What do you think?
Rate this book
A China Venceu? O Desafio Chinês à Supremacia Americana
De modo franco, transparente e incisivo, Kishore Mahbubani esclarece os riscos e erros estratégicos da disputa China-Estados Unidos Com sólida carreira acadêmica e diplomática, Kishore Mahbubani avalia os dois lados do embate e mostra como a China tem pensado em escala global, lançando iniciativas ambiciosas junto aos líderes mais pragmáticos e competentes do mundo. A sociedade chinesa, repleta de inovação e dinamismo, recuperou sua confiança cultural. Enquanto isso, os Estados Unidos viram seu modelo econômico ser seriamente prejudicado pela crise financeira de 2008; na concepção de muitos, não são mais a grande potência, mas um adversário estagnado. Em qualquer grande competição geopolítica, a parte que consegue permanecer racional e serena sempre terá vantagem sobre a parte movida por emoções, conscientes ou não. A ascensão global da China e o declínio estratégico dos EUA representam um desafio político que os americanos nunca enfrentaram antes. Nos últimos quarenta anos, a China viveu o maior crescimento econômico da história enquanto seus maiores rivais ficaram no piloto automático, acreditando que se manteriam como número um para sempre. A grande disputa geopolítica do século XXI já começou e vai continuar por mais uma ou duas décadas. A guerra comercial estourou. A humanidade precisa urgentemente que essas duas potências cooperem, mas o atrito permanente parece mais provável. E o maior erro estratégico dos EUA foi presumir que, não importa o que acontecesse, estariam na liderança mundial. Editora : Intrínseca; 1ª edição (23 julho 2021)
Idioma : Po
Idioma : Po
366 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2020
735 people are currently reading
4471 people want to read
About the author
Kishore Mahbubani
31 books333 followersKishore Mahbubani (born 24 October 1948) is a Singaporean academic and former diplomat. He is currently Professor in the Practice of Public Policy at Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore.
From 1971 to 2004 he served in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and was Singapore's Permanent Representative to the United Nations. In that role, he served as President of the United Nations Security Council in January 2001 and May 2002.
On 6 November 2017, Mahbubani announced that he would retire from the position as Dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School at the end of 2017.
From 1971 to 2004 he served in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and was Singapore's Permanent Representative to the United Nations. In that role, he served as President of the United Nations Security Council in January 2001 and May 2002.
On 6 November 2017, Mahbubani announced that he would retire from the position as Dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School at the end of 2017.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 267 reviews
June 23, 2020
As a Chinese person, I agree with everything the author is saying, and could also see why so many people are bashing this book in the comments. This book is very different from conventional rhetoric and would be difficult for someone who only receives information from English dominated media to hear, it will sound so different that it's almost " heretic" and " blasphemous" to the idea that democracy trumps all else.
Amidst everything that is going on in the world and reading this book just makes me want to shout :" stop fighting, can't you just work together!?" Quoting the author of his last sentence - the question isn't which country will win, but if humanity will.
Amidst everything that is going on in the world and reading this book just makes me want to shout :" stop fighting, can't you just work together!?" Quoting the author of his last sentence - the question isn't which country will win, but if humanity will.
May 4, 2020
***Disclaimer: I received a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. Thank you NetGalley and Public Affairs!***
I stopped reading this book about 150 pages in, roughly halfway. I make an effort to not put down a book less than halfway through in order to be fair. Sometimes things start to look up after a rocky beginning. To be clear, I did not put this book away because it was poorly written. Indeed, it was excellently written. But I felt like the author has gotten it wrong when it came to his starting thesis. And unfortunately, if your starting thesis is incorrect, then some or all of your conclusions probably will be too.
The author has a very big bias in favor of China. This was evident throughout the Introduction when he basically said that China is the victim of cultural misunderstanding and that America was mostly afraid of powerful “yellow” people (his words, not mine) and mistakenly thinks that all Communism is the same as the Soviet Union was. But I carried on in spite of this obvious bias because the next two chapters were about the biggest mistakes so far that each of the world superpowers has made. I thought, maybe here is where we get a more evenhanded approach.
Unfortunately we did not. According to the author, China’s biggest mistake is that it gives too much power to local governments and Beijing is largely powerless to control them. For example, the author mentions that businesses are very wary of working in China because they feel that China takes advantage of them and threatens them with access to the Chinese market if they don’t comply to outrageous. His example is a business that states they had a contract with a Chinese company that they would utilize their services for a set number of years and then buy the company outright for X price at the end of that period. When that date came the company refused to sell. The business petitioned to the courts in Beijing and were told “well pay them more money then and buy the business”. The author attributes this to a lack of centralized leadership. That is blatantly false and biased. That is called extortion. If the courts had said “Sorry, this is an issue with the local jurisdiction” that would prove the author’s point. But they acted like a mob enforcer “Pay more money, then they’ll sell.” The author gives this kind of leniency to the Chinese government over and over again.
And still, I continued. I thought that perhaps when the author was describing the largest mistake by America that we would see the same leniency. We did not. The author spends the entire chapter demonizing President Trump and demonizing businesses for blaming it on American war culture. And then throwing in some demonization of America’s lack of social justice for good measure. Americans just want to believe that all Communism is bad, so that’s why we demonize China. Again, this is a flawed premise. The Chinese Communist Party is bad. They have upwards of 1.5 million people imprisoned in labor camps, another half million in re-education centers. Stories abound from survivors of these camps of the rampant abuse and rape that goes on. Defectors from the CCP are executed silently and immediately, potentially thousands of people per year. The CCP has launched genocidal massacres on Tibetans, Buddhists, Christians and Muslims within the past decade. Don’t try and blow that particular sunshine about good Communism up my behind, thanks all the same!
In the end, this author thinks China is a great place and America is inherently racist with a psycho for a President. To me, that indicates that all conclusions that he draws will be flawed. So while the author asks a lot of interesting questions, the answers will likely be unsatisfying.
Reviewed for Written Among the Stars
I stopped reading this book about 150 pages in, roughly halfway. I make an effort to not put down a book less than halfway through in order to be fair. Sometimes things start to look up after a rocky beginning. To be clear, I did not put this book away because it was poorly written. Indeed, it was excellently written. But I felt like the author has gotten it wrong when it came to his starting thesis. And unfortunately, if your starting thesis is incorrect, then some or all of your conclusions probably will be too.
The author has a very big bias in favor of China. This was evident throughout the Introduction when he basically said that China is the victim of cultural misunderstanding and that America was mostly afraid of powerful “yellow” people (his words, not mine) and mistakenly thinks that all Communism is the same as the Soviet Union was. But I carried on in spite of this obvious bias because the next two chapters were about the biggest mistakes so far that each of the world superpowers has made. I thought, maybe here is where we get a more evenhanded approach.
Unfortunately we did not. According to the author, China’s biggest mistake is that it gives too much power to local governments and Beijing is largely powerless to control them. For example, the author mentions that businesses are very wary of working in China because they feel that China takes advantage of them and threatens them with access to the Chinese market if they don’t comply to outrageous. His example is a business that states they had a contract with a Chinese company that they would utilize their services for a set number of years and then buy the company outright for X price at the end of that period. When that date came the company refused to sell. The business petitioned to the courts in Beijing and were told “well pay them more money then and buy the business”. The author attributes this to a lack of centralized leadership. That is blatantly false and biased. That is called extortion. If the courts had said “Sorry, this is an issue with the local jurisdiction” that would prove the author’s point. But they acted like a mob enforcer “Pay more money, then they’ll sell.” The author gives this kind of leniency to the Chinese government over and over again.
And still, I continued. I thought that perhaps when the author was describing the largest mistake by America that we would see the same leniency. We did not. The author spends the entire chapter demonizing President Trump and demonizing businesses for blaming it on American war culture. And then throwing in some demonization of America’s lack of social justice for good measure. Americans just want to believe that all Communism is bad, so that’s why we demonize China. Again, this is a flawed premise. The Chinese Communist Party is bad. They have upwards of 1.5 million people imprisoned in labor camps, another half million in re-education centers. Stories abound from survivors of these camps of the rampant abuse and rape that goes on. Defectors from the CCP are executed silently and immediately, potentially thousands of people per year. The CCP has launched genocidal massacres on Tibetans, Buddhists, Christians and Muslims within the past decade. Don’t try and blow that particular sunshine about good Communism up my behind, thanks all the same!
In the end, this author thinks China is a great place and America is inherently racist with a psycho for a President. To me, that indicates that all conclusions that he draws will be flawed. So while the author asks a lot of interesting questions, the answers will likely be unsatisfying.
Reviewed for Written Among the Stars
April 21, 2020
'Has China Won?' is a must-read for geopolitical experts of all stripes in the current era of rapidly rising Sinophobia.
Mr. Mahbubani makes highly controversial points that are not going to be easily digestible for the rising hoard braying to declare China as the global villain. The author takes an unabashedly opposite viewpoint to prove that Chinese policymakers are a largely benevolent, growth-seeking, non-interfering lot who see themselves as "good guys" that are working hard and smart for their own betterment and without any intention of harming others. If they have particular desires for dominance, the list is small and nothing compared to the flaw list of the United States.
Given this anti-thetical position in the book compared to the views of most English-reading audience, the book's tone would jar firebrand democrats and liberals, right-wing Western nationalists and citizens of most Asian nations, left-wing socialists and more extreme anti-market groups, human right champions, free speech proponents, individualists, environmentalists, and on and on.
The author chooses multiple well- and lesser-known anecdotes to bolster his claims. Given his personal experiences and mastery of the state-craft, some of the tales are quite amusing despite their biased inferences. The author pulls no punches in holding a mirror to the United States' policies exposing highly questionable underlying motives, over-the-top actions, blunders, and ignorance. It is quite likely that many readers would classify the book as prejudicial and partisan, fuelled by the author's own inherent biases.
Despite the extreme position, the book should be read by anyone interested in geopolitics to understand a completely different, highly Eastern, take on current affairs. Post-COVID, as the world could be lurching towards castigating China as the designer of the virus that halted the world of 2010s, we will need a huge number who can spend time trying to understand China's potential motives as they really are versus what many of us want to assign to them. Books like these will help despite their unbalanced take.
Mr. Mahbubani makes highly controversial points that are not going to be easily digestible for the rising hoard braying to declare China as the global villain. The author takes an unabashedly opposite viewpoint to prove that Chinese policymakers are a largely benevolent, growth-seeking, non-interfering lot who see themselves as "good guys" that are working hard and smart for their own betterment and without any intention of harming others. If they have particular desires for dominance, the list is small and nothing compared to the flaw list of the United States.
Given this anti-thetical position in the book compared to the views of most English-reading audience, the book's tone would jar firebrand democrats and liberals, right-wing Western nationalists and citizens of most Asian nations, left-wing socialists and more extreme anti-market groups, human right champions, free speech proponents, individualists, environmentalists, and on and on.
The author chooses multiple well- and lesser-known anecdotes to bolster his claims. Given his personal experiences and mastery of the state-craft, some of the tales are quite amusing despite their biased inferences. The author pulls no punches in holding a mirror to the United States' policies exposing highly questionable underlying motives, over-the-top actions, blunders, and ignorance. It is quite likely that many readers would classify the book as prejudicial and partisan, fuelled by the author's own inherent biases.
Despite the extreme position, the book should be read by anyone interested in geopolitics to understand a completely different, highly Eastern, take on current affairs. Post-COVID, as the world could be lurching towards castigating China as the designer of the virus that halted the world of 2010s, we will need a huge number who can spend time trying to understand China's potential motives as they really are versus what many of us want to assign to them. Books like these will help despite their unbalanced take.
November 25, 2020
Disclaimer for my American friends on Goodreads. Please read this in its entirety. This review may not hold to your internalized values, but it comes from the place of a non-American, looking at the world thoughtfully and realistically, with a hope for peace, free trade, and a reduction in poverty, environmental risk, and the like. I am hopefully offering a nuanced viewpoint here; it is certainly up to you to decide. And I welcome any comments or criticisms below from any perspective, but hope you can be respectful and thoughtful in said comments.
Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy, by Kishore Mahbubani, is an interesting book examining the geopolitical competition between the United States and China, and advocating for a solution that promotes cooperation and balance over competition and conflict. Many reviewers on Goodreads have noted this book has a China bias. I flatly disagree. This book is written by a Singaporean geopolitical scholar who is viewing this struggle from a Singaporean position. That is why they are advocating for balance. I can understand why Americans and Western readers in general would think this. It is because it does not share the overwhelming Western narrative on China - which in of itself is a fully biased position to take. Instead it advocates for course corrections from both parties, and some subtle but nuanced suggestions for every other position. Remember; the United States and China are but two nations in the world. There are 194-odd others (depending on your stance) that are looking at different strategies and geopolitical options. A purely American vs. Chinese viewpoint, is therefore, incredibly naive and should be discounted swiftly.
The first part of this book looks at mistakes; namely mistakes that China and the United States have made when interacting with each other. Mahbubani looks at how the Chinese government has alienated the American business community - once there biggest ally, through protectionist measures, impediments to trade, and policies that favour domestic production. All of these factors have made the American business community strong and vocal advocates of trade protectionism against China. From the American side, Mahbubani examines the issues the United States has with determining cognizant strategies to deal with China. The majority opinion seems to be strongly in favour of tough measures against China, with the America's policy scholars building a Cold War era narrative of us vs. them. This reduces the likelihood that America will be able to successfully create a policy of handling China's move into a first world nation, with the political clout to boot. Whether Americans like it or not, Mahbubani argues, the situation is as it is, and states need to develop policies that reduce conflict, promote cooperation, and reduce the likelihood of war, trade disruption, environmental degradation, poverty and the like.
Mahbubani also examines the thought processes in Beijing and Washington, D.C. America, Mahbubani argues, is stuck in its doctrinal exceptionalism. Citizens in the United States would argue vociferously that their country is the most virtuous and free nation is the world, and China is an autocratic state with little to recommend it. There are many good points in the above statement, but of course, as with most things, it is not so black and white. America, in the Western world, has the most unequal society by most margins. In terms of equal distribution of resources, access to education, internment in prisons, racial equality, and so much more, the United States falls far behind any of its peers. Instead, it spends trillions of dollars in costly wars in the Middle East, and to keep its military might in check, to ensure its hegemony in the world. Most nations would do the same. Even so, this cost is born by its population, and it shows. If you asked most citizens of Europe, Canada, Australia or New Zealand if they would want to live in the United States, or become US citizens, the vast majority would probably politely decline for one of the above (or many other reasons). Even so, the United States is also one of the most interesting arbitrators of global hegemony. Its philosophy has been fully and completely adopted by most nations in the world; China included. The world has never seen such peace - even with the numerous conflicts that the US engages in.
China is different, Mahbubani argues. Their strategic considerations are much closer to home, and revolve around numerous historical conditions. Ensuring a stable domestic political environment is of great importance to China's government, and sometimes comes in the form of autocratic crackdowns. It must be noted, however, that China's autocratic systems have become much more open in recent years; no repeats yet of Tienanmen Square, although his does not mean it couldn't happen a second time. China is also concerned about maintaining a stable geopolitical environment. China is a major and recent player in most international organizations, and its growing clout in these arenas is due to its economic, demographic and political power across the globe. China is fast becoming the only state to be mentioned in the same sentence with the United States when discussing global power. Even so, Chinese power looks different than American power. The US is the established global hegemon, and requires systems to ensure this situation continues. China has no such considerations. Instead, it is able to focus (and indeed requires for a stable internal political environment) on continued improvements in its citizens incomes, happiness, environmental standards and so forth. The way China goes about this seems insidious to the West; social credit systems tracked by the government, CCTV systems to crack down on dissent and crime, and cultural homogenization of peoples not considered Han Chinese, and so much more. These systems are not attractive to the vast majority of Western citizens. If most Western citizens were asked if they would become a citizen of China, they would almost certainly reply with a strong negative. Even so, this does not mean that these systems are unattractive to the average citizen in China, or indeed any other developing nation. Democracy, as can be seen across the globe, is a double edged sword. It can lead to open, clean and efficient governance, and numerous freedoms and liberties for citizens, with the United States, the EU, Canada and Japan being shining examples. It can also lead to social unrest, corruption, civil war, and interference by global or regional powers, as can be seen from nations like the Philippines, states in Latin America and Africa, and the like throughout history and modern times. Democracy is a stellar way to promote many ideals, but in China's mind (and indeed the minds of nations like Singapore, the Gulf states, and numerous other polities) it is not the only way. This idea will not sit well with the universal idealism that American policy makers often discuss, but as Mahbubani posits, it is the reality of the situation.
Mahbubani looks at this geopolitical rivalry from the perspective of other nations in his final chapter, especially from the perspective of ASEAN and Singapore. These nations are stuck in the middle of a great power rivalry. Bordering China, but with American sanctions and tariffs hovering over their heads, they must walk a fine line to balance the interests of two competing nations. And Mahbubani thinks this is a terrible thing. Geopolitical competition does, but should not, effect other nations, in the dualistic sense. The United States and China are poised to be the two most influential nations in the world, and this reality needs to be tempered in some ways. Geopolitical competition hopefully will not lead to armed conflict. With enough nukes to blow up the world a few times over, it also makes armed conflict potentially apocalyptic, and the brunt of this cost may fall on the poor and middle class of the world. Instead, Mahbubani hopes to see greater cooperation and balancing of interests between the two powers, as would befit the geopolitical situation in Singapore if the reader is so inclined to consider it. Trade, international cooperation on poverty reduction, environmental regulation and safe travel, and continued cooperation in the sciences, humanities, art, history and so forth will have an immeasurable positive benefit on humanity. Regional trading blocs like the newly signed RCEP, cooperation with international organizations like the UN, and strong bilateral relations that ensure clear lines of communications, are how this can come about.
Frankly, a strong book which may be challenging to read by Americans and Western readers, but in my opinion, this makes it much more interesting. This is an easy contender for a book that should be read widely, its opinions considered and critiqued, and ideas formulated from its conclusions. The dichotomy between US hegemony and rising powers is going to be the global narrative for the next few decades at the very least. This is one of the defining changes of our time, and will have lasting effects into numerous issues, from combating environmental degradation to save humanity, to reducing poverty, to altering the very face of global culture, the effects of a multi-polar world will be absolutely profound, and difficult to fathom from the past. I highly recommend this book for its challenging discourse, and interesting conclusions.
Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy, by Kishore Mahbubani, is an interesting book examining the geopolitical competition between the United States and China, and advocating for a solution that promotes cooperation and balance over competition and conflict. Many reviewers on Goodreads have noted this book has a China bias. I flatly disagree. This book is written by a Singaporean geopolitical scholar who is viewing this struggle from a Singaporean position. That is why they are advocating for balance. I can understand why Americans and Western readers in general would think this. It is because it does not share the overwhelming Western narrative on China - which in of itself is a fully biased position to take. Instead it advocates for course corrections from both parties, and some subtle but nuanced suggestions for every other position. Remember; the United States and China are but two nations in the world. There are 194-odd others (depending on your stance) that are looking at different strategies and geopolitical options. A purely American vs. Chinese viewpoint, is therefore, incredibly naive and should be discounted swiftly.
The first part of this book looks at mistakes; namely mistakes that China and the United States have made when interacting with each other. Mahbubani looks at how the Chinese government has alienated the American business community - once there biggest ally, through protectionist measures, impediments to trade, and policies that favour domestic production. All of these factors have made the American business community strong and vocal advocates of trade protectionism against China. From the American side, Mahbubani examines the issues the United States has with determining cognizant strategies to deal with China. The majority opinion seems to be strongly in favour of tough measures against China, with the America's policy scholars building a Cold War era narrative of us vs. them. This reduces the likelihood that America will be able to successfully create a policy of handling China's move into a first world nation, with the political clout to boot. Whether Americans like it or not, Mahbubani argues, the situation is as it is, and states need to develop policies that reduce conflict, promote cooperation, and reduce the likelihood of war, trade disruption, environmental degradation, poverty and the like.
Mahbubani also examines the thought processes in Beijing and Washington, D.C. America, Mahbubani argues, is stuck in its doctrinal exceptionalism. Citizens in the United States would argue vociferously that their country is the most virtuous and free nation is the world, and China is an autocratic state with little to recommend it. There are many good points in the above statement, but of course, as with most things, it is not so black and white. America, in the Western world, has the most unequal society by most margins. In terms of equal distribution of resources, access to education, internment in prisons, racial equality, and so much more, the United States falls far behind any of its peers. Instead, it spends trillions of dollars in costly wars in the Middle East, and to keep its military might in check, to ensure its hegemony in the world. Most nations would do the same. Even so, this cost is born by its population, and it shows. If you asked most citizens of Europe, Canada, Australia or New Zealand if they would want to live in the United States, or become US citizens, the vast majority would probably politely decline for one of the above (or many other reasons). Even so, the United States is also one of the most interesting arbitrators of global hegemony. Its philosophy has been fully and completely adopted by most nations in the world; China included. The world has never seen such peace - even with the numerous conflicts that the US engages in.
China is different, Mahbubani argues. Their strategic considerations are much closer to home, and revolve around numerous historical conditions. Ensuring a stable domestic political environment is of great importance to China's government, and sometimes comes in the form of autocratic crackdowns. It must be noted, however, that China's autocratic systems have become much more open in recent years; no repeats yet of Tienanmen Square, although his does not mean it couldn't happen a second time. China is also concerned about maintaining a stable geopolitical environment. China is a major and recent player in most international organizations, and its growing clout in these arenas is due to its economic, demographic and political power across the globe. China is fast becoming the only state to be mentioned in the same sentence with the United States when discussing global power. Even so, Chinese power looks different than American power. The US is the established global hegemon, and requires systems to ensure this situation continues. China has no such considerations. Instead, it is able to focus (and indeed requires for a stable internal political environment) on continued improvements in its citizens incomes, happiness, environmental standards and so forth. The way China goes about this seems insidious to the West; social credit systems tracked by the government, CCTV systems to crack down on dissent and crime, and cultural homogenization of peoples not considered Han Chinese, and so much more. These systems are not attractive to the vast majority of Western citizens. If most Western citizens were asked if they would become a citizen of China, they would almost certainly reply with a strong negative. Even so, this does not mean that these systems are unattractive to the average citizen in China, or indeed any other developing nation. Democracy, as can be seen across the globe, is a double edged sword. It can lead to open, clean and efficient governance, and numerous freedoms and liberties for citizens, with the United States, the EU, Canada and Japan being shining examples. It can also lead to social unrest, corruption, civil war, and interference by global or regional powers, as can be seen from nations like the Philippines, states in Latin America and Africa, and the like throughout history and modern times. Democracy is a stellar way to promote many ideals, but in China's mind (and indeed the minds of nations like Singapore, the Gulf states, and numerous other polities) it is not the only way. This idea will not sit well with the universal idealism that American policy makers often discuss, but as Mahbubani posits, it is the reality of the situation.
Mahbubani looks at this geopolitical rivalry from the perspective of other nations in his final chapter, especially from the perspective of ASEAN and Singapore. These nations are stuck in the middle of a great power rivalry. Bordering China, but with American sanctions and tariffs hovering over their heads, they must walk a fine line to balance the interests of two competing nations. And Mahbubani thinks this is a terrible thing. Geopolitical competition does, but should not, effect other nations, in the dualistic sense. The United States and China are poised to be the two most influential nations in the world, and this reality needs to be tempered in some ways. Geopolitical competition hopefully will not lead to armed conflict. With enough nukes to blow up the world a few times over, it also makes armed conflict potentially apocalyptic, and the brunt of this cost may fall on the poor and middle class of the world. Instead, Mahbubani hopes to see greater cooperation and balancing of interests between the two powers, as would befit the geopolitical situation in Singapore if the reader is so inclined to consider it. Trade, international cooperation on poverty reduction, environmental regulation and safe travel, and continued cooperation in the sciences, humanities, art, history and so forth will have an immeasurable positive benefit on humanity. Regional trading blocs like the newly signed RCEP, cooperation with international organizations like the UN, and strong bilateral relations that ensure clear lines of communications, are how this can come about.
Frankly, a strong book which may be challenging to read by Americans and Western readers, but in my opinion, this makes it much more interesting. This is an easy contender for a book that should be read widely, its opinions considered and critiqued, and ideas formulated from its conclusions. The dichotomy between US hegemony and rising powers is going to be the global narrative for the next few decades at the very least. This is one of the defining changes of our time, and will have lasting effects into numerous issues, from combating environmental degradation to save humanity, to reducing poverty, to altering the very face of global culture, the effects of a multi-polar world will be absolutely profound, and difficult to fathom from the past. I highly recommend this book for its challenging discourse, and interesting conclusions.
May 6, 2021
History is not a morality tale and neither China nor the Chinese Communist Party are likely going anywhere, nor are they likely to experience many brakes on their path to global power. This book argues for a nuanced U.S. take on China, from the perspective of a former Singaporean diplomat. I'm familiar with Mahbubani's earlier works and the Asian futurist perspective he represents. I found this one to be a bit repetitive and poorly edited, but he lays out a plausible path in which Asia rebalances the United States and even relegates it to second-tier nation status in the coming decades. Mahbubani is much less catastrophic than Graham Allison who thinks that a shooting war of some sort is likely inevitable. Instead, China and the U.S. will compete diplomatically, economically, and technologically. Whether this competition is constructive or not remains to be seen, but for that to happen the zero-sum mentality now prevailing in D.C. will need to shift to something more realistic.
April 12, 2020
An emotional take on US-China rivalry. Heavily biased in favour of China.
May 28, 2020
This book is cohesive, driven, and goes a good job explaining the big picture issues facing the US and China. As a Westerner I found Mahbubani's perspective eye-opening in many ways, and I would recommend this book to anyone who 1) wants to get a better grasp of where the US-China relationship is headed 2) wants to understand China and the perspective of China or 3) wants to think critically about the United States and American foreign policy. I'm glad I read it.
I got to interview Prof. Mahbubani on the book as well, and we cover a lot of the main points. Interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaNyT...
I got to interview Prof. Mahbubani on the book as well, and we cover a lot of the main points. Interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaNyT...
April 1, 2021
Eh. Yes. Yes and no. 4* for the first three chapters and 2* for the final six.
Good:
- Interesting parallels with the Cold War, framing the modern US as the new USSR, tired and brittle, while China quickly adapts;
- Is right that China can't be fought head-on and that constant lobbying pressure from contractors is a significant weakness to the US;
- Largely right to stress that the US is wrong to approach China as a *Communist* threat;
- Offers a useful analysis of the tarnishing of the US's reputation as a stable, reliable trade partner (and the USD as a reserve; the chapter on the role of the dollar really was interesting)
- Good reading into how China underestimated the US after the 2008 recession and has hurt its relations with western business by its own hand;
- Seems broadly right in its assessment of Chinese attitudes towards the CCP;
- Right in refocus on south east Asia. Mostly right to advise the US to leave the Middle East.
And then, unfortunately, the book takes a turn. One moment it's offering a balanced breakdown of the seizure of intellectual property, historical claims to the South China Sea etc... and then the text gets weighed down in appeals to authority and tu quoque deflections.
Not so good:
- The end lingers on US atrocities and inefficiencies. Fair enough. But these do not serve the titular question. The book instead uses examples of poor American foreign policy to avoid uncomfortable truths for China for a few pages until the reader has forgotten the point. The final chapter offers one conciliatory mention of human rights abuses in Xinjiang. But it has to qualify this with US use of torture in the Middle East. Hence, criticism only really extends to Chinese practice when it can highlight a case of the US being 'worse'. So nothing on Tibertans, Falun Gong, corporate deserters... just whataboutism;
- For a book called 'Has China Won', it spends a lot of time examining how the West might have lost its grip and almost no time looking at the challenges facing China in the next few years. Europe has a wave of migration coming. Fine. But China's looming drought (and conflict with India), famine and economic bubble deserve some mention, no?
- I do understand that the presentation of China as an active aggressor in foreign affairs has been largely exaggerated. But presenting it as the poor victim of American expansionism is... disingenuous. China doubled its troops in Hong Kong mere months before the book claims that China has "shown great restraint in Hong Kong" and hasn't used any military threat. Also, the line of 'it's not ideological' is not wholly true; the CCP now vets HK MPs for political affiliation. And zero mention of the United Front, Confucius Institutes, lobbying, etc;
- False dichotomies: "most neighbours would prefer to be led by a calm Xi Jinping than a reckless Trump" (...and therefore Myanmar and Taiwan are... complicit?)
- Reliance on Rawls. Says that under the veil of ignorance, somebody might choose China over the US on the basis of high wealth inequality in the US. This is obviously a problem in the west, but poor and minority groups aren't pouring /into/ China for protection...
The book started so well with its tight analysis of geopolitics in the region and then ended up in gushy, idealistic visions of the BRI and China being left to its own devices with Taiwan so that it can 'watch as an experiment on how Chinese people react to democracy'(!) It ends on a sort of 'maybe it's not a zero sum game and everyone can love each other and save the earth (oh and also China is better with its emissions)... what a shame... (SAD!)
The author does well to raise the problems facing a US that has grown used to stability. But if - as the reviews say - the book will provoke a reaction in American audiences, it should be for this. Unfortunately, I fear, far more glaring is misdirection that the book relies upon to deliver its arguments.
Good:
- Interesting parallels with the Cold War, framing the modern US as the new USSR, tired and brittle, while China quickly adapts;
- Is right that China can't be fought head-on and that constant lobbying pressure from contractors is a significant weakness to the US;
- Largely right to stress that the US is wrong to approach China as a *Communist* threat;
- Offers a useful analysis of the tarnishing of the US's reputation as a stable, reliable trade partner (and the USD as a reserve; the chapter on the role of the dollar really was interesting)
- Good reading into how China underestimated the US after the 2008 recession and has hurt its relations with western business by its own hand;
- Seems broadly right in its assessment of Chinese attitudes towards the CCP;
- Right in refocus on south east Asia. Mostly right to advise the US to leave the Middle East.
And then, unfortunately, the book takes a turn. One moment it's offering a balanced breakdown of the seizure of intellectual property, historical claims to the South China Sea etc... and then the text gets weighed down in appeals to authority and tu quoque deflections.
Not so good:
- The end lingers on US atrocities and inefficiencies. Fair enough. But these do not serve the titular question. The book instead uses examples of poor American foreign policy to avoid uncomfortable truths for China for a few pages until the reader has forgotten the point. The final chapter offers one conciliatory mention of human rights abuses in Xinjiang. But it has to qualify this with US use of torture in the Middle East. Hence, criticism only really extends to Chinese practice when it can highlight a case of the US being 'worse'. So nothing on Tibertans, Falun Gong, corporate deserters... just whataboutism;
- For a book called 'Has China Won', it spends a lot of time examining how the West might have lost its grip and almost no time looking at the challenges facing China in the next few years. Europe has a wave of migration coming. Fine. But China's looming drought (and conflict with India), famine and economic bubble deserve some mention, no?
- I do understand that the presentation of China as an active aggressor in foreign affairs has been largely exaggerated. But presenting it as the poor victim of American expansionism is... disingenuous. China doubled its troops in Hong Kong mere months before the book claims that China has "shown great restraint in Hong Kong" and hasn't used any military threat. Also, the line of 'it's not ideological' is not wholly true; the CCP now vets HK MPs for political affiliation. And zero mention of the United Front, Confucius Institutes, lobbying, etc;
- False dichotomies: "most neighbours would prefer to be led by a calm Xi Jinping than a reckless Trump" (...and therefore Myanmar and Taiwan are... complicit?)
- Reliance on Rawls. Says that under the veil of ignorance, somebody might choose China over the US on the basis of high wealth inequality in the US. This is obviously a problem in the west, but poor and minority groups aren't pouring /into/ China for protection...
The book started so well with its tight analysis of geopolitics in the region and then ended up in gushy, idealistic visions of the BRI and China being left to its own devices with Taiwan so that it can 'watch as an experiment on how Chinese people react to democracy'(!) It ends on a sort of 'maybe it's not a zero sum game and everyone can love each other and save the earth (oh and also China is better with its emissions)... what a shame... (SAD!)
The author does well to raise the problems facing a US that has grown used to stability. But if - as the reviews say - the book will provoke a reaction in American audiences, it should be for this. Unfortunately, I fear, far more glaring is misdirection that the book relies upon to deliver its arguments.
May 10, 2020
Though I don't agree with all the arguments of Mahbubani's analysis, the overall sentiment is one that I agree with.
Mahbubani approaches this review of US-China relations without making the underlying assumption that China is a brutal expansionist totalitarian regime - which much of the current hawkish US-China literature seems to believe - and asks: Where do the US and China clash? Why? Is there an alternative?
Ultimately Mahbubani argues that the Chinese politburo isn't the irrational communist regime which many US policy makers believe, and actually acts more akin to the founding fathers of western philosophy's ideal "philosopher king", with the millenia-old Chinese values at its core. Furthermore, the US should ask itself how rational and just its own nation is, before it looks to judge others. And finally, Mahbubani argues that though a clash of civilisations seems inevitable, it need not be, and there are many arenas for cooperation towards international prosperity, if the US and China were willing to work collaboratively.
Mahbubani approaches this review of US-China relations without making the underlying assumption that China is a brutal expansionist totalitarian regime - which much of the current hawkish US-China literature seems to believe - and asks: Where do the US and China clash? Why? Is there an alternative?
Ultimately Mahbubani argues that the Chinese politburo isn't the irrational communist regime which many US policy makers believe, and actually acts more akin to the founding fathers of western philosophy's ideal "philosopher king", with the millenia-old Chinese values at its core. Furthermore, the US should ask itself how rational and just its own nation is, before it looks to judge others. And finally, Mahbubani argues that though a clash of civilisations seems inevitable, it need not be, and there are many arenas for cooperation towards international prosperity, if the US and China were willing to work collaboratively.
April 10, 2020
Compelling read. As a Singaporean, Kishore Mahbubani has a unique perspective on China and the US, quite eye-opening from a Western perspective. Perhaps a bit too doting on Xi Jinping but can't knock the book itself, couldn't put it down.
May 9, 2021
I feel that this must be one of the best book describing the current state of affairs and the shift in political power. While I can understand why some of the reviews have indicated that the author is biased in his writing, I think we should take a moment and ask ourselves a couple of questions first.
The first is what is the author's objective. If the objective of the author is to spur deeper thoughts, particularly western readers, who may have grown up with a very heavy western narrative, a "balanced" view is unlikely to spur any actions or deeper soul searching. Secondly, I will also wonder how many of the people who have said the book is biased has a true understanding of eastern/Asian perspective of what is going on in the world. Have these people lived in Asia on the ground or have significant exposure to Asian culture, or have they read a lot about Asia (and if so, are they Asian authors or westerners who claims understanding of Asians?) While we may have read a lot about America, I am pretty sure most Americans will agree that we can't truly understand them and their culture. I think it is the same vice versa.
All in all, I feel that this book highlights several noteworthy points that warrant deeper thoughts. I feel that the author has provided some Asian context and perspective to the shift in power and will strongly recommend people to read it.
The first is what is the author's objective. If the objective of the author is to spur deeper thoughts, particularly western readers, who may have grown up with a very heavy western narrative, a "balanced" view is unlikely to spur any actions or deeper soul searching. Secondly, I will also wonder how many of the people who have said the book is biased has a true understanding of eastern/Asian perspective of what is going on in the world. Have these people lived in Asia on the ground or have significant exposure to Asian culture, or have they read a lot about Asia (and if so, are they Asian authors or westerners who claims understanding of Asians?) While we may have read a lot about America, I am pretty sure most Americans will agree that we can't truly understand them and their culture. I think it is the same vice versa.
All in all, I feel that this book highlights several noteworthy points that warrant deeper thoughts. I feel that the author has provided some Asian context and perspective to the shift in power and will strongly recommend people to read it.
November 28, 2020
Excellent analysis and critique of American political system, past misbehaviors and current and upcoming challenges - warts and all. On the other hand, China gets almost reverent treatment, some of it justified, and negatives are whitewashed to a ridiculous degree - there is no foreign intimidation or influence attempts by China (waved away as an exaggeration of a "few isolated incidents"), BRI is brilliant and so benevolent that only a fool would be able to find anything wrong with it, and Chinese system is perfect meritocracy; also, China is an ancient culture with peace in its DNA ergo any alarmism about its muscle flexing is pure paranoia. There was no mention of terrible human rights record of CCP, enrichment of the CCP leadership and their families, IP theft, unfair economic behaviors, etc.
This is at times very informative and thought provoking but it's very one sided and can't be taken as a serious book.
This is at times very informative and thought provoking but it's very one sided and can't be taken as a serious book.
July 29, 2021
Extremely biased book. Ignored a lot of the facts in the Hong Kong protest, and framed it as a "Housin issue". Really shows how little/shallow research the author has done towards the problem of China.
January 30, 2021
A brutally honest and somewhat contrarian take on US-China relations. Though like everyone, Mahbubani has his own biases, I thought that the perspective of a Singaporean academic offered a perspective that was less influenced by fear and denial than most American commentators. One of the major undergirding assumptions in this book is that over the course of the 21st century, China will economically surpass America. This is a strong likelihood that I think most Americans simply push to the back of their minds and don't think about, and consequently don't consider when making China policy. On a meta-level, he also notes that America uses "cold war logic" when thinking about China - we assume that China is expansionist, and interpret China's action in the south china sea accordingly. He offers some arguments against this notion. He also spends a lot of time assessing the bilateral relations between China and other countries and drives implications for how other countries should operate. He paints a picture of the world where Asia (China largely, but also ASEAN countries and India) is at parity and surpassing the West economically, and the West (and in particular the US, which has trouble relinquishing an image of international leadership) must over the course of the next couple of decades adapt to multipolarity. I see this as a pretty clear-eyed analysis, and thought that all of Mahbubani's points were good and insightful. Would recommend to anyone interested in thinking about not just the US-China relationship, but international politics more broadly, is headed over the 21st century.
June 18, 2020
In Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy, Singaporean diplomat and academic Kishore Mahbubani presents a balanced and thoughtful assessment of the state of US-China relations, and issues an impassioned plea to both sides to take the necessary steps to prevent a New Cold War. Such a conflict wouldn't benefit the people of the US, of China, or indeed the world. Mahbubani reasons that the two sides should understand each other better (clearly the US is behind on this score) and should collaborate concretely on key global issues, particularly tackling climate change and creating a favourable global trade environment.
Sometimes the author comes across as having a pro-China bias, but it's more a case of being frustrated by the utter ineptitude of US foreign policy circles, particularly in the age of Trump. It's certainly the case that China already promotes a polycentric vision of international relations, based around UN leadership and international law, whereas the US seems to be moving in the direction of unilateralism and hegemonism.
Mahbubani is a professional diplomat from a historically US-aligned capitalist country, and therefore it's hardly surprising that his analysis isn't framed in terms of class struggle and the 'long transition to socialism', as Samir Amin called it. Nonetheless there's plenty of insight here to make 'Has China Won?' well worth reading.
Sometimes the author comes across as having a pro-China bias, but it's more a case of being frustrated by the utter ineptitude of US foreign policy circles, particularly in the age of Trump. It's certainly the case that China already promotes a polycentric vision of international relations, based around UN leadership and international law, whereas the US seems to be moving in the direction of unilateralism and hegemonism.
Mahbubani is a professional diplomat from a historically US-aligned capitalist country, and therefore it's hardly surprising that his analysis isn't framed in terms of class struggle and the 'long transition to socialism', as Samir Amin called it. Nonetheless there's plenty of insight here to make 'Has China Won?' well worth reading.
November 11, 2020
Very recommendable book which brings a different perspective to the trade and civilisation war between the USA and China. Mahbubani looks at the issue from the physical proximity to China of somebody based in Singapore. At the same time, he knows very well the USA after having lived there for many years as a diplomat. His approach is original, very much Asian, and his views on the issue make the question rather rhetoric. It's probably not a matter of if, but when. The author analyses the mistakes made by both sides and explains in detail why the Western countries understand little about China. This book should be largely read by political scientists in the West.
December 30, 2024
i had to read the first chapter for a class and it sounded so interesting i went ahead & bought the whole book 🫣 it's a little outdated since it's pre-biden, covid, ukraine invasion, even the crackdown on student protests & it's written in 2019. that being said, i thought it was really rich food for thought with observations & predictions. literally like every page is annotated lol i highly recommend everyone read this book it's sooo informative
October 17, 2021
Given the low baseline on much of the pop international-relations books on the US-China relationship, and its various dimensions, released over the past 4 years, much of which are sensationalist or poorly researched (see “The 100 Year Marathon” as a more “respectable” example), this book is fairly well-done, though imperfect. I’ve watched Kishore Mahmubani many times since the release (and even right before as the publicity was ramping up) of this book, from IntelligenceSquared debates to policy seminars for the various think-tanks etc. His premise is very simple: the US cannot “contain” China economically (not alone at least), and therefore there needs to be some kind of ‘understanding’ or compact between the two. Any sound analysis will conclude this just on the likely growth trajectory of China from a per-capita GDP perspective, as it will at least partially converge to “first world levels”' for a large subset of the population within the next decade or so. As Mahbubani concludes, a China, even a quarter of per-capita GDP of the US, is a China too big for the US to face off itself. That being said, the author is actually not really “pro-China”, in fact, he effectively believes (if not stating directly) that some kind of countervailing alliance of nations, including Russia, will form to “balance out” China, as it becomes larger/richer economically (and thus, militarily). Further, he does not criticize this possibility (though it’s merits or truth are not certain at least to me).
Reading through some of the reviews, the above fact seems to be omitted by many of the other reviewers. The book is not written as a pro-China agitprop piece to lambast “Westernism”, it is basically written from the view of a policy analyst working to advise US actions. Having read the book in mid-2021, nothing that the Biden administration has done, which is very much adversarial vis-a-vis China, including the recent announcement of the AUKUS axis contradicts Mahmubani’s thesis/viewpoints. In fact, everything the current administration has done would likely be praised by Mahmubani as the administration is attempting to “correct” two things Mahmubani states explicitly as a faulty US strategy: 1. the unilateral impulse in trade/political/military policy, 2. acting without a “plan”.
He even dedicates an entire chapter outlining how he believes the CCP has caused this proto-countervailing encirclement because of their neglect to placate US elites through political/business/economic incentives, and this neglect meant that when the Trump administration began it’s trade war, there were no agents in the socio-economic-industrial-political blob that was willing to militate for it’s position within the domestic debate. Of course, he does follow that chapter with what the US has done wrong, but that is almost exclusively centered on the actions of Donald Trump and his right-of-center think-tank cliques. There is some societal commentary on the societal racism within the West primarily manifesting within the “Yellow Peril” narrative, but much of his analysis in this dimension is shallow and inconsequential to the most of the text other than as a possible explanation as to why the US is unwilling to “hand-off hegemony” peacefully to the PRC, as the British did so to the US a hundred years prior.
From the historical viewpoint of 2018-2019, this book was clearly written to correct Trump’s unilateral tendencies with respect to the policies of trade and military agitation vis-a-vis China, they are not necessarily saying those are a bad thing. Mahmubani is sly in the way he writes, attempting to replicate a normative-voice. In this case, he compares the nascent US-China geo-economic conflict (from the view of 2018-19) to the first US-USSR Cold War, buy with the roles inverted, the Chinese are in the US’ shoes, supporting the global trade-network and the US has assumed the role that the USSR played in that conflict, being the outsider. I don’t really buy that as a really deep analog, despite some superficial similarities, and this is borne out in the first few months of the Biden administration as again, he has attempted to reverse all of those perceived errors.
In the end, the book is definitely well-written, it’s only exceptional in the sense that so much of the text published prior to it (and since it’s publication) have been so sensationalist and one-sided. Had this not been the case, this book would easily be a forgettable piece of policy writing. Mahmubani isn’t saying anything that is interesting, obscure, or surprising. He is providing sound analysis (it is said that this is a feature in an industry that is purported to be founded on all sound-analysis i.e. the think-tank industry), which I guess is better than unsound analysis. Conditional recommendation for newish readers in the area of SIno-US policy/history.
Reading through some of the reviews, the above fact seems to be omitted by many of the other reviewers. The book is not written as a pro-China agitprop piece to lambast “Westernism”, it is basically written from the view of a policy analyst working to advise US actions. Having read the book in mid-2021, nothing that the Biden administration has done, which is very much adversarial vis-a-vis China, including the recent announcement of the AUKUS axis contradicts Mahmubani’s thesis/viewpoints. In fact, everything the current administration has done would likely be praised by Mahmubani as the administration is attempting to “correct” two things Mahmubani states explicitly as a faulty US strategy: 1. the unilateral impulse in trade/political/military policy, 2. acting without a “plan”.
He even dedicates an entire chapter outlining how he believes the CCP has caused this proto-countervailing encirclement because of their neglect to placate US elites through political/business/economic incentives, and this neglect meant that when the Trump administration began it’s trade war, there were no agents in the socio-economic-industrial-political blob that was willing to militate for it’s position within the domestic debate. Of course, he does follow that chapter with what the US has done wrong, but that is almost exclusively centered on the actions of Donald Trump and his right-of-center think-tank cliques. There is some societal commentary on the societal racism within the West primarily manifesting within the “Yellow Peril” narrative, but much of his analysis in this dimension is shallow and inconsequential to the most of the text other than as a possible explanation as to why the US is unwilling to “hand-off hegemony” peacefully to the PRC, as the British did so to the US a hundred years prior.
From the historical viewpoint of 2018-2019, this book was clearly written to correct Trump’s unilateral tendencies with respect to the policies of trade and military agitation vis-a-vis China, they are not necessarily saying those are a bad thing. Mahmubani is sly in the way he writes, attempting to replicate a normative-voice. In this case, he compares the nascent US-China geo-economic conflict (from the view of 2018-19) to the first US-USSR Cold War, buy with the roles inverted, the Chinese are in the US’ shoes, supporting the global trade-network and the US has assumed the role that the USSR played in that conflict, being the outsider. I don’t really buy that as a really deep analog, despite some superficial similarities, and this is borne out in the first few months of the Biden administration as again, he has attempted to reverse all of those perceived errors.
In the end, the book is definitely well-written, it’s only exceptional in the sense that so much of the text published prior to it (and since it’s publication) have been so sensationalist and one-sided. Had this not been the case, this book would easily be a forgettable piece of policy writing. Mahmubani isn’t saying anything that is interesting, obscure, or surprising. He is providing sound analysis (it is said that this is a feature in an industry that is purported to be founded on all sound-analysis i.e. the think-tank industry), which I guess is better than unsound analysis. Conditional recommendation for newish readers in the area of SIno-US policy/history.
May 23, 2020
Regardless of the writer's bias toward China, the book does not lose any value
The book is easy, clear, and informative, not to mention that it shows the big picture, and therefore I highly recommend it
I enjoyed reading it.
Having said that, there is a huge problem that the writer did not take into account
Covid 19 divided history into pre-Coved 19 and post Covid 19.
Accordingly, the writer needs to publish a second book in the future to include new problems specifically the problem of Covid 19, or to update his book and add what happened during 2020.
This book was about before Coved 19, needs a second book talking about after Coved 19.
The book is easy, clear, and informative, not to mention that it shows the big picture, and therefore I highly recommend it
I enjoyed reading it.
Having said that, there is a huge problem that the writer did not take into account
Covid 19 divided history into pre-Coved 19 and post Covid 19.
Accordingly, the writer needs to publish a second book in the future to include new problems specifically the problem of Covid 19, or to update his book and add what happened during 2020.
This book was about before Coved 19, needs a second book talking about after Coved 19.
November 1, 2020
This is probably the most important book of the year, written with objectivity.
June 7, 2020
An excellent book with several convincing arguments.
My main take away is this point: from the year Zero to AD 1820 the most accomplished civilizations on earth were in India and China. Both India and China have very recently had a great resurgances to the extent that, at least in the case of China, one of them may soon regain their formal place as the most accomplished civilization.
Which is to mean that the past 200 years have not been the norm, they are an aberration.
My main take away is this point: from the year Zero to AD 1820 the most accomplished civilizations on earth were in India and China. Both India and China have very recently had a great resurgances to the extent that, at least in the case of China, one of them may soon regain their formal place as the most accomplished civilization.
Which is to mean that the past 200 years have not been the norm, they are an aberration.
June 7, 2020
This is a book about current international relations, particularly China/US relations. It’s a very common sense book, and yet such rational voice is lacking in today’s discussion. It’s a clear head analysis of national interest, rather than pointless argumentation of ideology. I think both China and US should read this book.
July 26, 2020
Znakomita książka o bieżącej polityce międzynarodowej, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem rywalizacji amerykańsko-chińskiej. Pisana z perspektywy obywatela singapuru o hinduskich korzeniach. Mam wrażenie że im więcej czytam ludzi którzy nie są z "zachodu" tym lepiej rozumiem świat. Polecam bo krótsza i mniej ciężka niż lektury Bartosiaka.
May 15, 2021
China is on its way to being number 1 superpower in the world.
Forget the US president or Putin
...no world leader will have more influence
on the future than Xi Jinping.
America has a strong macho culture
but it is the pragmatic China that is going to win!
Mr. Muhbubani sketches the strategic steps and missteps
that both America and China have made.
The more I read about China....the more I admire
its long-term plans,
Chinese defense rationale (no stockpiles of nuclear weapons)
and a meritocratic government which chooses only best and the brightest.
Ch 3: KM is a Singaproean diplomat with a sense of humor. Laughing out loud when I read: " ...the world is genuinely shocked that America has elected a president who could not pass an Economics 101 undergraduate exam on international trade." Trump presented to China a geopolitical gift b/c his decisions were erratic with NO long-term strategy.
USA is a rogue superpower....and China will become THE world leader!
#MustRead
Forget the US president or Putin
...no world leader will have more influence
on the future than Xi Jinping.
America has a strong macho culture
but it is the pragmatic China that is going to win!
Mr. Muhbubani sketches the strategic steps and missteps
that both America and China have made.
The more I read about China....the more I admire
its long-term plans,
Chinese defense rationale (no stockpiles of nuclear weapons)
and a meritocratic government which chooses only best and the brightest.
Ch 3: KM is a Singaproean diplomat with a sense of humor. Laughing out loud when I read: " ...the world is genuinely shocked that America has elected a president who could not pass an Economics 101 undergraduate exam on international trade." Trump presented to China a geopolitical gift b/c his decisions were erratic with NO long-term strategy.
USA is a rogue superpower....and China will become THE world leader!
#MustRead
February 7, 2022
This is a volume that examines the current American narrative of a hegemonic China. This volume evaluates the American point of view and the Chinese point of view. This fair-minded volume is a passionate appeal for rational heads to prevail and not slide into war. The book is divided into nine chapters. The first is an introduction to the geopolitical situation at hand, superpower competition and American insecurity and China's ascension. The next two chapters examine China's biggest strategic mistake and America's biggest strategic mistake. The chapter analyses if China is expansionist. After which, the following chapter looks to see if America can make U-turns in policy. The next chapter questions if China should become a democratic nation, if so, why and if not, why not. The following chapter is on the assumption of virtue, the mental construct that is deeply embedded in American minds. This is followed by an analysis as to how other countries will choose and a conclusion which the writer termed as a paradox.
All in all, this is an incisive, and deep analysis and will make unpleasant reading for American and Chinese policy makers. The writer, Singapore's foremost political thinker, delivers a hopeful treatise, urging engagement and diplomacy.
All in all, this is an incisive, and deep analysis and will make unpleasant reading for American and Chinese policy makers. The writer, Singapore's foremost political thinker, delivers a hopeful treatise, urging engagement and diplomacy.
October 9, 2020
Bare bones of a weak argument. Several salient points for global audiences though. This book loses when it goes on defense. The offense is easy. It’s 2020.
October 29, 2020
The style and discussion of the topic shows that Mahbubani knows what he talks about: I believe he is correct when he states that there are a few important key concepts that determine the relationship between the United States and China: the fact that the US has no (properly developed) China-strategy, that the US is struggling more against itself than any other, the fact that China is not seeking world dominance in an American style or will transform into an America by default, and that an important struggle for China currently is the Westernization and Western-based institutions, including the financial system through the dollar.
However, Mahbubani makes very bold conclusions, ones that he cannot support with much evidence and then tries to, unnecessarily, relate to the US to downsize the issues. He states that the Chinese have very little interest to go beyond its borders, even in a post-US era, but there is little evidence to affirm this statement. Rather strange is that he seems less critical on China than on the policies by the American government. Another strange effect was the reading into Singapore, understanding given his background, but often very irrelevant.
What the books makes clear, which is key for the importance of this work, is that the image of China in China and outside China differ, as well as that the US has to radically differ its game, perhaps not just to better know the 'enemy', but rather itself.
However, Mahbubani makes very bold conclusions, ones that he cannot support with much evidence and then tries to, unnecessarily, relate to the US to downsize the issues. He states that the Chinese have very little interest to go beyond its borders, even in a post-US era, but there is little evidence to affirm this statement. Rather strange is that he seems less critical on China than on the policies by the American government. Another strange effect was the reading into Singapore, understanding given his background, but often very irrelevant.
What the books makes clear, which is key for the importance of this work, is that the image of China in China and outside China differ, as well as that the US has to radically differ its game, perhaps not just to better know the 'enemy', but rather itself.
Currently reading
November 10, 2021ST book review:
https://www.straitstimes.com/lifestyl...
Debate Mahbubani vs Mearsheimer
https://youtu.be/ZnkC7GXmLdo
Kishore Mahbubani talks with INET President Rob Johnson
https://youtu.be/li6xcTsVPB4
4 more years of Trump may accelerate China’s rise -Fortune 28 May 2020
https://fortune.com/2020/05/28/trump-...
How to Keep U.S-Chinese Tensions From Sparking a War by Kevin Rudd
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...
US-China relations are entering a dangerous period
https://twitter.com/sanfordchee/statu...
What Happens When China Becomes Number One?
https://youtu.be/bVkLqC3p0Og
IPS-Nathan Lecture II: US-China Rivalry: Inevitable War or Avoidable War?
https://youtu.be/VTTcaBHc_IA
"What China Will Be Like As A Great Power" : Martin Jacques Keynote (32nd Annual Camden Conference)
https://youtu.be/uBjvklYLShM
Ray Dalio Honored by the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations
https://youtu.be/9ShGk-CYEoI
‘The unraveling of America’ by Wade Davis
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics...
Geopolitical reset 2021 by ST webinar
https://www.facebook.com/TheStraitsTi...
Stephen Roach: US vs China from Conflict to Resolution
https://youtu.be/ayEkfWH-8nM
The Economist: why Joe Biden’s China policy is failing
https://www.economist.com/leaders/202...
Chan Chung Seng IISS Fullerton lecture Nov 2021
Singapore amid great power rivalry https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/...
https://www.straitstimes.com/lifestyl...
Debate Mahbubani vs Mearsheimer
https://youtu.be/ZnkC7GXmLdo
Kishore Mahbubani talks with INET President Rob Johnson
https://youtu.be/li6xcTsVPB4
4 more years of Trump may accelerate China’s rise -Fortune 28 May 2020
https://fortune.com/2020/05/28/trump-...
How to Keep U.S-Chinese Tensions From Sparking a War by Kevin Rudd
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...
US-China relations are entering a dangerous period
https://twitter.com/sanfordchee/statu...
What Happens When China Becomes Number One?
https://youtu.be/bVkLqC3p0Og
IPS-Nathan Lecture II: US-China Rivalry: Inevitable War or Avoidable War?
https://youtu.be/VTTcaBHc_IA
"What China Will Be Like As A Great Power" : Martin Jacques Keynote (32nd Annual Camden Conference)
https://youtu.be/uBjvklYLShM
Ray Dalio Honored by the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations
https://youtu.be/9ShGk-CYEoI
‘The unraveling of America’ by Wade Davis
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics...
Geopolitical reset 2021 by ST webinar
https://www.facebook.com/TheStraitsTi...
Stephen Roach: US vs China from Conflict to Resolution
https://youtu.be/ayEkfWH-8nM
The Economist: why Joe Biden’s China policy is failing
https://www.economist.com/leaders/202...
Chan Chung Seng IISS Fullerton lecture Nov 2021
Singapore amid great power rivalry https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/...
March 11, 2025
#Binge Reviewing all my past Reads:
Kishore Mahbubani’s Has China Won? presents a provocative analysis of the continuing geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States. The book questions whether the U.S. is successfully retorting to China's rise and challenges the notion of American primacy in the 21st century. Mahbubani, a seasoned diplomat and scholar, argues that China has strategically outmaneuvered the U.S. in many areas, particularly in economic and diplomatic influence, while the U.S. remains entangled in ideological battles and internal divisions. One of the book’s key strengths is its balanced yet provocative perspective. Mahbubani does not present China as an undisputed victor but rather critiques American missteps—such as overreliance on military supremacy and economic satisfaction—that have given China a lead. He urges the U.S. to adopt a more realistic, less confrontational approach toward China, emphasizing cooperation rather than competition. Nevertheless, some readers may find his analysis overly compassionate to China, as he downplays concerns regarding human rights, dictatorship, and global security risks posed by China’s rise. Additionally, while Mahbubani effectively critiques American policies, he offers fewer concrete solutions for how the U.S. should recalibrate its strategy. Overall, Has China Won? is a compelling and timely read for anyone interested in global power dynamics. It forces readers to question long-held assumptions about international relations and consider the shifting balance of power in a multipolar world. Whether or not one comes to an understanding with Mahbubani’s deductions, his intuitions spark a necessary debate on the future of U.S.-China relations. Give it a go!!
Kishore Mahbubani’s Has China Won? presents a provocative analysis of the continuing geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States. The book questions whether the U.S. is successfully retorting to China's rise and challenges the notion of American primacy in the 21st century. Mahbubani, a seasoned diplomat and scholar, argues that China has strategically outmaneuvered the U.S. in many areas, particularly in economic and diplomatic influence, while the U.S. remains entangled in ideological battles and internal divisions. One of the book’s key strengths is its balanced yet provocative perspective. Mahbubani does not present China as an undisputed victor but rather critiques American missteps—such as overreliance on military supremacy and economic satisfaction—that have given China a lead. He urges the U.S. to adopt a more realistic, less confrontational approach toward China, emphasizing cooperation rather than competition. Nevertheless, some readers may find his analysis overly compassionate to China, as he downplays concerns regarding human rights, dictatorship, and global security risks posed by China’s rise. Additionally, while Mahbubani effectively critiques American policies, he offers fewer concrete solutions for how the U.S. should recalibrate its strategy. Overall, Has China Won? is a compelling and timely read for anyone interested in global power dynamics. It forces readers to question long-held assumptions about international relations and consider the shifting balance of power in a multipolar world. Whether or not one comes to an understanding with Mahbubani’s deductions, his intuitions spark a necessary debate on the future of U.S.-China relations. Give it a go!!
June 26, 2020
Fresh out of the oven, this book is a useful primer on understanding the difficulty the US has in managing relations with a rising China. The US almost universally views China as a strategic competitor and a threat, which Kishore believes is a total mistake.
Addressing a western audience, Kishore is critical of US attitudes and policies towards China - including its failure to accept the inevitable rise of China, while highlighting China's own error in alienating the US business community. Those sympathetic to China will find a lot in this book to agree with. Those who do not may find this book difficult to swallow.
In International Relations, all big countries are bullies. Foreign policy is determined primarily by relative power and by the inherently competitive nature of international politics. The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. There are no saints.
It is clear to everyone that there will be a rearrangement of the present world order with the rise of China. Kishore makes the point that without a strategic idea of what this order is, the US can have no overarching long term strategy. This is leading it to confront China as a default.
And what about smaller countries? It is to figure out how survive in this rearragement. Otherwise, when the elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.
Addressing a western audience, Kishore is critical of US attitudes and policies towards China - including its failure to accept the inevitable rise of China, while highlighting China's own error in alienating the US business community. Those sympathetic to China will find a lot in this book to agree with. Those who do not may find this book difficult to swallow.
In International Relations, all big countries are bullies. Foreign policy is determined primarily by relative power and by the inherently competitive nature of international politics. The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. There are no saints.
It is clear to everyone that there will be a rearrangement of the present world order with the rise of China. Kishore makes the point that without a strategic idea of what this order is, the US can have no overarching long term strategy. This is leading it to confront China as a default.
And what about smaller countries? It is to figure out how survive in this rearragement. Otherwise, when the elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 267 reviews