Strategic Showdown: US-China Rivalry, Rhetoric, and the Race for Global Reign

The clouds of tension are looming large, and we see a storm stirring up. Now, before scratching your head, wondering what storm we are talking about and who is stirring what, let us make things clear.

Illustration by The Geostrata

A new chapter in US-China ties has begun, defined by increasingly hostile discourse, reciprocal sanctions, and limited people-to-people interaction. Additionally, if the current string of tensions continue, the prospect of a long-term strategic rivalry turning into a new Cold War may no longer be speculative. 

Delving deeper and analysing the rift from the standpoint of realism, in particular the power transition theory, it appears that if both sides continue to adopt unsettling positions with little room for negotiation, this cold war will soon escalate into a conflict, thereby disrupting the existing world order.

On the contrary, the institutionalist theory has a diametrically different perspective. It places importance on frameworks and norms that lead to cooperation (even among rival states). For years, the US-China relations were handled by institutional ties – such as the World Trade Organization, negotiations, bilateral dialogue, and cultural exchanges. These channels provided space for deliberation, thereby preventing a slide into Cold War-style antagonism.

THE HARD POWER HORIZON

Tracing the domain of hard power, the first bone of contention lies with the issue of  Taiwan. The US does not recognise Taiwan as a separate country but maintains strategic ambiguity with the nation via the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT), a non-profit corporation mandated by the Taiwan Relations Act, functioning as an unofficial embassy, thereby allowing Washington to pursue its interests in the Western Pacific.  

This expansion of cooperation and engagement is precisely what pesters China, as it directly challenges Beijing's assertion of suzerainty over Taiwan. China's claim to suzerainty is deeply embedded in a historical narrative encompassing periods of Qing Dynasty, World War 2 era Declarations such as the Cairo Declaration (1943) and Potsdam Declaration (1945), Japanese surrender, and finally the legitimate successor state argument.

Concurrently, Beijing considers Taiwan as a "breakaway province" with history and culture embedded in the roots of China. 

Therefore, from Beijing's standpoint, the US approach to Taiwan transcends more than just "strategic ambiguity"; it potentially induces the strategy of “strategic enablement”, therefore  empowering Taiwan to resist unification and igniting cross-strait tensions.

TRACING THE SOUTH CHINA SEA DISPUTE

Moving on to the next point which is the hot topic of recent times, the South China Sea dispute. The South China Sea is an important region involving US$3.36 trillion worth of annual global trade passing through the influence zones of a plethora of countries. Beijing’s sweeping claims of sovereignty over the sea – estimated to have 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas – have heightened friction among competing claimants- Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam.

More so, satellite imagery analysis from recent years have demonstrated China's intensified efforts in the South China Sea for territorial reclamation. This involves both the substantial augmentation of existing land features as well as the creation of entirely new artificial islands. These activities extend beyond mere sand-dredging and further include the construction of permanent infrastructure such as ports, military installations, and airstrips—particularly in the Paracel and Spratly Islands. More so, by deploying fighter jets, cruise missiles, and radar systems, China has further militarised Woody Island. 

Southeast Asian nations, whose territorial claims are significantly impacted by China's dominant stance in land reclamation, are strengthening their military capabilities and forging strategic alliances to counter these challenges. 

For example, the Philippines has strengthened its partnerships with other Indo-Pacific neighbours. Upon assuming office in June 2022, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., in contrast to his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte, took a firmer stance and refrained from making compromises. He eventually began signing agreements with the United States to expand base access, conduct joint training exercises, and facilitate weapons transfers.

In March 2024, the-then U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin confirmed that the Mutual Defense Treaty signed between the United States and the Philippines extended armed forces, public vessels, and aircraft in the South China Sea. Consequently, Japan has also boosted its presence in recent years by selling military equipment to the Philippines and Vietnam, thereby improving the maritime security capacity of like-minded nations in the region. 

STRATEGIC STRIDES: SHAPING SOFT POWER SPHERES

The essence of soft power stresses three fundamental pillars: a country's culture, its political values, and its foreign policies. With the coming of Trump 2.0, the United States has witnessed several policy shifts. This primarily includes winding up humanitarian initiatives like USAID, the withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO), and most importantly, restrictive visa and stringent immigration policies, leading to the deportation of foreign students.

All of this has ultimately culminated in the erosion of America's soft power appeal, particularly among developing countries and the global youth who once harboured aspirations of the "American Dream."

This decline is evidenced by various sources: The Democracy Perception Index indicates the middle income countries' confidence in China’s governance model and trade policies in comparison to the U.S. This is further fueled by the report procured from Pew Research Center's 2025 polling data which highlights a challenging landscape for the U.S. where the rate of decline in positive views for the U.S. has been widespread across numerous countries, including neighbours Canada and Mexico. 

This aligns closely with observations from Joseph Nye, the architect of the "soft power" concept, who has frequently cited that a more transactional, "America First" foreign policy, or a unilateral approach, can eventually diminish the nation's influence and moral authority.

Therefore, America's diminishing soft power and global reach have created an opening, which China is now aggressively trying to seize. The standpoint of China's soft power strategy is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), launched by President Xi Jinping in 2013.

People usually view BRI from a strategic or economic lens, but experts have traced that it is also a significant instrument of China’s soft power. Spanning over 140 countries, embedded in massive investments from infrastructure the BRI aims to promote economic interdependence and foster regional connectivity, Subsequently, it aims to revive the ancient Silk Road connection with  Asia, Europe, and Africa by both land (the Silk Road Economic Belt ) as well as sea (the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road). 

China plays very smartly by projecting the BRI as a platform seeking to promote mutual prosperity and South-South cooperation. Concurrently, Beijing has strategically allocated resources to strengthen its soft power initiatives. These include significant investments in humanitarian aid, agricultural programs, healthcare cooperation programs, targeted cultural diplomacy efforts, and robust student exchange programs.

This multifaceted approach highlights China's strategic initiatives to enhance its global influence and appeal. Specific examples of these initiatives include vegetable aid provided to Sri Lanka during the COVID-19 pandemic, the widespread offering of scholarships for foreign students attending Chinese universities, and strategic efforts such as "mask diplomacy" during global health crises.

THE AI COLD WAR

In the digital era, battle lines are not drawn over territories but rather envelope the mastery of technologies, particularly with regard to semiconductors and artificial intelligence. The use of the term “AI cold war” is largely driven by innovations that fuel political influence and ideological prestige. Recently, China launched its DeepSeek model, built on a modest budget, yet still managing to serve as an alternative to ChatGPT, catching many in Washington off guard. Some even called it an “AI Sputnik moment,” comparing the shock to the Soviet Union satellite launch in 1957.

While the United States continues to spearhead the race to innovation, China has an upper hand in the processing of rare earth minerals which function as raw material for making semiconductor chips, modern electronic equipment and EV systems.

While the U.S. continues to lead in research, fundamentally in producing top-cited AI papers, the Chinese lead in terms of scale, contributing over 70% of global AI patent filings and subsequently deploying AI models across the Belt and Road Initiative partner nations.

In regard to this, three events in May 2025 confirmed that the rivalry between the United States and China over artificial intelligence has now become sharper, vested in economic and ideological spheres. First came a Senate hearing titled “Winning the AI Race,” where U.S. lawmakers voiced apprehension that America’s edge over China was gradually eroding.

This wasn't just some routine meeting; it was where US lawmakers openly, and with clear concern, talked about how quickly America's lead over China in artificial intelligence was disappearing. Then was the U.S. ban on Huawei’s Ascend AI chips, which was aimed to  disrupt China’s supply chain dominance globally. 

Finally, we trace Donald Trump, in his second term as president, expanding AI chip deals in the Middle East, indicating how middle powers are being drawn into the fray not just as spectators but participants in the digital ecosystem. Trump's strategy is built on two main ideas. First, he believes that money from Gulf countries flowing into the U.S. will help America build its AI computer power much faster.

Second, he thinks that by selling lots of advanced AI chips to these countries, they will become deeply connected to American technology, making U.S. tech the worldwide standard before China can get there.

Therefore, the AI sprint is no longer only about rapid innovation; now it is pivoting towards establishing foundational regulations and influencing widespread adoption of these guiding principles, laying the roadmap for future tech governance. 

CONCLUSION

Ultimately, the trajectory of global influence in the forthcoming years appears to be increasingly shaped by the strategic competition between the United States and China. Although a confrontation is highly unlikely, keeping in mind the high costs of conventional warfare, nuclear deterrence and the preference of major powers to engage in proxy conflicts rather than full-scale wars. However, the geopolitical landscape is unpredictable and if the two giants clash directly the global repercussions would be profound and far-reaching.

Economically, there would be a bloodbath in financial markets, causing a collapse in trade, disintegration of supply chains, eventually leading to a severe economic recession on the global scale. Countries that rely on both powers would be forced to either choose sides or risk isolation, leading to the emergence of hostile blocs and further breakdown of globalisation.

Security risks would ignite, with the threat of nuclear war and an eventual possibility of regional conflicts casting a shadow. More so, critical global issues such as climate change, public health, and most importantly poverty would see no diplomatic cooperation, further intensifying the already deteriorating stability and humanitarian crises. To sum it all, the US-China clash would push the global order into chaos fuelled with despair, uncertainty, and division.

---

BY URJA

TEAM GEOSTRATA

info@thegeostrata.com