War With China Was Always the Goal 4/5: US Unipolar Moment
In this part, I’ll be pivoting back to more of a focus on the United States and the imperialist camp, as compared to China’s internal changes. What we can say about China at this time is that they were in many ways heeding the advice and strategy of the late Deng, who advised that China “keep a low profile” diplomatically to avoid the overt animosity of America. We will start around 2000, with some overlap in the mid to late 1990s, and end in the early 2010s with key changes to the international scene. By the end of this article’s proposed period (~1991-2013), this strategy of laying low will be over, propelled on by America’s increased aggression and Pivot to Asia under Obama in 2012.
There are five main periods/events that encapsulate the American unipolar moment, which by most accounts ended around 2013 but which they are desperately clinging to despite the reality.
- Unipolar Emergence and Solidification Period (1991–1999)
- Unipolar Overreach: War on Terror and Great Recession (2001–2008)
- Rise of China/Russia, other independent governments
- Hegemonic dominance and the ‘pure competitor’ threat
- Eurasian Integration and NATO opposition
Let’s first discuss why this unipolar world was even possible: the collapse of the socialist camp in 1991–1999, particularly of the USSR in 1991. This also includes the NATO dismemberment of Yugoslavia, which no longer even exists as a country, and the first Gulf War in the 1990s, which saw the US flex its military might without consequences or challengers for the first time since WWII. This collective collapse of the socialist bloc is a significant event in the transformation of modern imperialism from wars of domination amongst imperialist powers to a unified class war led by the United States against the anti-colonial and independent governments of the world, regardless of their ideology. The entire Cold War starting after WWII can be seen as a class war on a global scale, and is one of the major reasons we did not see a third world war (yet) amongst imperialists.
The fact that we are approaching a sizeable global conflict today does not necessarily imply that it will be a return to this style of division and re-division of the world however, as exemplified by the major security concerns Russia has clearly voiced in opposition to Western domination since years before their escalatory invasion of Ukraine. Seeing the Ukraine conflict in as an inter-imperialist conflict ignores the extra dimensions of US domination and underdevelopment of the majority of the planet, including its own allies in Europe currently de-industrializing themselves in support of Washington’s goals of weakening its rival Russia. It also presupposes the sovereignty of Ukraine that was robbed by the United States in 2014 when it utilized protest movements to gain political control over the country and handpick new leaders that would be able to push Russia to attack Ukraine (this serves a dual purpose of weakening Russia and providing the West with a country to plunder yet again). Regardless of modern Russia’s undoubtedly capitalist orientation, the main contradiction today is the imperialist world order led by the United States.
Unipolar Emergence
Originally, coming out of WWII, the US declared its desire for domination, saying that the point of US diplomacy and foreign policy was to establish primacy. The reality of United States intervention in Europe in World Wars I and II was that this was done in order to prevent Germany from establishing hegemony there, not out of some altruism. In fact, the United States routinely diminished the significance of the Hitler regime and even sponsored his party as it came to power. It also fought in the Pacific theater to prevent Japan from dominating that region. During the Cold War, of course, the United States explicitly sought to remain the world’s strongest power in both the military and economic realms. As the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff argued in 1947, “To seek less than preponderant power would be to opt for defeat. Preponderant power must be the object of U.S. policy.”
This wasn’t particularly popular with even the Western allies, but they were not in a position to stand up for themselves. Europe had been destroyed, much of its industry needed to be rebuilt and was only allowed to be rebuilt through massive monetary aid from the United States. Had this not occurred, many European governments may have seen socialist upheaval in the absence of the fascists. Even so, the United States didn’t leave that destiny up to chance, and Operation Gladio was conducted to suppress movement to the left and firmly entrench America into the politics and structures of European life, eventually giving birth to NATO.
The real reason the United States was not able to gain a unipolar hegemonic position post WWII and prior to the 1990s was the existence and resistance of the USSR, the communist states outside of the USSR in eastern Europe, and the non-aligned movement in the Global South. Once the Soviet Union collapsed, and the US had already solidified its influence in the former colonialist camp, leading the capitalist block became the de facto world organization of power. You can see this position solidified in official policy in the mid 1990s, namely the establishment of the Wolfowitz Doctrine and the founding of the WTO. A common misconception is that this has been a peaceful transition and maintenance of power, but this is false. In fact, recent reporting has shown that the period after 1991 has been more violent than any in American history, concentrating some 50% of US historical interventions in just 12–13% of its existence.
The Wolfowitz doctrine was leaked, not released on purpose, and advocated for unilateral control over world economies and preemptive military suppression of opposition. We can see this sentiment carried through all the way to today with the US hybrid war on Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, and many more.
Working through the WTO, the United States is able to protect and advance the economic interests of American businesses and workers while opening foreign markets. The WTO and GANTT provide ‘legal’ frameworks for forcing the rules based international order on the rest of the world.
China during this period utilized American greed to its advantage, allowing capitalism to enter the country for cheaper labor and resources, but requiring technology and science transfer as part of the deal. This will and has greatly irked the US ruling class since then, as their short term drive from increased profits leaves them vulnerable and unable to contend with an economy where so much of their GDP is tied up.
Unipolar Overreach
The US began overreaching in the early 2000s, militarily and economically. The Iraq War of 2003 and the ‘Great Recession’ signify this and the beginning of the end of unipolarity in striking fashion.
The US’ fraudulent ‘democracy building’ in Iraq and Afghanistan showed the world they were much more interested in driving up dividends for stock holders than ‘spreading freedom and democracy’. Regardless of how much the US wants to hold on to this mythology, the truth is that they destroyed much of that area of the world under the pretense of stopping terrorism, and more have tied directly from US drone strikes and violence, as well as sanctions and theft of reserves, than any terrorist attacks.
One effect of the conflict domestically has been undermining the faith of the people, by and large. Although that may seem hard to believe from the frothing at the mouth types one runs into on the internet most days, the truth is that the 9/11 tragedy gave the US cover to declare a near permanent state of emergency that allows them to routinely break their own rules without reprehension. An example might be the Patriotic Act, which vastly expanded the surveillance state in America under the pretense of national security. This same reasoning was used when suppressing the anti-war movement, when jailing and abusing BLM protestors in 2020, and countless others. It is the same reasoning that allows the Biden admin to censor dissident voices speaking out against the Russia-NATO proxy war and forcing engineers in China to come home or renounce their citizenship in an attempt to slow China’s development.
The Great Recession nearly single handedly ended the unipolar moment, but due to a massive bailout of the banks, the US imperialist government was able to hang on, at the expense of the workers in America. The ongoing War on Terror, continued and escalated under Obama, provided enough income and dividends for American corporations to stabilize, although the reality is that the American economy didn’t ever really recover from 2008 in full. A lot of work has become increasingly precarious, and underemployment and gig economy work more the norm than the exception since then.
Pure Competitors
Rise of China and Russia
During the end of the 2000s, and predominantly during the first five years of the 2010s, China and Russia entered new periods of development that challenged the hegemony in meaningful ways. China, mainly economically, and Russia militarily as well as economically.
Russia is sitting on one of the largest holdings of natural resources in the world, and their nationalization of key resources in order to help their economy recover from the neoliberal shock therapy of the 1990s is a key reason why the once friendly US press and ruling class media flipped on Putin. Another was a 2007 speech he gave at a conference that encapsulated his view of unipolarity:
“However, what is a unipolar world? However, one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making. It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within. And this certainly has nothing in common with democracy. Because, as you know, democracy is the power of the majority in light of the interests and opinions of the minority. Incidentally, Russia — we — are constantly being taught about democracy. But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves.”
He went on to say, “[o]ne state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?”. The speech gives an actual, accurate look into the post-Soviet government’s mindset, and although Putin glosses over the humanitarian crisis of post-Soviet collapse as a ‘peaceful transition’, there is a lot to learn from the speech. He finishes with this:
“And of course, we would like to interact with responsible and independent partners with whom we could work together in constructing a fair and democratic world order that would ensure security and prosperity not only for a select few, but for all.”
A far cry from the evil, rabid and nonsensical caricature we’ve seen of recent. The real crime of Putin is exactly this independent outlook. He wants Russia to be able to stand on its own feet, trade with who they want, etc. The United States wants subservience of Russia to foreign capitalists, and access to that sweet oil and other natural resources reserves.
In China, 2013 sees the election of Xi to presidency, and a pivot in China’s position in world affairs. The 18th National Congress lets the world know China will be pursuing independent policy, will crackdown on corruption and the unruly expansion of capital, and will safeguard China’s environment, workers and sovereignty to the upmost. Extremely unimageable prospects for Washington, no doubt, as they had spent the last few decades moving their production to countries like China in order to avoid offering prosperity to their own workers and secure outrageous profits.
A few charts to encapsulate China’s ‘threat’ since Xi entered the picture:
Another major event for China and a real ‘threat’ to the United States began in 2013: the Belt and Road Initiative. This offers countries in the Global South an alternative model of development not steeped in neocolonial debt peonage and control over policy. The IMF and World Bank actually force governments to embrace neoliberal capitalist reforms and austerity policies in order to gain access to needed funds for development. What industries and areas of the economy get developed is strictly controlled to foster a local bourgeoise class and export profits to the Global North.
China, on the other hand, simply required win-win partnership, and has helped undermine colonialism through the BRI development projects. Of course, China isn’t perfect. Whenever Chinese private corporations have been used in the BRI, they haven’t always had the best interests of the people abroad. However, China actually has precedence of holding capitalists on a tight leash and accountable. Regarding the debts themselves, China routinely forgives debt in order to help the Global South continue to develop.
To recap, China and Russia during this period have really ‘stood up’. They have, regardless of ideology, come together with the common interest of developing and cultivating independent movements for sovereignty worldwide, against neoliberalism, colonialism and imperialism. How did the US react to this? Violently, as we’ll see.
Conclusion
This about covers the period I was hoping to cover in part 4, from a much more externalized view as it relates to China.
It is difficult to map out all the details of the US wardrive, but as we get to current events, it is easier to focus on the rabid-ness, the depravity, the desperation of a dying empire and its attempts to secure primacy into the future. Oftentimes, China is just silently working on improving itself and improving life for its 1.4 billion people. It’s non-intervention stance and willingness to economically aid Global South countries has proved to be a different but very effective spin on communist internationalism, even with its contradictory nature at times (see dealings with Saudi Arabia and Israel, for example). Although I’d love to spend a lot more time on China’s internal changes and improvements during the last twenty or so years, I want to stick with the thesis of this series as much as I can here. I can always return to that if it is of interest. One theme I hope readers take away is that it does not truly matter if China is socialist, which it is. The United States is against any independent governance, as it undermines its hegemony. This perspective can help us see through the imperial lies that cloak our perception of other areas of the world, like Iran, Cuba or the DPRK. Although socialism is always approached with a special level of animosity and contempt by the US ruling class, opposition is not unique to anti-capitalist led nations. This is why a non-unipolar world can offer progress and hope to all countries, and definitely to progressive movements across the world. In the last part, I will take us up to the current date or close to, covering the US war drive that has become increasingly loud and dominant today.
I hope you got something out of the article!
