Europe Sees China Closing the Gap on US Global Power
Former EU Commission President observes China approaching US dominance through economic strength. What does this power shift mean for global stability?
"China comes every time closer." This assessment from a former European Union leader captures what many observers see but few dare to articulate: the world's power balance is shifting.
Jose Manuel Durao Barroso, who led the European Commission from 2004 to 2014, this week offered a frank evaluation of global power dynamics. While the United States remains the "most important global power," he noted, China is steadily closing the gap through economic strength, technological advancement, and expanding influence.
The Numbers Don't Lie
Barroso's observation isn't based on speculation. China's economy, measured by purchasing power parity, has already surpassed the US. In nominal terms, it sits at roughly 70% of America's GDP. More striking is China's manufacturing dominance—the country now produces 30% of global manufacturing output, compared to America's 16%.
Technology tells a similar story. In artificial intelligence patents, 5G infrastructure, electric vehicle batteries, and renewable energy, Chinese companies are either matching or outpacing their American counterparts. Huawei, BYD, and CATL have become household names in global markets, challenging the traditional dominance of Western tech giants.
Why Europe's Perspective Matters
Barroso's comments carry particular weight because they come from Europe—a region that competes with both superpowers while depending on neither exclusively. Unlike countries forced to choose sides, European leaders can offer relatively objective assessments of the US-China rivalry.
The EU has designated China as a "systemic rival" while maintaining it's also a partner and competitor. This nuanced approach reflects Europe's recognition that the world isn't neatly divided into opposing camps. Countries and regions must navigate complex relationships with both powers.
Implications for Global Markets
For investors and businesses, this power shift creates both opportunities and challenges. Supply chains built around American technological leadership now face disruption from Chinese alternatives. Companies must increasingly consider geopolitical risks alongside traditional business factors.
The semiconductor industry exemplifies this challenge. While American companies like Intel and Nvidia maintain technological edges in certain areas, China's massive investments in chip manufacturing threaten to reshape the entire industry. Meanwhile, export controls and trade restrictions force companies to choose between markets.
The Middle Power Dilemma
Perhaps most affected are middle powers caught between the two giants. Countries like South Korea, Australia, and several European nations face pressure to align with one side while maintaining profitable relationships with both.
This dilemma extends beyond economics to technology standards, military alliances, and even cultural exchanges. As the US-China rivalry intensifies, neutral ground becomes increasingly scarce.
The answer may determine whether the 21st century brings cooperation or conflict on a scale we haven't seen since the Cold War.
This content is AI-generated based on source articles. While we strive for accuracy, errors may occur. We recommend verifying with the original source.
Share your thoughts on this article
Sign in to join the conversation
Related Articles
UK PM Keir Starmer visits Beijing with a message that unsettles Washington: Britain won't choose between US and China. What this means for investors in a fragmenting world.
Former US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan unveils an 8-scenario matrix for AI strategy. Will superintelligence emerge? Can China catch up easily? The answers reshape global power.
As the US, China, and Russia grapple with self-imposed crises, India emerges as the sole bright spot among major powers. An analysis of how great power missteps are reshaping global order.
Three nuclear powers are now led by personalist rulers who make policy based on whims rather than strategy. What happens when global order depends on individual psychology?
Thoughts