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.

The US assumes its democratic values create a trust advantage. However, unpredictable actions, like threatening to cut off tech access to partners, undermine this trust and create an opening for China. China is exploiting this by positioning itself as a more reliable, if not more ideologically aligned, long-term supplier, especially in the Global South.

Unlike the old Cold War with Russia, the U.S. and China's deep economic interdependence prevents open conflict. The current "Rice War" is like water polo: while business and diplomacy occur on the surface, a covert intelligence and influence war rages underneath.

With the U.S. stepping back from its traditional leadership role, European countries are creating new, direct alliances to ensure their own security. A notable example is the emerging UK-Scandinavia-Baltic-Poland axis, which signals a fundamental shift in the continent's geopolitical architecture away from a singular reliance on Washington.

As America's global dominance wanes, power is bifurcating into two distinct successor empires. China is winning the physical world of manufacturing and military hardware. Simultaneously, the internet is winning the digital world of media (AI, social) and money (crypto, smart contracts). This succession has already occurred but has not been fully priced in by global markets.

The US-China tech rivalry spans four arenas: creating technology, applying it, installing infrastructure, and self-sufficiency. While the U.S. excels at creating foundational tech like AI frameworks and semiconductors, China is leading in its practical application (e.g., robotics), installing digital infrastructure globally, and achieving resource independence.

The political landscape is not a simple left-right binary. It's a four-way conflict between distinct factions: the internet (tech), Blue America (media), Red America (manufacturing), and China. Each engages in specific clashes, like the 'tech clash' (internet vs. blue) or the 'trade war' (red vs. China), which better explains modern global tensions.

While China supports institutions like the UN, its primary strategy for global influence is creating new, economically-focused organizations like the BRICS Bank and regional summits (e.g., China-Africa). This approach builds alternative power centers and economic interdependence with the Global South, supplementing rather than directly challenging the post-war Western order.

A multinational peacekeeping force from BRICS countries (China, India, Brazil, etc.) could be more effective in conflicts like the Russia-Ukraine war. The rationale is that these nations are seen as more neutral than NATO and hold significant economic leverage (e.g., as major buyers of Russian energy), making them a credible guarantee against further aggression.