The United States' greatest strategic advantage over competitors like China is its vast ecosystem of over 50 wealthy, advanced, allied nations. China has only one treaty ally: North Korea. Weakening these alliances through punitive actions is a critical foreign policy error that erodes America's primary source of global strength.

Related Insights

The U.S. is undoing 25 years of bipartisan work by pushing India away with punitive tariffs. This is a massive strategic blunder, as India is the only country with the population and industrial scale to serve as a viable supply chain alternative to China, making it a critical geopolitical partner.

Luckey argues that US foreign policy is shifting away from direct military intervention. The new, more effective strategy is to arm allies, turning them into "prickly porcupines" that are difficult to attack. This approach maintains US influence and economic benefits while avoiding the political and human cost of deploying troops.

Contrary to its goals, the U.S. trade war has resulted in self-isolation. Data shows the U.S. is the only country buying less from China, while U.S. allies and developing nations have increased their trade, leading to a record $1 trillion surplus for China. This highlights a strategic miscalculation in U.S. foreign trade policy.

The U.S. industrial strategy isn't pure "reshoring" but "friend-shoring." The goal is to build a global supply chain that excludes China, not to bring all production home. This creates massive investment opportunities in allied countries like Mexico, Vietnam, Korea, and Japan, which are beneficiaries of this geopolitical realignment.

The U.S. faces adversaries who are actively collaborating, rendering a siloed response insufficient. Victory requires an integrated effort combining the government, the traditional defense industrial base, and agile innovators, creating unique partnerships to move faster than the competition.

While a unipolar world led by one's own country is advantageous, a multipolar world with competing powers like the U.S. and China creates a dynamic tension. This competition may force more compromised global decisions, potentially leading to a more balanced, albeit more tense, international system than one dominated by a single unchallenged power.

China embraces economic globalization, crediting it for lifting 800 million from poverty. However, it explicitly rejects the "militarized globalization" represented by security pacts like AUKUS or NATO expansion. This differentiates its approach from the Western model, which often intertwines economic integration with shared security and political values.

After WWII, the U.S. used its naval dominance to guarantee global trade. In exchange for writing its allies' security policies, it allowed open access to its market. This economic "unfairness" was the strategic cost of building a global coalition against the Soviet Union, effectively bribing nations into an alliance.

Far from being a precise tool against China, recent US tariffs act as a blunt instrument that harms America's own interests. They tax raw materials and machine tools needed for domestic production and hit allies harder than adversaries. This alienates partners, disrupts supply chains, and pushes the world towards a 'World Minus One' economic coalition excluding the US.

The recent uptick in global conflicts, from Ukraine to the Caribbean, is not a series of isolated events. It's a direct result of adversaries perceiving American weakness and acting on the historical principle that nations expand their influence until they are met with sufficient counter-force.

America's True Superpower Is Its Alliance Network, Not Its Military | RiffOn