The Dangers of Containing a Collapsing China

### JAN 12, 2025 

BY TOM RAQUER

DEAR ESSENTIAL AMERICAN CITIZEN,

As we navigate the complexities of U.S. foreign policy, we need to recognize an important issue. Our intense focus on containing China is causing us to overlook our own national interests. The narrative of competition has positioned China as a “pacing threat.” This term resonates more as a political buzzword. It is not a reality we should emphasize. For years, we believed that engaging with China liberalize its regime. We hoped it would align with American values. Yet, this approach has continuously distracted us from pressing domestic issues and the urgent needs of our citizens.

We do not tackle the challenges we face at home. Instead, we seem trapped in a cycle of reacting to perceived threats abroad. This cycle resembles our ill-fated strategies toward Russia. These strategies ultimately led to disillusionment and conflict, notably the ongoing crisis in Ukraine.

So, why are we repeating these mistakes, and at what cost to our own country?

---

This introduction effectively highlights the idea that focusing on containment detracts from addressing America’s immediate needs and interests. If further adjustments or enhancements are needed, feel free to let me know!

So, why are we repeating history?

### THE MISGUIDED CONTAINMENT STRATEGY

Let’s be clear: our efforts to contain China are not just misguided. They are a fool’s errand. This will drag us into conflicts we can’t afford. The harsh truth is that we can’t include China, nor can they truly dominate the Indo-Pacific. Ironically, the evidence suggests that China is beginning to contain itself.

#### CHINA’S DECLINE IS IMMINENT

Once viewed as an unstoppable powerhouse, China is now facing significant internal challenges. The country is wrestling with staggering debt. It also faces a faltering real estate market. An aging population compounds these issues (World Bank, 2024). Meanwhile, we are grappling with our financial burdens, observing the national debt spiral beyond comprehension (Baker & Lind, 2022).

So, what are we trying to contain? In our futile attempts to counter China, are we inadvertently containing ourselves?

### A DANGEROUS PATH OF CONFRONTATION

Can we afford to continue down this confrontational path? The true challenge lies not in keeping China in check but in fortifying our nation. Our future depends on wise action and immediate purpose.

We must consider Jeane Kirkpatrick’s insights in her 1991 essay. America does not have a divine mandate to remake the world. Instead, our core mission should focus on protecting our country and its interests. It’s time to question the logic of wasting resources on a declining nation. Our current geopolitical climate is challenging. Meanwhile, our domestic challenges stay dire.

### THE CASE AGAINST CONTAINING A COLLAPSING CHINA

1. CHINA’S DISINTEGRATING POWER 

China is stumbling under the weight of its systemic incompetence and corruption. Why should we use valuable resources trying to stabilize a failing rival? Instead, let’s redirect those resources to tackle urgent domestic issues.

2. THE REALITIES OF REALPOLITIK 

History teaches us that intervention in declining states often leads to catastrophe (Mearsheimer, 2014). The real threat to stability in the Indo-Pacific is our relentless pursuit of dominance. Misguided coalitions like AUKUS and the Quad work on the presumption of conflict, ultimately exacerbating existing tensions.

### THE RISKS OF CORNERING A “DYING ANIMAL”

As we consider strategies to contain China, we must acknowledge the dangers. Cornering a “dying animal”—representing a threatened China—can provoke aggressive and unpredictable responses. Just as a wounded animal fights back, so China will react fiercely to perceived existential threats.

### U.S. CLAIMS TO INDO-PACIFIC POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION

1. HISTORICAL CONTEXT 

Ancient civilizations—including China, India, and Japan—hold histories that far exceed the brief existence of the U.S. By not fully appreciating these enduring legacies, claims of America as an “Indo-Pacific power” can seem ethnocentric and presumptive.

2. GEOGRAPHICAL PRESENCE 

The U.S. does not share a land border with any Indo-Pacific nation. The military presence and economic partnerships are significant. But, they can’t substitute for the deep cultural ties fostered among neighboring countries.

3. POWER DYNAMICS 

The Indo-Pacific region is characterized by many nations with unique interests. As noted by Parag Khanna, this diversity makes it impractical for any single country to assert total dominance over it. This multifaceted reality further complicates the U.S.’s claims to regional authority.

### ECONOMIC DEPENDENCY: THE FACTS

1. PROPORTION OF GDP 

Assertions linking American prosperity closely to the Indo-Pacific do not hold up. Only about 6% of U.S. GDP is derived from this region, raising doubts about our economic dependency narrative.

2. TRADE DEFICITS 

Many Indo-Pacific nations show trade deficits for the U.S., contradicting claims of economic prosperity tied to the region.

3. SECURITY BURDENS 

The U.S. is shouldering security for many Indo-Pacific nations while receiving little economic reciprocity, creating a complex and often exploitative relationship. This situation begs the question: are these military commitments altruistic or merely strategic self-interest?

### DOMESTIC CHALLENGES DEMAND IMMEDIATE ATTENTION 

1. A NATION IN DISTRESS 

The U.S. is in crisis. Soaring debt and rising inequality threaten our society. Rather than engaging in foreign conflicts, we must tackle our citizens’ pressing needs (Baker & Lind, 2022).

2. PRIORITIZING AMERICAN LIFE AND SECURITY 

Americans deserve a government that prioritizes domestic resilience. Education, healthcare, and infrastructure investments should take precedence over distant military engagements. Why should we keep a robust military presence abroad when our foundation is crumbling? Our security is intrinsically linked to empowering our citizens, not to flexing military overseas (Kennedy, 2019).

### A PRAGMATIC AMERICAN STRATEGY

1. CONTAINMENT THROUGH NON-ENGAGEMENT 

In this transformed geopolitical landscape, our strategy about China must adopt a “containment through non-engagement stance.” Why should we stretch our strained resources by intervening in every shift within China? Upholding human rights globally is a priority. We can achieve this from a position of strength and resilience. This approach avoids overextending our resources.

2. STRENGTHENING STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS 

We must recalibrate our strategy, shifting focus from containing China to strengthening partnerships throughout the Indo-Pacific. Countries like Japan, India, and Australia are key allies capable of handling the ramifications of Chinese instability.

### CONCLUSION: A PATH AHEAD

The rationale for containing China becomes increasingly fragile as the world transitions into a multipolar landscape. America should now focus inward. It needs to confront domestic challenges. At the same time, it should empower nations in the Indo-Pacific to manage their geopolitical realities.

The moment has arrived to reclaim America’s narrative. We must shift from misguided foreign ambitions to fostering resilience based on our strengths. We must focus genuine investments in education, healthcare, and infrastructure over foreign entanglements.

A cooperative approach emphasizing partnership over containment will better serve American interests and promote regional stability. Investing in our society and economy lays the groundwork for responsible international engagement. Only as a strong, self-reliant nation can we effectively influence the world while safeguarding our future.