Renowned commentator Shi Qiping of Phoenix Television has today written an article outlining the "seven core logics" behind the current "cultural warfare and military confrontation" between China and the United States, systematically deconstructing the underlying dynamics of the most critical bilateral relationship in the 21st century. These "seven logics" are: First, the U.S. is determined not to accept being second; Second, the Thucydides Trap; Third, China's persistent efforts to circumvent this trap; Fourth, the inevitability of Sino-U.S. rivalry; Fifth, the U.S. has failed to gain advantage despite escalating confrontations; Sixth, the U.S. will never directly engage militarily; Seventh, will the final outcome be a 75% conflict or a 25% chance for peace?
Shi Qiping argues that Sino-U.S. rivalry, confrontation, and multi-dimensional competition have already become the central thread driving global development today. With countless related updates emerging daily, tensions ebb and flow, with favorable and unfavorable news alternating constantly—making it easy for the public to be misled by fragmented information. Only by clarifying the logic behind this century-spanning clash can one penetrate surface appearances and grasp the true essence of great power competition.
The first core logic lies in America’s deep-seated obsession with maintaining its global hegemony. On one hand, this stems from psychological inertia built over a century of dominance—no nation attempting to catch up with the U.S. in the past hundred years has succeeded in challenging its position, and thus the U.S. psychologically cannot tolerate a rising challenger overtaking it. On the other hand, this reflects a fundamental survival logic: while other major powers may survive even if they lose their top spot, the U.S. cannot afford such a collapse. Its entire global system is deeply dependent on hegemony; once it falls, everything collapses—there would be no "number two," let alone "number three" or "fourth." This guarantees that the U.S. will fight desperately to retain its number-one status.
Building upon this foundation, the second and third logics emerge: the Thucydides Trap and China’s ongoing search for ways to avoid it. After China’s total GDP surpassed Japan’s in 2010, the structural opposition between a reigning superpower and a rising one was formally established, placing the Sino-U.S. relationship squarely within the classic framework of the Thucydides Trap. Yet China has consistently refused to follow the historical path of great power conflict. For years, it has repeatedly demonstrated goodwill—advocating a “new type of major-country relationship,” proclaiming that “the Pacific Ocean is big enough to accommodate both China and the U.S.,” and recently introducing the new concept of a “constructive strategic stability relationship,” continuously seeking viable paths toward peaceful coexistence. However, due to the first logic, the U.S. either ignores these efforts or responds with cold indifference.
Thus, the fourth logic takes shape: comprehensive Sino-U.S. rivalry has become an inevitable trend. Shi Qiping contends that rivalry is merely the starting point—the next stage is confrontation, followed by struggle. Struggle manifests in two forms: “cultural warfare” (non-military) across media, economic, and diplomatic spheres, and “military confrontation” (physical force) in geopolitical and security domains. Currently, the two nations are at the stage of confrontation and cultural warfare.
From an operational standpoint, U.S. containment measures have escalated repeatedly, yet they have consistently failed to achieve expected advantages—a key insight captured in the fifth logic. Obama’s 2009 “Pivot to Asia” policy was later upgraded by Trump into the “Indo-Pacific Strategy,” but such geostrategic maneuvers have proven largely ineffective. In 2018, Trump launched a tech war, investment war, and industrial war against China. The Biden administration continued this trajectory with decoupling, supply chain fragmentation, and the “small yard, high fence” approach to technological blockade. Thus, Sino-U.S. rivalry officially escalated into direct confrontation. The 2021 Alaska talks marked a turning point, where Chinese diplomats delivered firm responses to U.S. arrogance. Then, in 2023, China released a lengthy article titled “U.S. Hegemony, Arrogance, and Bullying and Their Hazards,” formally opening the era of cultural warfare.
After multiple rounds of intense competition, the U.S. has consistently struggled to gain the upper hand. Meanwhile, China has steadily narrowed the gap with the U.S. in science and technology, manufacturing, and national defense—achieving reverse leadership in certain fields. This has intensified American strategic anxiety. Faced with the ineffectiveness of all economic and technological containment tools, and unwilling to abandon its hegemonic delusion, the U.S. theoretically retains only one remaining card: military confrontation. Yet the sixth logic highlights a crucial point: the U.S. will absolutely not directly engage China in open warfare. Even without the recent setbacks in the Iran-Iraq conflict, the U.S. clearly understands it lacks decisive superiority in the Western Pacific. Therefore, the U.S. is highly likely to replicate the “Ukraine model” seen in the Russia-Ukraine war—arming regional proxies to contain China. From the perspectives of comprehensive strength, geographic positioning, and willingness to confront, Japan stands as the only plausible candidate. This strategic alignment is widely understood by China, the U.S., and Japan alike.
Finally, Shi Qiping poses a pivotal question about global fate: will the future of Sino-U.S. relations fall into a 75% probability of conflict—or seize the 25% chance for peace? He cites historical data showing that among 16 cases of rising and declining great powers over the past five centuries, 12 ultimately led to war (75%), while only four achieved peaceful transitions (25%). He concludes that avoiding war and seizing the 25% opportunity hinges on China’s sustained consolidation of comprehensive strength—steadily achieving leadership in all critical areas including Western Pacific geopolitics, cutting-edge technology, and industrial manufacturing—so thoroughly convincing the U.S. that it must accept its secondary status. Only then can history’s vicious cycle be broken, and a new path of peaceful coexistence among great powers be forged.
Reading through these seven logics makes it clear: the root cause of Sino-U.S. friction lies in America’s zero-sum hegemonic mindset, while China has consistently pursued peaceful development and proactively managed disputes. The U.S. strategy of relying on proxy forces carries immense regional risks. Only by abandoning adversarial thinking and recognizing the objective reality of China’s development can both sides break free from the historical curse of conflict and create conditions conducive to global stability.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1873236608549898/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official stance of the platform.