East Asia ForumSearch
Is the ‘China threat’ real or trumped up?
Published: 03 August 2025
Reading Time: 5 mins
A military delegate waits for the opening session of the National People's Congress (NPC) at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China, 5 March 2025 (Photo: Reuters/Florence Lo).
Jia Qingguo
Peking University
In Brief
Despite its growing power, Chinese foreign policy has revealed little intent to deliberately harm the global order. Yet Western powers labelling it a threat risks escalating tensions unnecessarily and could weaken the international community at large. A cooperative, objective approach, rather than fear-driven posturing, is vital to managing US–China relations and maintaining global stability.
===
In recent years, the ‘China threat’ theory has become a prominent theme in Western political discourse. At the 2025 Shangri-La Dialogue, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called on East Asian nations to increase military spending, citing an ‘imminent’ threat from China. Many anti-China hawks perceive this threat as spanning economic, technological and security domains.
But if viewed from within China, the so-called ‘China threat’ has little to do with China’s actual intentions or behaviour. Instead, it reflects Western — particularly US — perceptions, anxieties and political considerations.
By definition, a threat implies a deliberate intention to cause harm. China’s foreign policy does not conform to this notion. It has consistently refrained from imposing its ideology, political system or economic model on other countries and adheres to a long-standing principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of others.
Rather than resorting to force, China advocates the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence: mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit and peaceful coexistence. It maintains that all nations have the right to pursue development based on their own national conditions.
China also supports an open and rules-based trading system and has successfully resolved numerous border disputes through diplomatic negotiation. Even as it has become more militarily capable and assertive in defending its territorial claims in the South China Sea, the East China Sea and on the Sino–Indian border, China has not moved to expand its long-held claims, let alone resorted to the use of force in order to do so. This track record may have included mis-steps. But it does not suggest a state bent on aggression or global domination, and China has tied itself back to negotiation within the framework of international principles.
Why, then, does the ‘China threat’ narrative persist — especially in the United States?
One reason lies in the discomfort over China’s rapid rise. As China emerges as a major player in the global economy and technology sectors, it challenges the long-standing dominance of the West. For many, this shift provokes a sense of strategic and ideological insecurity. China’s advancements in 5G, artificial intelligence and space exploration have triggered fears of declining Western technological superiority.
Compounding this unease is China’s refusal to follow the Western path of governance. Its model — marked by centralised political authority, a greater role for the state in the economy and an emphasis on order over liberal freedoms — contrasts with Western democratic norms. For some, China’s success threatens not only global power dynamics but also the ideological foundation of the liberal international order.
Domestic politics further fuel the ‘China threat’ narrative. In some Western countries, especially the United States, portraying China as an adversary serves domestic political purposes. It helps deflect public attention from internal challenges such as inequality, political polarisation and economic discontent. China’s different political system and economic achievements make it a convenient scapegoat, especially for politicians seeking to galvanise nationalist sentiment or justify defence spending.
Strategic and geopolitical considerations also play a role. For the United States and its allies, the ‘China threat’ provides a rationale for strengthening military alliances and maintaining influence in the Indo-Pacific. Under former president Joe Biden, Washington frequently emphasised the need for democratic unity in the face of rising autocracies — an implicit reference to China.
This framing reinforces coalitions like NATO and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue while legitimising increased defence budgets. But this narrative is dangerous. Framing China as a predetermined adversary risks transforming a complex but manageable relationship into an outright confrontation. History teaches us that perceived enemies often become real ones when consistently treated as threats. The more the United States positions China as a rival, the greater the likelihood of provoking the very behaviours it seeks to avoid.
Is such an outcome in the United States’ interest? Absolutely not. Both China and the United States benefit immensely from the existing international order. Open trade, global stability and multilateral cooperation are necessary to address shared challenges like climate change, pandemics and nuclear proliferation.
As Paul Kennedy argues in The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, historically, dominant states often decline not from external conquest but from the overextension of their power. If China and the United States exhaust themselves in mutual containment, both will lose. A more sensible strategy would involve collaboratively upholding the international order while sharing its burdens with other nations.
In this context, the international community should approach China’s rise with objectivity and restraint. China’s foreign policy since the 1970s has been largely defensive and adaptive. It has not sought to dismantle the post-Second World War global system, nor rewrite its institutions or norms. This is the reality many in the West often choose to ignore. For its part, China has enabled this ignorance by failing to effectively communicate its foreign policy approach on the international stage. Western and Chinese policymakers alike should exercise caution in their rhetoric and avoid actions that escalate tensions or invite retaliatory conduct.
Pragmatic, confidence-building measures are needed to foster mutual understanding. China has consistently expressed willingness to engage in dialogue and cooperation. Western countries, especially the United States, should respond by expanding diplomatic channels, promoting educational and cultural exchange and deepening economic partnerships. Collaboration, not confrontation, is the key to a peaceful and prosperous future.
Rather than perpetuating the ‘China threat’ narrative, the international community, including China, should focus on common interests and shared challenges. Confrontation is not inevitable — but mutual understanding and cooperation are essential if we are to avoid it.
Jia Qingguo is Professor at the School of International Studies, Peking University.
https://doi.org/10.59425/eabc.1754258400
One response to “Is the ‘China threat’ real or trumped up?”
Ashley Brunner says:August 4, 2025 at 6:02 am
So well put. In daily discourse in Australia I get looked at with such scepticism when I say this, “China is not a threat!”.
At a regular social meeting of us older men, I see the local newspapers lying across the table, and know that the false narrative is there in front of me, and it’s so frustrating.
No comments:
Post a Comment