While Theodore Roosevelt said America should “speak softly and carry a big stick”, its President today is unafraid to raise his voice and gesture to the massive modern arsenal behind him. Threats to occupy the Panama Canal, annex Greenland and absorb Canada into the United States have baffled the world.
The explanation, inevitably, comes back to China. For the American decision to allow the Chinese into the world trading system – on the terms it did and without any serious attempt to reform or enforce the rules of international trade – will be remembered as one of the great strategic errors in world history.
Today China remains a “developing country” under World Trade Organisation rules, which allows it “special and differential treatment”. Thus it escapes rules imposed on Western countries, from those covering market access and intellectual property rights to deadlines for implementing new agreements. It has exploited this freedom by using tariffs, holding down production costs, dumping goods sold below market value, placing punitive conditions on foreign firms operating within its borders, and stealing – on an industrial scale – the intellectual property of rival countries and companies.
President Clinton, who negotiated and ratified America’s trade agreement with China in 2000, promised it would allow the US to “export products without exporting jobs”, and predicted China would “import one of democracy’s most cherished values: economic freedom.”
Instead, the communist dictatorship grew stronger and more repressive, and manipulated the world trading system to boost its own economy while systematically destroying productive capacity in the West. As tens of thousands of American factories closed following Chinese accession to the WTO, and millions of jobs were lost, China’s economy grew from $1.66 trillion in 2003 to $17.79 trillion in 2023. According to the World Bank, it now makes up 29 per cent of the world’s manufacturing value.
With economic and trading power comes a geopolitical presence and the need to project military might. Xi Jinping has assembled the largest navy in the world and developed highly advanced weapons systems including hypersonic missiles. Pentagon war games find America would lose a Pacific war against China.
Hong Kong has been crushed and Taiwan is in Xi’s sights. Beijing has been busy building military bases in the South China Sea. Its policy is to dominate Africa and control its minerals, while it has successfully trapped European countries – including Britain – by hooking them on Chinese trade and investment.
The Trump administration is worried that the Panama Canal – once controlled by America but run now by a Panamanian government agency – will fall under Chinese influence. Ports at the Atlantic and Pacific ends of the Canal are operated by CK Hutchison, a Chinese-owned company from Hong Kong. “We gave the Panama Canal to Panama,” Trump has said. “We didn’t give it to China.”
Meanwhile China has declared itself a “near-Arctic state”, which is neither a legally meaningful term nor a geographically logical one. But as ice melts and new sea routes open up, maritime distances between markets can be cut by thousands of miles. The Arctic also holds vast reserves of oil and gas and natural minerals. The attraction to rival powers is obvious, and explains the American threats to Greenland and Canada.
As ever, it is difficult to know how literally we should take Trump’s statements. Canada will not become the 51st state, and it seems unlikely that the US will use military force to take Greenland from Denmark. But he feels American power keenly and is unafraid to use it. As with his policy regarding the defence of Europe, the aggressive posture seems designed to force allied countries to do what he wants: to secure territory around the Arctic and allow its exploitation in the American interest.
As with European defence spending Trump may get his way, although he underestimates the importance of long-term trust and reciprocity among normally allied countries. The treatment of Denmark and Canada – countries that gave lives during America’s Middle Eastern wars – has been especially galling.
This may be a new American imperialism, but America has always been imperialistic. The United States on the map today was forged through conquest and occupation, and – in Louisiana, Florida and Alaska – purchase, which is an option Trump has suggested for Greenland. America has also had colonies, such as the Philippines, which won independence only in 1946.
Traditional American imperialism was cloaked in the language of liberalism, international institutions and a rules-based order. But the reality was always the pursuit and projection of US power. Think about American interventions in Latin America, and policies like extraordinary rendition and the extradition of foreign businessmen on extraterritorial offences. For those who believe Trump is uniquely rough on his allies, think about the price America extracted from Britain for its support during the Second World War, its role over Suez, and its approach to Northern Ireland.
Despite the continuities, however, what we see now is different. More than before, America is brazen. It is not only behaving ruthlessly with its allies, but as if it believes it can do whatever it wishes to them. However justifiable its frustrations with the countries of Europe, it is burning bridges as it prepares for confrontation – and perhaps even conflict – with China. But if it wants to wean Europe off Chinese trade and investment, and if it recognises that this is not only a rivalry between empires but a clash of civilisations, these are reckless steps.
And its allies should be cautious. Just as Britain should not subordinate its national security to the interests of others in Europe, neither should we be unquestioning participants – “America’s Gurkhas” as Aris Roussinos puts it – in every US foreign policy and military operation. American leadership in the world is preferable to any realistic alternative, but in this new and dangerous age of empire, we need to be clear about our national interest. Trump says he wants to put America first – and we too should only ever put our country first.
While Theodore Roosevelt said America should “speak softly and carry a big stick”, its President today is unafraid to raise his voice and gesture to the massive modern arsenal behind him. Threats to occupy the Panama Canal, annex Greenland and absorb Canada into the United States have baffled the world.
The explanation, inevitably, comes back to China. For the American decision to allow the Chinese into the world trading system – on the terms it did and without any serious attempt to reform or enforce the rules of international trade – will be remembered as one of the great strategic errors in world history.
Today China remains a “developing country” under World Trade Organisation rules, which allows it “special and differential treatment”. Thus it escapes rules imposed on Western countries, from those covering market access and intellectual property rights to deadlines for implementing new agreements. It has exploited this freedom by using tariffs, holding down production costs, dumping goods sold below market value, placing punitive conditions on foreign firms operating within its borders, and stealing – on an industrial scale – the intellectual property of rival countries and companies.
President Clinton, who negotiated and ratified America’s trade agreement with China in 2000, promised it would allow the US to “export products without exporting jobs”, and predicted China would “import one of democracy’s most cherished values: economic freedom.”
Instead, the communist dictatorship grew stronger and more repressive, and manipulated the world trading system to boost its own economy while systematically destroying productive capacity in the West. As tens of thousands of American factories closed following Chinese accession to the WTO, and millions of jobs were lost, China’s economy grew from $1.66 trillion in 2003 to $17.79 trillion in 2023. According to the World Bank, it now makes up 29 per cent of the world’s manufacturing value.
With economic and trading power comes a geopolitical presence and the need to project military might. Xi Jinping has assembled the largest navy in the world and developed highly advanced weapons systems including hypersonic missiles. Pentagon war games find America would lose a Pacific war against China.
Hong Kong has been crushed and Taiwan is in Xi’s sights. Beijing has been busy building military bases in the South China Sea. Its policy is to dominate Africa and control its minerals, while it has successfully trapped European countries – including Britain – by hooking them on Chinese trade and investment.
The Trump administration is worried that the Panama Canal – once controlled by America but run now by a Panamanian government agency – will fall under Chinese influence. Ports at the Atlantic and Pacific ends of the Canal are operated by CK Hutchison, a Chinese-owned company from Hong Kong. “We gave the Panama Canal to Panama,” Trump has said. “We didn’t give it to China.”
Meanwhile China has declared itself a “near-Arctic state”, which is neither a legally meaningful term nor a geographically logical one. But as ice melts and new sea routes open up, maritime distances between markets can be cut by thousands of miles. The Arctic also holds vast reserves of oil and gas and natural minerals. The attraction to rival powers is obvious, and explains the American threats to Greenland and Canada.
As ever, it is difficult to know how literally we should take Trump’s statements. Canada will not become the 51st state, and it seems unlikely that the US will use military force to take Greenland from Denmark. But he feels American power keenly and is unafraid to use it. As with his policy regarding the defence of Europe, the aggressive posture seems designed to force allied countries to do what he wants: to secure territory around the Arctic and allow its exploitation in the American interest.
As with European defence spending Trump may get his way, although he underestimates the importance of long-term trust and reciprocity among normally allied countries. The treatment of Denmark and Canada – countries that gave lives during America’s Middle Eastern wars – has been especially galling.
This may be a new American imperialism, but America has always been imperialistic. The United States on the map today was forged through conquest and occupation, and – in Louisiana, Florida and Alaska – purchase, which is an option Trump has suggested for Greenland. America has also had colonies, such as the Philippines, which won independence only in 1946.
Traditional American imperialism was cloaked in the language of liberalism, international institutions and a rules-based order. But the reality was always the pursuit and projection of US power. Think about American interventions in Latin America, and policies like extraordinary rendition and the extradition of foreign businessmen on extraterritorial offences. For those who believe Trump is uniquely rough on his allies, think about the price America extracted from Britain for its support during the Second World War, its role over Suez, and its approach to Northern Ireland.
Despite the continuities, however, what we see now is different. More than before, America is brazen. It is not only behaving ruthlessly with its allies, but as if it believes it can do whatever it wishes to them. However justifiable its frustrations with the countries of Europe, it is burning bridges as it prepares for confrontation – and perhaps even conflict – with China. But if it wants to wean Europe off Chinese trade and investment, and if it recognises that this is not only a rivalry between empires but a clash of civilisations, these are reckless steps.
And its allies should be cautious. Just as Britain should not subordinate its national security to the interests of others in Europe, neither should we be unquestioning participants – “America’s Gurkhas” as Aris Roussinos puts it – in every US foreign policy and military operation. American leadership in the world is preferable to any realistic alternative, but in this new and dangerous age of empire, we need to be clear about our national interest. Trump says he wants to put America first – and we too should only ever put our country first.