The Rivalry between the U.S. and China as the Main Axis of Inner-Imperialist Contradictions

By Michael Pröbsting, International Secretary of the Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT), 02.10.2018, www.thecommunists.net

 

 

 

 

Marxists have emphasized in the past years that the acceleration of the rivalry between the Great Powers is one the most important characteristics of the present historic period. This is one of the crucial changes in world politics in the past decades. As we elaborated, there are basically five Great Powers: the U.S., China, the European Union, Russia and Japan. (In addition there are several smaller imperialist states like South Korea, Australia, or the Switzerland.) [1]

 

However, we think it is possible and necessary to arrive at a certain “hierarchization” among these Great Powers. [2] In our view the two strongest, most important, the development of world politics and word economy most determining imperialist powers are the U.S. and China. [3] These two states are without doubt the two strongest economic powers. This becomes, once more, obvious in the current Global Trade War which has at its center the conflict between the U.S. and China. [4] While Russia is militarily superior to China (and all other imperialist powers except the U.S.), it is economically so much weaker that we can not treat Moscow as equal with Beijing. [5] Consequently, we characterize the rivalry between the U.S. and China as the main axis of the global inner-imperialist contradictions.

 

We have demonstrated in a number of studies that China has become the most important challenger of the U.S. as the hegemonic imperialist power. [6] At this place we limit ourselves to present only a few characteristic facts.

 

When we look at the basis of capitalist value production – global industrial production – we see that the US’s share decreased from 25.1% (2000) to 17.7% (2015), Western Europe’s share also declined from 12.1% to 9.2%, while China’s share grew from 6.5% (2000) to 23.6% (2015). [7]

 

Likewise, while the U.S.’s share in world trade declined from 15.1 (2001) to 11.4% (2016), China’s share rose in this period from 4.0% to 11.5%. [8] According to the latest statistics published by the World Trade Organization, China’s share in merchandise trade in 2017 has been 11.5% while the US had 11.1%. [9]

 

A similar development can be observed when we analyze the national composition of the leading capitalist monopolies. Comparing the Forbes Global 2000 list – a list the world’s 2000 largest corporations – of the year 2003 with the year 2017, we see that while the US remains the strongest power, its share has declined substantially from 776 corporations (38.8%) to 565 (28.2%). At the same time, China’s share grew dramatically and it has now become the number two among the Great Powers. (See Table 1)

 

 

 

Table 1. National Composition of the World’s 2000 Largest Corporations, 2003 and 2017 (Forbes Global 2000 List) [10]

 

2003                                                                       2017

 

Number                 Share                                     Number                 Share

 

USA                                                       776                         38.8%                                    565                         28.2%

 

China                                                    13                           0.6%                                       263                         13.1%

 

Japan                                                     331                         16.5%                                    229                         11.4%

 

United Kingdom                               132                         6.6%                                       91                           4.5%

 

France                                                   67                           3.3%                                       59                           2.9%

 

Canada                                                 50                           2.5%                                       58                           2.9%

 

Germany                                              64                           3.2%                                       51                           2.5%

 

 

 

While Russia is weaker on an economic level, it still plays an important role given its military and political weight. In addition to important monopolies like Gazprom or Rosneft, Russia has a huge military-industrial complex making it the second largest military power behind the U.S. and ahead of all other imperialist states. (See Table 2) [11]

 

 

 

Table 2. World Nuclear Forces, 2018 [12]

 

Country                      Deployed Warheads          Other Warheads                Total Inventory

 

USA                                       1,750                                      4,700                                      6,450

 

Russia                                   1,600                                      5,250                                      6,850

 

France                                   280                                         20                                           300

 

China                                    –                                              280                                         280

 

UK                                      120                                         95                                           215

 

 

 

Other imperialist powers might come close to the U.S. respectively China in this or that area. But in their totality they do not match these two dominant Great Powers. Japan, for example, is economically strong. But for various reasons, one of them the consequences of its defeat in World War II, it is politically and military subordinated to the U.S. and can not play an independent role. Germany, the economically strongest European power, faces also the consequences of its defeat in World War II and, as a result, still can not play an independent military role in global affairs.

 

Furthermore, one has to make a certain reservation about the EU as a Global Power. Basically it is not a unified state but rather a federation in making with various inner contradictions. This substantially limits its ability to intervene politically and military in global affairs. However, we will not focus on this issue here since we have dealt with this elsewhere and, furthermore, it does not alter the fundamental argument in this place. [13]

 

Of course, each of these Great Powers is an independent power following their own interests. But they can only act in the world arena (and actually do so) if they operate in an alliance with one of the two dominating Great Powers U.S. resp. China. They can hardly play any significant role without the support of one of the two. And in any alliance with one of them (the U.S. resp. China), it is the later which plays the dominant role but neither the EU, Russia nor Japan.

 

Furthermore, when analyzing the Great Powers it is crucial to take into account the dynamic of the development. The U.S., the EU and Japan are old, declining, imperialist powers while China and Russia are new, rising powers. Naturally, this is a highly important factor for the political appeal of China resp. Russia. It has also profound consequences for the domestic stability and cohesiveness. Just look at the U.S. or the European Union. The ruling class of the strongest imperialist is deadlocked in a political civil war with Trump as a dysfunctional President who is detested by the majority of the monopoly bourgeoisie as well as the population. And the imperialist governments of the European Union are self-absorbed with their conflicts between each other how to deal with Brexit, migration, trade war, etc.

 

Related with this decline of the old imperialist powers is the undermining of the social fabric in the U.S., Western Europe and Japan. Historically, these richest imperialist powers where able to afford a relatively stable bourgeois democracy for many decades because their wealth allowed them to build a social alliance of the ruling class with the middle class and the labor aristocracy. Politically, this “historic bloc” (to lend a category of Antonio Gramsci) has been expressed in relatively stable (coalition) governments – of the Republican resp. the Democratic Party in the U.S., of the leading conservative resp. reformist party in Europe, etc.

 

All this is changing now as we see with Trump, Macron, the M5S-Lega government in Italy, etc. In short, the decline of the old imperialist powers has provoked a lasting disintegration of this “historic bloc” and resulted in the break-away of sectors of the middle class (expressed in the emergence of radical right-wing racist movements or radical liberal-democratic movements). Likewise, we see crises or even splits in reformist parties like Corbyn’s Labour Party in Britain, the collapse of the French Socialist Party and the rise of Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s La France Insoumise, the rise of Podemos in Spain, etc. In short, the decline of the old imperialist powers has provoked a fundamental social and political destabilization. This domestic political crisis weakens these Great Powers in addition to their economic decline.

 

Compare these domestic problems of the old imperialist power with the situation in China and Russia. In both countries exists a stable Bonapartist regime since decades. Since Putin took power in 1999, Russia grew considerable as an imperialist power. Despite Western sanctions, the regime could maintain relative political stability at home. Similarly, the Stalinist-Capitalist ruling class in China has managed to keep their regime stable since their counter-revolutionary massacre against the workers and students on Tiananmen Square in June 1989.

 

In summary, for all these reasons we think it is justified to identify the U.S. and China as the two strongest, most important, the development of world politics and word economy most determining imperialist powers. Hence, the rivalry between the U.S. and China is the main axis of the global inner-imperialist contradictions.