Cultural

Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy

Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy

  • Downloads：6361
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-05-11 08:55:07
  • Update Date：2025-09-07
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Kishore Mahbubani
  • ISBN：1541768132
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

The defining geopolitical contest of the twenty-first century is between China and the US。 But is it avoidable？ And if it happens， is the outcome already inevitable？
China and America are world powers without serious rivals。 They eye each other warily across the Pacific; they communicate poorly; there seems little natural empathy。 A massive geopolitical contest has begun。
America prizes freedom; China values freedom from chaos。America values strategic decisiveness; China values patience。America is becoming society of lasting inequality; China a meritocracy。America has abandoned multilateralism; China welcomes it。
Kishore Mahbubani， a diplomat and scholar with unrivalled access to policymakers in Beijing and Washington， has written the definitive guide to the deep fault lines in the relationship， a clear-eyed assessment of the risk of any confrontation， and a bracingly honest appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses， and superpower eccentricities， of the US and China。

Download

Reviews

Guillaume Dohmen ，

A fascinating book written by a specialist who was born in the Far East but also knows the West。

Murtaza ，

History is not a morality tale and neither China nor the Chinese Communist Party are likely going anywhere， nor are they likely to experience many brakes on their path to global power。 This book argues for a nuanced U。S。 take on China， from the perspective of a former Singaporean diplomat。 I'm familiar with Mahbubani's earlier works and the Asian futurist perspective he represents。 I found this one to be a bit repetitive and poorly edited， but he lays out a plausible path in which Asia rebalance History is not a morality tale and neither China nor the Chinese Communist Party are likely going anywhere， nor are they likely to experience many brakes on their path to global power。 This book argues for a nuanced U。S。 take on China， from the perspective of a former Singaporean diplomat。 I'm familiar with Mahbubani's earlier works and the Asian futurist perspective he represents。 I found this one to be a bit repetitive and poorly edited， but he lays out a plausible path in which Asia rebalances the United States and even relegates it to second-tier nation status in the coming decades。 Mahbubani is much less catastrophic than Graham Allison who thinks that a shooting war of some sort is likely inevitable。 Instead， China and the U。S。 will compete diplomatically， economically， and technologically。 Whether this competition is constructive or not remains to be seen， but for that to happen the zero-sum mentality now prevailing in D。C。 will need to shift to something more realistic。 。。。more

Tom ，

A balanced assessment of which country will lead the world through the 21st century， especially refreshing since Kishore Mahbubani is a veteran diplomat from Singapore so the book is written from a non-Western perspective。 Interesting that research was done before the pandemic hit， and some of the United States' vulnerabilities on the cultural level vis a vis China have only been magnified in the months since publication。 A great lens through which to assess much of the day-to-day news。 A balanced assessment of which country will lead the world through the 21st century， especially refreshing since Kishore Mahbubani is a veteran diplomat from Singapore so the book is written from a non-Western perspective。 Interesting that research was done before the pandemic hit， and some of the United States' vulnerabilities on the cultural level vis a vis China have only been magnified in the months since publication。 A great lens through which to assess much of the day-to-day news。 。。。more

Martin Khamphoukeo ，

Typically his writings are good， however， this book shows his bias towards China。 I felt many views were poorly documented and were based on pure believe。 The fact that he enjoys a good relationship with China just supports why he would be biased。

Ivailo ，

Great points but sometimes they are overvalued for china's favor It's an amazing book which gives deep knowledge of the situation between the US and China and the potential upcoming cold War。There are amazing points in this book but sometimes they get repeated too much and get overblown to make China look like the better country。 There are also factors which weaken China and were missed to be mentioned in the book。In summary， it is a great book and if you're interested in the topic then you shou Great points but sometimes they are overvalued for china's favor It's an amazing book which gives deep knowledge of the situation between the US and China and the potential upcoming cold War。There are amazing points in this book but sometimes they get repeated too much and get overblown to make China look like the better country。 There are also factors which weaken China and were missed to be mentioned in the book。In summary， it is a great book and if you're interested in the topic then you should definately give it a read！ 。。。more

Michael Duyvesteijn ，

I had already become more skeptical towards the United States still proclaiming itself "the leader of the free world" （that title rightfully belongs to Angela Merkel after all those years）， but this book has changed my perception of China more favorably as well。 Mahbubani dives deeply and with nuance into why either side behaves like it does， for better or for worse。 China is a force to be reckoned with， hence Mahbubani （being Singaporean） is advocating balance and cooperation to live together p I had already become more skeptical towards the United States still proclaiming itself "the leader of the free world" （that title rightfully belongs to Angela Merkel after all those years）， but this book has changed my perception of China more favorably as well。 Mahbubani dives deeply and with nuance into why either side behaves like it does， for better or for worse。 China is a force to be reckoned with， hence Mahbubani （being Singaporean） is advocating balance and cooperation to live together peacefully on this tiny Earth。 。。。more

Rob T ，

Very interesting perspective on how China views the world。

Jason ，

Kishore’s opinion is while both US and China has made mistakes and can make devastating mistakes in the future， China is winning the strategic race unless US makes an U-turn in its foreign policy。 With rational decision making the two can avoid conflicts by focusing on the noncontradictions and common interests。 However emotions often trumps rationality and if this continues， conflicts are hard to avoid。

Alice ，

The issue with this book is that it tries to cover a lot of ground in too few pages （read: it’s all over the place）。 As a result， it grossly oversimplifies many of the topics it touches on。。。

Shahid Pracha ，

I thought this was a thoughtfully written book which challenges Western perceptions about China and provides very useful insights on its history and culture。 Most readers fed on a steady diet of a hitherto presumptive American inspired （and often propagandist） narrative will find that the tone rankles as Mahbubani makes his case。 But anyone willing to approach reading this book with an open mind will find Mahbubani's bias stimulates reflection on alternative possibilities。 I thought this was a thoughtfully written book which challenges Western perceptions about China and provides very useful insights on its history and culture。 Most readers fed on a steady diet of a hitherto presumptive American inspired （and often propagandist） narrative will find that the tone rankles as Mahbubani makes his case。 But anyone willing to approach reading this book with an open mind will find Mahbubani's bias stimulates reflection on alternative possibilities。 。。。more

Jim Reynolds ，

Eh。 Yes。 Yes and no。 4* for the first three chapters and 2* for the final six。 Good:- Interesting parallels with the Cold War， framing the modern US as the new USSR， tired and brittle， while China quickly adapts;- Is right that China can't be fought head-on and that constant lobbying pressure from contractors is a significant weakness to the US;- Largely right to stress that the US is wrong to approach China as a *Communist* threat;- Offers a useful analysis of the tarnishing of the US's reputat Eh。 Yes。 Yes and no。 4* for the first three chapters and 2* for the final six。 Good:- Interesting parallels with the Cold War， framing the modern US as the new USSR， tired and brittle， while China quickly adapts;- Is right that China can't be fought head-on and that constant lobbying pressure from contractors is a significant weakness to the US;- Largely right to stress that the US is wrong to approach China as a *Communist* threat;- Offers a useful analysis of the tarnishing of the US's reputation as a stable， reliable trade partner （and the USD as a reserve; the chapter on the role of the dollar really was interesting）- Good reading into how China underestimated the US after the 2008 recession and has hurt its relations with western business by its own hand;- Seems broadly right in its assessment of Chinese attitudes towards the CCP;- Right in refocus on south east Asia。 Mostly right to advise the US to leave the Middle East。And then， unfortunately， the book takes a turn。 One moment it's offering a balanced breakdown of the seizure of intellectual property， historical claims to the South China Sea etc。。。 and then the text gets weighed down in appeals to authority and tu quoque deflections。Not so good:- The end lingers on US atrocities and inefficiencies。 Fair enough。 But these do not serve the titular question。 The book instead uses examples of poor American foreign policy to avoid uncomfortable truths for China for a few pages until the reader has forgotten the point。 The final chapter offers one conciliatory mention of human rights abuses in Xinjiang。 But it has to qualify this with US use of torture in the Middle East。 Hence， criticism only really extends to Chinese practice when it can highlight a case of the US being 'worse'。 So nothing on Tibertans， Falun Gong， corporate deserters。。。 just whataboutism;- For a book called 'Has China Won'， it spends a lot of time examining how the West might have lost its grip and almost no time looking at the challenges facing China in the next few years。 Europe has a wave of migration coming。 Fine。 But China's looming drought （and conflict with India）， famine and economic bubble deserve some mention， no？- I do understand that the presentation of China as an active aggressor in foreign affairs has been largely exaggerated。 But presenting it as the poor victim of American expansionism is。。。 disingenuous。 China doubled its troops in Hong Kong mere months before the book claims that China has "shown great restraint in Hong Kong" and hasn't used any military threat。 Also， the line of 'it's not ideological' is not wholly true; the CCP now vets HK MPs for political affiliation。 And zero mention of the United Front， Confucius Institutes， lobbying， etc;- False dichotomies: "most neighbours would prefer to be led by a calm Xi Jinping than a reckless Trump" （。。。and therefore Myanmar and Taiwan are。。。 complicit？）- Reliance on Rawls。 Says that under the veil of ignorance， somebody might choose China over the US on the basis of high wealth inequality in the US。 This is obviously a problem in the west， but poor and minority groups aren't pouring /into/ China for protection。。。The book started so well with its tight analysis of geopolitics in the region and then ended up in gushy， idealistic visions of the BRI and China being left to its own devices with Taiwan so that it can 'watch as an experiment on how Chinese people react to democracy'（！） It ends on a sort of 'maybe it's not a zero sum game and everyone can love each other and save the earth （oh and also China is better with its emissions）。。。 what a shame。。。 （SAD！）The author does well to raise the problems facing a US that has grown used to stability。 But if - as the reviews say - the book will provoke a reaction in American audiences， it should be for this。 Unfortunately， I fear， far more glaring is misdirection that the book relies upon to deliver its arguments。 。。。more

Kimfu ，

Finally， a book featuring attitudes and ideas about China and its relations with the rest of the world in a way that matches my own！ I thought that wasn't possible！ Now， Mr。 Mahbubani， could you please begin to influence other thinkers and policy-makers who have an impact on the world stage？ I believe you could do a lot of good！二零二一年： 第十一本书 Finally， a book featuring attitudes and ideas about China and its relations with the rest of the world in a way that matches my own！ I thought that wasn't possible！ Now， Mr。 Mahbubani， could you please begin to influence other thinkers and policy-makers who have an impact on the world stage？ I believe you could do a lot of good！二零二一年： 第十一本书 。。。more

Yu Gao Fei ，

Good book about analyzing China's intentions， motivation， ideals and values in relation to what the west misconceptions are。 However， the book can be repetitive in terms of some ideas at the end。 Basic idea: 1） China is not expansionary 2） It has its own style of goverance3） China will not compromise on issue of Taiwan4） China may have made a mistake in asserting its domainance too early 5） American may have made a mistake of over extending its reach too strongly Good book about analyzing China's intentions， motivation， ideals and values in relation to what the west misconceptions are。 However， the book can be repetitive in terms of some ideas at the end。 Basic idea: 1） China is not expansionary 2） It has its own style of goverance3） China will not compromise on issue of Taiwan4） China may have made a mistake in asserting its domainance too early 5） American may have made a mistake of over extending its reach too strongly 。。。more

Stephanie Fuhr ，

Provocative read on US/China relations from an expert and engaging writer。 I was 90 pages in before I could put it down。 I see comments about China-bias in the reviews。 Since I live entrenched in US-bias， I found the perspectives refreshing and thought-provoking。 The relationship between our two nations seems even more challenging to track and parse through now， but I feel like I have some indicators with which to read and question political declarations and media better。

Wallis Chan ，

Pro-CCP propaganda junk

Juan Liong ，

Not the best book for beginners because it requires some degree of understanding toward American and China's political system and social-economic condition。 Very thought provoking and insightful Not the best book for beginners because it requires some degree of understanding toward American and China's political system and social-economic condition。 Very thought provoking and insightful 。。。more

Scott Rauland ，

This book is a welcome antidote to the wave of Сhina-bashing the world had to endure in the final years of the Trump Administration。 It is well written and sourced， with commentary by a long list of highly regarded experts。 I felt there was a slight tendency to whitewash some of China’s problems and shortcomings， in particular China’s internment of up to 1 million Uighurs in detention centers。 And some of his commentary on the U。S。 is also too simplistic， for example， his assertion that the best This book is a welcome antidote to the wave of Сhina-bashing the world had to endure in the final years of the Trump Administration。 It is well written and sourced， with commentary by a long list of highly regarded experts。 I felt there was a slight tendency to whitewash some of China’s problems and shortcomings， in particular China’s internment of up to 1 million Uighurs in detention centers。 And some of his commentary on the U。S。 is also too simplistic， for example， his assertion that the best a career U。S。 diplomat could hope for was to make ambassador to Bamako。 There have been dozens and dozens of highly accomplished career diplomats who have guided our largest and most important embassies in recent years， including in Moscow， Berlin， Brasilia， Mexico City， and Jakarta， to name just a handful。My only major quibble was with the title， which was unnecessarily provocative， and does not reflect the actual goal of the author in writing the book。that being said， I was very grateful for his assessment of the state of one of the most important bilateral relationships in the world。 。。。more

WT ，

Really good thoughts / observations。 Learned so much。

Larkin H ，

Ambassador Mahbubani wrote an important book and I encourage all Americans to read it。 However， my review is slightly negative because the book was unnecessarily long and at times repetitive。 The first half of the book is essential reading for those interested in China-America geopolitics but then it starts to drag。 The book probably started as a think tank report and was extended to meet normal book length。

SH Leung ，

The first 90 pages of the book were excellent with relatively unbiased analyses of the strategic mistakes of China and US respectively。 Then the book descended into lengthy repetitive extremely biased pro-China rhetoric which can be summed up as the following1。 Economic growth = clout2。 Ideology-less = pragmatism = winning strategyIn short， the way of China and Singapore rocks。 Democracy and principle-driven diplomacy are well meaning but not the best way to manage a country。 Author’s view is so The first 90 pages of the book were excellent with relatively unbiased analyses of the strategic mistakes of China and US respectively。 Then the book descended into lengthy repetitive extremely biased pro-China rhetoric which can be summed up as the following1。 Economic growth = clout2。 Ideology-less = pragmatism = winning strategyIn short， the way of China and Singapore rocks。 Democracy and principle-driven diplomacy are well meaning but not the best way to manage a country。 Author’s view is so biased that at times he would sidestep/rationalize certain basic facts that made you go WTF？ For example，1。 China’s way is justified because it needs to reign in the domestic “nationalistic dragon。” —> But clearly the govt is the one stoking it？？2。 Xi removal of term limit is justified to ensure policy continuity and because China always needed a strong core to thrive because of its 5000 years of dynastic history etc And India was brought up to show how the US would “disrespect” them even though they are ideologically more compatible than China。 I think the book is worth a read for its first 90 pages but the rest of the 200 pages contain only superficial analyses that are heavily biased to suit the author’s own view of the world and should be skipped unless what you want is the “other side of the story” away from the usual Western narratives。 。。。more

QUINNS ，

In theory， national interests， not personalities， drive the course of international relations。 In practice， characters do matter。 This book highlights the realities of China and the US， both viewpoints well on various hot topics。 It has also captured accurate perspectives from Western and Eastern civilisations， the inevitable frictions and layout in a readable fashion for the general readers。 In my view， the book is an excellent read for anyone wanting to familiarise with the current wave of pol In theory， national interests， not personalities， drive the course of international relations。 In practice， characters do matter。 This book highlights the realities of China and the US， both viewpoints well on various hot topics。 It has also captured accurate perspectives from Western and Eastern civilisations， the inevitable frictions and layout in a readable fashion for the general readers。 In my view， the book is an excellent read for anyone wanting to familiarise with the current wave of politics and international relations。 Additionally， the book talks about the Western undercurrents of "yellow peril"， opportunities in ASEAN for America， the challenge of climate change and all countries' mutual interests in China-US diplomacy in preserving planet earth for future generations。 Overall， there is something for everyone here—a solid read。 。。。more

Carter ，

I skimmed through particular title， and I found the title very odd， there are few statistics backing up claims make about China， and a lot of the statistics presented about America are not comparative which China， which makes any of the claims difficult to evaluate。 Would opening up the car market for U。S。 made vehicles be beneficial to China？ Would opening up the market to Boeing？ It is a claim that is unsubstantiated， in the book， and is more of an opinion。 A detailed impact analysis on the bo I skimmed through particular title， and I found the title very odd， there are few statistics backing up claims make about China， and a lot of the statistics presented about America are not comparative which China， which makes any of the claims difficult to evaluate。 Would opening up the car market for U。S。 made vehicles be beneficial to China？ Would opening up the market to Boeing？ It is a claim that is unsubstantiated， in the book， and is more of an opinion。 A detailed impact analysis on the both economies would be needed， and on business ties between both countries。 Airbus exists as a competitor to Boeing in the E。U。？ Why does China try to do likewise？ Mercantilism on some level is still a thing， countries on some level would prefer some level of autonomy when it comes to critical industries， products and supplies， even given a global supply chain。 Democracy in China， is exceptionally complicated much like Iraq， where there is battle between the Shiites， Sunnis and Kurds。 Especially with foreign influence from places like Iran， and terrorist organizations try to fan the flames of these disputes （ISIS）。 Obviousy in China such divisions are not racial/tribal or religious， but one of economics， city centres sit squarely in the first world， particularly along the coast， but much of the country is much poorer- inland cities， and the regions around them and then the village areas which are far out of contact。 With such deep divisions， much like the one's emerging in the U。S。A。 between the Blue coastal and Red inland states， would it ever work？ 。。。more

I Read ，

Mahbubani is clearly biased in favour of China - this is not necessarily a bad thing。 Any book that seeks to answer the titular question should favour one side or the other。 He brings much more to the table by presenting his opinion， shaped by decades of diplomatic experience， than by simply presenting both sides of the argument。However， I do think that the book suffers slightly from its biases。 This is clear from the start of the book when he identifies China's greatest strategic mistake as ali Mahbubani is clearly biased in favour of China - this is not necessarily a bad thing。 Any book that seeks to answer the titular question should favour one side or the other。 He brings much more to the table by presenting his opinion， shaped by decades of diplomatic experience， than by simply presenting both sides of the argument。However， I do think that the book suffers slightly from its biases。 This is clear from the start of the book when he identifies China's greatest strategic mistake as alienating American businesses and America's as having no coherent geopolitical strategy at all。 Where the book is lacking is in examination of China's weaknesses and America's strengths。 To be fair， each are acknowledged， but not at length; the latter perhaps goes without saying。 Mahbubani also seems to be writing primarily to a Western audience to challenge widely-held assumptions; in that context， the focus on China's strengths and America's weaknesses makes sense because it is the converse that is so often focused on。Overall， a good read that will likely prove incendiary and challenging to many Western readers - it is precisely for that reason that it should be read。 。。。more

Rohan Dalvi ，

A brutally honest and somewhat contrarian take on US-China relations。 Though like everyone， Mahbubani has his own biases， I thought that the perspective of a Singaporean academic offered a perspective that was less influenced by fear and denial than most American commentators。 One of the major undergirding assumptions in this book is that over the course of the 21st century， China will economically surpass America。 This is a strong likelihood that I think most Americans simply push to the back o A brutally honest and somewhat contrarian take on US-China relations。 Though like everyone， Mahbubani has his own biases， I thought that the perspective of a Singaporean academic offered a perspective that was less influenced by fear and denial than most American commentators。 One of the major undergirding assumptions in this book is that over the course of the 21st century， China will economically surpass America。 This is a strong likelihood that I think most Americans simply push to the back of their minds and don't think about， and consequently don't consider when making China policy。 On a meta-level， he also notes that America uses "cold war logic" when thinking about China - we assume that China is expansionist， and interpret China's action in the south china sea accordingly。 He offers some arguments against this notion。 He also spends a lot of time assessing the bilateral relations between China and other countries and drives implications for how other countries should operate。 He paints a picture of the world where Asia （China largely， but also ASEAN countries and India） is at parity and surpassing the West economically， and the West （and in particular the US， which has trouble relinquishing an image of international leadership） must over the course of the next couple of decades adapt to multipolarity。 I see this as a pretty clear-eyed analysis， and thought that all of Mahbubani's points were good and insightful。 Would recommend to anyone interested in thinking about not just the US-China relationship， but international politics more broadly， is headed over the 21st century。 。。。more

Nay Aung ，

A great read with well through views from both Chinese， American and other countries。 Has China won？ Well， it will depend on both directions/action of leaders from both countries in next few decades。

Squigzo ，

The FT review is a fair analysis of the books stance of the USA/China relationship。 The book's criticism of the USA regarding its battleship diplomacy， plutocracy and the downward economic path for its 50% lowest earners is fair。 Its analysis of China's rise as an economic powerhouse。 military power and the improved economic benefits for its population are undeniable。 However， it's lack of critical analysis of China's human rights violations is completely absent。 Its dismissal of protests in Chi The FT review is a fair analysis of the books stance of the USA/China relationship。 The book's criticism of the USA regarding its battleship diplomacy， plutocracy and the downward economic path for its 50% lowest earners is fair。 Its analysis of China's rise as an economic powerhouse。 military power and the improved economic benefits for its population are undeniable。 However， it's lack of critical analysis of China's human rights violations is completely absent。 Its dismissal of protests in China and Hong Kong are at best tame and more often act as an apologist for the CCP。 It exposes a clear bias in favour of China and it's leadership， however， I would still recommend it as a worthwhile read。 。。。more

Shayaalh ，

The book should be called “The Case for China”rather than making it sound like a fair comparison between the U。S and China and posing a question of whether China will win this race。 Although the author has a clear bias to China （understandable）， I think the arguments posed in the book are worth pondering upon。

David Silva ，

An excellent book to dismistify a lot of our bias ideas about China and the USA。 It provides some clarity of how the clash of these two countries will move forward and what is really at stake for both of them。

Gunkar ，

The book reads almost like a clickbait post and has an extreme bias for China which makes the read less enjoyable。 For example， the book suggests that the real reason behind the Hong Kong protests are because of high real estate prices which is hard to believe。 Furthermore， the book intentionally avoids politically sensitive topics about China such as China’s record on freedom of expression and press。 There are some deeply flawed premises in the book’s arguments but I will not mention them here。 The book reads almost like a clickbait post and has an extreme bias for China which makes the read less enjoyable。 For example， the book suggests that the real reason behind the Hong Kong protests are because of high real estate prices which is hard to believe。 Furthermore， the book intentionally avoids politically sensitive topics about China such as China’s record on freedom of expression and press。 There are some deeply flawed premises in the book’s arguments but I will not mention them here。However， some interesting points were brought up。 It’s true that US primacy has severely declined and American exceptionalism will end as time progresses。 It’s also true that American foreign and domestic policy need to radically change if the US wants to maintain its competitive edge。 Despite its shortcomings， I’d still recommend this book for anyone interested in geopolitics。 。。。more

Shawn P ，

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 Probably the best book I’ve read on US-China geopolitical， social and economic competition。 Kishore is evidently pro-China， but still his insights are cogently laid out:* The use of USD as the world’s reserve currency enables Americans to live beyond their means as the world wants to buy their Treasury Bills with USD。 They just need to buy the paper to print the Treasury Bills。 That funds their double deficits - fiscal deficit and trade deficit。 American spends more than it collects in income - Probably the best book I’ve read on US-China geopolitical， social and economic competition。 Kishore is evidently pro-China， but still his insights are cogently laid out:* The use of USD as the world’s reserve currency enables Americans to live beyond their means as the world wants to buy their Treasury Bills with USD。 They just need to buy the paper to print the Treasury Bills。 That funds their double deficits - fiscal deficit and trade deficit。 American spends more than it collects in income - fiscal deficit。 It imports more goods than it exports - trade deficit。* But America weaponising its currency （eg sanction of Iran by forbidding USD trades） may have unexpected effects; the world will start moving away from USD to lessen its reliance on it。* Most of the 2000 years （0 - 1800’s）， China and India are the dominant nations。 Only in the last 200 years did the west （UK， USA， Europe） rose to the forefront。* China alienated the west by imposing unfair conditions for opening their huge market to them - forced technology transfers， etc。* Unlike most countries， America willingly accepts foreign-born people as their own if they succeed in America。 By contrast， no major Chinese company or institution is run by a foreign-born individuals。* China firms enjoyed a better playing field outside China than the one China provided to foreign firms inside China。* American people have been fleecing the Chinese people because they have been paying for Chinese products with money printed on paper - through China buying American Treasury Bills。 * A large part of global transactions go to American banks as USD is used。 So even though American has a trade deficit in goods， it enjoys a trade surplus in services。* America’s illusion: that it will be number one forever; that its society is inherently virtuous both in its domestic and international behaviour。 That it is gifted in all spheres of human demeanour。 This is called American Exceptionalism。* America feels it stands for universal values and the world would be better off if it follows American values。 But is it wise to believe that there is only one road for all societies to travel on if they want to grow and progress？* China is not militaristic， unlike America。 It has a pragmatic view of power。 It has not fought a major war in 40 years and has not fired a bullet across its borders for 30 years。* American is militaristic and expansionistic。 It took Puerto Rico and Guam from Spain （and California and Texas from Mexico？）* America is overspending in its military expenditure， including weapons and interventions overseas。* India is an open society with a closed mind， whereas China is a closed society with an open mind。* China has one of the most intelligent governments in the world。 The CCP recruits only the best graduates in China， selected based on merit。 Civil service in China is based on meritocracy， whereas that in US on plutocracy。* Europe should hope that Africa’s top economic partner， China， helps it to succeed。 Perhaps by Europe itself participating。 So it helps Europe’s long term security if China develops Africa。 Else in the future millions of African refugees may yet again descend on its shores like in 2017。 But US will object to Europe partnering with China of course。 * It’s beneficial for US to continue providing protection to Japan。 Without it， Japan may need to resort to building nuclear weapons and unset the global nuclear balance。 Japan can easily and quickly build nuclear weapons given its scientific capabilities and stockpile of nuclear materials for peaceful use。* When the best brains of the world compete on a level playing field in America， the data shows it is the ethnic Indian community that does the best。 Eg the CEOs of Google， Microsoft， Pepsico。 They have the highest median household income in America at US$119K。* Paradox: while China is supposedly a closed society while America is open society， China finds it easier to deal with a diverse world as it has no expectations that other societies should become like them。 They have no desire to change the ideological or political practices of other societies。 。。。more

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0