It’s tricky to rank the relative power of countries. Until they go to war with each other.
For instance, Russia was always rated as vastly superior to Ukraine. The year before its all-out invasion in 2022, the annual review by Global Firepower rated Russia as the world’s No.2 military power and Ukraine at a distant No.25.
The Pentagon assessed that Moscow would defeat Kyiv in just three days. But today “Russia holds a sizable advantage over Ukraine on troop numbers and weaponry, yet the two sides have fought to a standstill”, as the Council on Foreign Relations points out.
Illustration by Dionne GainCredit:
It’s blindingly obvious that static comparisons of power miss something essential.
Similarly, Donald Trump went into his trade war against China brimful of confidence that the US held the advantage: “They have some cards,” he said in August. “We have incredible cards. But I don’t want to play those cards. If I did, that would destroy China.”
When Xi Jinping announced comprehensive export controls on its rare earths last week, Trump, stunned, called it “impossible”. He responded in three phases. First was his kneejerk threat to put tariffs of 100 per cent on all Chinese imports to the US.
Second. When Wall Street sold off sharply in anticipation of brutal damage to the US economy, Trump relented: “Don’t worry, it will all be fine!” he wrote. The time elapsed between his thrust and withdrawal? 48 hours.
“Highly respected President Xi just had a bad moment.” A bad moment? Xi has spent a decade preparing China to be able to survive wartime isolation. Including, if necessary, a depression. Whereas Trump evidently applied his customary careful consideration and analytical rigour.
By last weekend, Australian time, Trump had conceded that his retaliatory tariff would be “unsustainable”. This was the third part of his response. An admission that he had lost. Even before he sat down with Xi to negotiate. Trump had negotiated against himself, against Wall Street, and declared defeat.
And he went on to gush over Xi – “a very strong leader, a very, you know, amazing man”. Through all three phases of Trump’s response, what did Xi say on the matter?
Chinese President Xi Jinping inspects the troops ahead of a military parade last month.Credit: AP
Nothing. His Commerce Ministry repeated its formula that “if there’s a fight, we will fight to the end; if there’s a talk, our door is open.” There’s a planned meeting between Trump and Xi in Seoul on October 31. The threatened US 100 per cent tariff is supposed to take effect the following day.
In a static comparison of economic heft, the US wins. America’s economy is about one-third bigger than China’s, based on actual market prices. In other aspects, China has the stronger economy.
More telling is the result of contact between the two clashing forces – China’s export controls on rare earths and Trump’s threatened tariff retaliation. And the comparative hard power, soft power and willpower behind each.
China won. As the BBC headline put it: “China has found Trump’s pain point – rare earths.”
For Trump, this is akin to Vladimir Putin’s shock on first contact with Ukraine’s forces. There’s a rich history of analysts predicting the moment China overtakes the US as the world’s strongest power. They’ve been wrong to date.
It remains early days. But this does appear to be a pivotal moment, the day that America quaked and China prevailed.
So it appears paradoxical that, at this very moment of triumph over the American superpower, China’s leader is waging a power struggle within his own regime.
The Chinese Communist Party’s central committee has convened this week for its four-day plenum, the most important political event of the year. It’s set to draw up China’s next five-year plan for the economy.
The party confirmed on the weekend that it had purged nine senior generals, one of the grandest liquidations of top officials since Mao. The purge includes the firing and prosecution of the highest-ranking officer in China, second only to Xi Jinping.
As president, Xi is chair of the paramount Central Military Commission. The sacked He Weidong, formerly vice-chair, was a member of the Politburo, the party’s top executive committee. He becomes the first Politburo member since the Cultural Revolution to be purged and face military prosecution.
The others include the officer responsible for the political loyalty of the People’s Liberation Army. The PLA Daily said they were accused of “seriously violating party discipline” and showing a “total collapse of beliefs”. Belief in what or whom?
They are accused of corruption. Every senior party member could be accused of corruption; the ones who are purged are judged guilty of the ultimate crime in Xi’s China, disloyalty to the chairman. By naming these disgraced generals on the cusp of the plenum, Xi nakedly is intimidating his entire regime.
What’s going on? “The generals are among the best-educated and technically practised political figures in China,” says the irreverently erudite sinologist Geremie Barmé. Of course they are sycophantic to Xi.
“But there are always adventurers, plotters and notorious double-dealers among the leadership,” he says, using a long-standing phrase from the CCP lexicon. “Among these leaders there are some who want to launch a pre-emptive strike on Taiwan, or want to say ‘f— it, let’s get rid of this old doughboy’” by staging a coup against Xi.
He’s speculating, but, he says, “how could there not – at the heart of their system you have a military junta. In the 104-year history of the CCP, there has been one successful, peaceful transfer of power”, in 2003. And, without an anointed heir, Xi deliberately has created a succession dilemma.
The political purge of China’s military has similarities to the Trump administration’s political loyalty test now under way in the Pentagon. “The parallels of power – once you have an autocratic ruler, it’s always the same playbook – paranoia, testing loyalty, purging,” remarks Barme, publisher of China Heritage.
The leaders of the US and China may be growing more alike, but in their power struggle against each other, only one can prevail.
Peter Hartcher is international editor.
Most Viewed in World
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: www.smh.com.au
