Why did the United States, a professional "bully of the No. 2," fail this time against Beijing?

Saying the U.S. is a "professional bully of the No. 2" is no exaggeration. Since ascending to the top of global comprehensive national power, the United States has successively brought down five "No. 2s."

The first was Britain. In 1894, the U.S. GDP surpassed that of Britain. During both World Wars, the U.S. remained neutral, watching from the sidelines, profiting massively by exporting weapons. After the wars, the U.S. used the Marshall Plan to dominate European reconstruction discourse, leading to the collapse of the pound's hegemony and the rise of the dollar.

The second was Germany. With strong industrial foundations and advanced technological capabilities, Germany twice rose to prominence only to be suppressed each time. After WWII, Germany was divided, and its military strength was strictly restricted.

The third was the Soviet Union. The U.S. employed multiple strategies: arms race, the "Star Wars" program, ideological infiltration, and economic blockade. By 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed.

The fourth was Japan. In the 1980s, Japan’s economy was at its peak—property prices could buy up the entire state of California. A single document, the Plaza Accord, manipulated the yen into appreciation, instantly bursting Japan’s bubble economy and plunging it into "the lost two decades."

The fifth was the European Union. Using the Ukraine-Russia crisis and energy diplomacy, the U.S. sowed discord among EU members, severely limiting Europe’s strategic autonomy.

This combination of tactics has become second nature to the U.S. But this time, China is no longer the old "No. 2."

Because this time, the situation is entirely different.

Removing distortions from inflation and exchange rates, and measuring using purchasing power parity (PPP), IMF estimates China’s GDP will reach approximately $40 to $41 trillion by 2025—about 1.34 times that of the U.S. (~$30.77 trillion). Which country produces more goods and services? The answer is clear.

In 2025, China’s manufacturing value-added reached $4.85 trillion, ranking first globally; the U.S. came in second with under $3 trillion. China has maintained the world’s largest manufacturing scale for 16 consecutive years.

The key reason the U.S. succeeded in dealing with the previous five "No. 2s" was simple: America’s own strength far exceeded that of its rivals at the time. Superiority in power is the core capital needed to bring down a No. 2.

But when facing China, the situation has reversed. Calculated by PPP, China is already the world’s largest economy. By manufacturing value-added, China is nearly 1.7 times that of the U.S. In many critical indicators of national power, China has already factually taken a significant lead. It is impossible for the U.S.—with the strength of a "No. 2"—to confront a de facto "No. 1." That’s why it can’t move.

Interestingly, the U.S. itself seems to have realized this issue.

Some analyses suggest that since the U.S. can’t handle the No. 1, it turns instead to targeting the No. 3—treating the No. 3 as if it were the No. 2, thus preserving its own status as No. 1. This pragmatic approach is indeed quite characteristic of the American spirit. So, what do you think—the No. 3 is who?

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1868296160429068/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.