China vs the United States

The defining Zweikampf of the 21st century.

The following contains one multidimensional lens by which to view the current conflict inspired by Clausewitz, a 19th-century Prussian general, who wrote On War, saying war is politics with fighting, driven by emotion, chance, and reason. His ideas on uncertainty ("fog of war") and inefficiencies ("friction") shape modern military and strategic thinking.

United States

The U.S. remains the preeminent global military power, with unmatched power projection via 11 carrier strike groups, over 750 overseas bases, and enduring control of global maritime routes. Its financial system anchors the dollar as the reserve currency, enabling sanction regimes and economic warfare at scale. It dominates the narrative across Western institutions, media, and multilateral frameworks. But it suffers from internal political incoherence, fiscal overextension, industrial hollowing, and declining trust from the Global South. Its strategic logic is reactive, fragmented, and more concerned with preserving hegemony than redefining purpose.

→ Likelihood of winning a kinetic war near China’s borders: ~20%.

Cold war-style containment success: ~50%.

China

China plays the long game. It has built industrial, infrastructural, and technological superiority in key sectors (EVs, solar, high-speed rail, shipbuilding). It commands strategic chokepoints via the BRI and boasts the world’s largest standing military by personnel, the world’s largest navy by ship count, and advanced hypersonic capability. Domestically, it is unified, goal-aligned, and led by a technocratic elite unconstrained by election cycles. Its weaknesses: demographic headwinds, capital outflow pressures, and global narrative mistrust—largely engineered by Western soft power. But its strategy is rational, adaptive, and fundamentally expansionary in economic, not ideological, terms.

→ Likelihood of winning a kinetic war near Taiwan or SCS: ~80%.

Winning a systemic economic-technological cold war: ~75%.

Clausewitz would say: He wins who aligns means with ends, who possesses clarity of purpose, and who can transform will into force, without self-destruction.

As of now, China understands this better.

This may, or may not, be fully reflective of our position at any given time.

It may be a sanitized version of what we feel is "safe" to publish.