon shock" gradually emerged later on, and the US economy shifted toward virtualization and financialization. On account of lower profits compared with the financial industry, combined with the high contradiction between strong union forces and the capitals in steel, automobile and other industries, together with other influences, the offshoring trend of medium and low-end manufacturing industry got more evident in the US. The result was that the virtualisation of the US economy had accelerated, thus roughly half of US GDP is associated with finance now.

This makes the US less self-sustaining today than it was in 1945. Nevertheless, the "bloodsucking ability" of the country has been greatly enhanced, enabling it to control and continuously profit from the global market through financial means.

In this way, it is not difficult to understand why the US directs the focus of the "new Cold War" squarely at China. According to general views of the international academic and even political circles, China will eventually replace the US as the largest economic power if continuing to develop on its current trajectory. On the context of severe economic virtualization, the US is highly dependent on its "leading" status in the world economy. To a large extent, it is the credibility and hegemonic position as the world's first economic powerhouse that facilitate it to manipulate all types of financial games and reap interests from the world. Therefore, in the view of some American elites, maintaining the "leading" position is no longer just a matter of interests but a matter of "life and death" significance. Although China has repeatedly stressed that it never seeks to change the existing international order nor interferes in the internal affairs of the US, and has no intention to challenge or replace its position, the US has continued to build up strategic anxiety and behaves increasingly hysterical in its China policy until unilaterally launching a "new Cold War" against China.

(The author is a professor of School of International Studies, Renmin University of China)

Editor's note: Originally published on opinion.huanqiu.com, this article is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.