Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / China / Dropping the Cold War Framework in U.S.-China Competition
China, Asia

April 9, 2024

Dropping the Cold War Framework in U.S.-China Competition

By Sabreena Croteau

Rhetoric around U.S.-China relations in the past few years has frequently been framed as an unavoidable “New Cold War,” pitting the U.S. and its allies as the “democratic bloc” vs a China-led “autocratic bloc,” with Russia playing a supporting role for the latter.

However, it’s a term and a framework that both U.S. rhetoric and policy need to turn away from, as the Cold War is a poor point of comparison for today’s great power competition between the U.S. and China. Even the lowercase “cold war” understanding of bilateral competition will continue to be overshadowed by capitalized Cold War ghosts, especially considering that the term was coined to describe U.S.-Soviet relations specifically.  If U.S. policymakers are trapped in an ill-fitting framework of historical memory, they will be more likely to recycle Cold War strategies, regardless of whether those strategies are the most effective means of promoting U.S. interests in the face of a rising China.

In the Cold War, the U.S. and the Soviet Union existed in almost entirely separate economic blocs, with little trade between them and certainly no economic interdependence. This left the two superpowers to focus their competition on military power and global spheres of influence. The U.S.-China situation looks very different, with a massive amount of economic interdependence between the two, despite efforts toward “decoupling.” Aggressive military posturing will therefore have very different consequences in this new era of competition. In attempting to hurt one another economically, the U.S. and China ultimately face mutually assured economic destruction and both regimes should be proceeding with more caution.

Read at RealClearWorld

Author

Photo of Sabreena Croteau

Sabreena
Croteau

Contributing Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Asia

op-edNATO, Alliances, Asia

Why America’s East Asian allies skipped the NATO summit

By Lyle Goldstein

July 2, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, China, Iran, North Korea, Russia

There is no ‘axis of autocracy’

By Daniel DePetris

July 1, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, Americas, China, Iran, Middle East, Russia

How not to do multipolarity

By Anthony Constantini

June 28, 2025

op-edChina, Asia, Israel‑Iran

Why China’s sitting on the Iran war sidelines

By Lyle Goldstein

June 25, 2025

In the mediaChina, Air power, Asia, Balance of power, Global posture, Land power, Naval power

What does China’s military gain from operating 2 aircraft carriers in second island chain?

Featuring Lyle Goldstein

June 13, 2025

op-edNorth Korea, Air power, Asia, Balance of power, Global posture, Land power, Naval power

Trump’s North Korea conundrum

By Daniel DePetris

June 12, 2025

Events on China

See All Events
virtualGreat power competition, Balance of power, China, Grand strategy, Middle East

Past Virtual Event: U.S.-China competition and the value of Middle East influence

June 10, 2025
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

Past Virtual Event: China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualAsia, Basing and force posture, Burden sharing, China, Grand strategy

Past Virtual Event: Rethinking U.S. strategy in East Asia: do more bases mean more deterrence?

January 24, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved