
The real reason the West is warmongering against China
China's rise indeed threatens US interests, but not in the way the US political elite seeks to frame it.
The US relationship with China needs to be understood in the context of the capitalist world system. Capital accumulation in the core states, often glossed as the 'Global North', depends on cheap labour and cheap resources from the periphery and semi-periphery, the so-called 'Global South'.
This arrangement is crucial to ensuring high profits for the multinational firms that dominate global supply chains. The systematic price disparity between the core and periphery also enables the core to achieve a large net-appropriation of value from the periphery through unequal exchange in international trade.
Ever since the 1980s, when China opened up to Western investment and trade, it has been a crucial part of this arrangement, providing a major source of labour for Western firms – labour that is cheap but also highly skilled and highly productive. For instance, much of Apple's production relies on Chinese labour. According to research by the economist Donald A Clelland, if Apple had to pay Chinese and East Asian workers at the same rate as a US worker, this would have cost them an additional $572 per iPad in 2011.
But over the past two decades, wages in China have increased quite dramatically. Around 2005, the manufacturing labour cost per hour in China was lower than in India, less than $1 per hour. In the years since, China's hourly labour costs have increased to more than $8 per hour, while India's are now only about $2 per hour. Indeed, wages in China are now higher than in every other developing country in Asia. This is a major, historical development.
This has happened for several key reasons. For one, surplus labour in China has been increasingly absorbed into the wage-labour economy, which has amplified workers' bargaining power. At the same time, the current leadership of President Xi Jinping has expanded the role of the state in China's economy, strengthening public provisioning systems – including public healthcare and public housing – that have further improved the position of workers.
These are positive changes for China – and specifically for Chinese workers – but they pose a severe problem for Western capital. Higher wages in China impose a constraint on the profits of Western firms that operate there or that depend on Chinese manufacturing for intermediate parts and other key inputs.
The other problem, for the core states, is that the increase in China's wages and prices is reducing its exposure to unequal exchange. During the low-wage era of the 1990s, China's export-to-import ratio with the core was extremely high. In other words, China had to export very large quantities of goods in order to obtain necessary imports. Today, this ratio is much lower, representing a dramatic improvement in China's terms of trade, substantially reducing the core's ability to appropriate value from China.
Given all this, capitalists in the core states are now desperate to do something to restore their access to cheap labour and resources. One option – increasingly promoted by the Western business press – is to relocate industrial production to other parts of Asia where wages are cheaper. But this is costly in terms of lost production, the need to find new staff, and other supply chain disruptions. The other option is to force Chinese wages back down. Hence, the attempts by the United States to undermine the Chinese government and destabilise the Chinese economy – including through economic warfare and the constant threat of military escalation.
Ironically, Western governments sometimes justify their opposition to China on the grounds that China's exports are too cheap. It is often claimed that China 'cheats' in international trade, by artificially suppressing the exchange rate for its currency, the renminbi. The problem with this argument, however, is that China abandoned this policy around a decade ago. As the International Monetary Fund (IMF) economist Jose Antonio Ocampo noted in 2017, 'In recent years, China has rather been making efforts to avoid a depreciation of the renminbi, sacrificing a large amount of reserves. This may imply that, if anything, this currency is now overvalued.' China did eventually permit a devaluation in 2019, when tariffs imposed by the administration of US President Donald Trump increased pressure on the renminbi. But this was a normal response to a change in market conditions, not an attempt to suppress the renminbi below its market rate.
The US largely supported the Chinese government in the period when its currency was undervalued, including through loans from the IMF and World Bank. The West turned decisively against China in the mid-2010s, at precisely the moment when the country began to raise its prices and challenge its position as a peripheral supplier of cheap inputs to Western-dominated supply chains.
The second element that's driving US hostility towards China is technology. Beijing has used industrial policy to prioritise technological development in strategic sectors over the past decade, and has achieved remarkable progress. It now has the world's largest high-speed rail network, manufactures its own commercial aircraft, leads the world on renewable energy technology and electric vehicles, and enjoys advanced medical technology, smartphone technology, microchip production, artificial intelligence, etc. The tech news coming out of China has been dizzying. These are achievements that we only expect from high-income countries, and China is doing it with almost 80 percent less GDP per capita than the average 'advanced economy'. It is unprecedented.
This poses a problem for the core states because one of the main pillars of the imperial arrangement is that they need to maintain a monopoly over necessary technologies like capital goods, medicines, computers, aircraft and so on. This forces the 'Global South' into a position of dependency, so they are forced to export large quantities of their cheapened resources in order to obtain these necessary technologies. This is what sustains the core's net-appropriation through unequal exchange.
China's technological development is now breaking Western monopolies, and may give other developing countries alternative suppliers for necessary goods at more affordable prices. This poses a fundamental challenge to the imperial arrangement and unequal exchange.
The US has responded by imposing sanctions designed to cripple China's technological development. So far, this has not worked; if anything, it has increased incentives for China to develop sovereign technological capacities. With this weapon mostly neutralised, the US wants to resort to warmongering, the main objective of which would be to destroy China's industrial base, and divert China's investment capital and productive capacities towards defence. The US wants to go to war with China not because China poses some kind of military threat to the American people, but because Chinese development undermines the interests of imperial capital.
Western claims about China posing some kind of military threat are pure propaganda. The material facts tell a fundamentally different story. In fact, China's military spending per capita is less than the global average, and 1/10th that of the US alone. Yes, China has a big population, but even in absolute terms, the US-aligned military bloc spends over seven times more on military power than China does. The US controls eight nuclear weapons for every one that China has.
China may have the power to prevent the US from imposing its will on it, but it does not have the power to impose its will on the rest of the world in the way that the core states do. The narrative that China poses some kind of military threat is wildly overblown.
In fact, the opposite is true. The US has hundreds of military bases and facilities around the world. A significant number of them are stationed near China – in Japan and South Korea. By contrast, China has only one foreign military base, in Djibouti, and zero military bases near US borders.
Furthermore, China has not fired a single bullet in international warfare in over 40 years, while during this time the US has invaded, bombed or carried out regime-change operations in over a dozen Global South countries. If there is any state that poses a known threat to world peace and security, it is the US.
The real reason for Western warmongering is because China is achieving sovereign development and this is undermining the imperial arrangement on which Western capital accumulation depends. The West will not let global economic power slip from its hands so easily.
The views expressed in this article are the authors' own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Al Jazeera
5 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Columbia University agrees to rules making teaching 'Impossible'
Trump rules to make teaching some topics 'impossible' Quotable Video Duration 01 minutes 00 seconds 01:00 Video Duration 00 minutes 45 seconds 00:45 Video Duration 00 minutes 53 seconds 00:53 Video Duration 01 minutes 14 seconds 01:14 Video Duration 01 minutes 34 seconds 01:34 Video Duration 01 minutes 21 seconds 01:21 Video Duration 00 minutes 42 seconds 00:42


Al Jazeera
6 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
US-made bombs used in deadly Israeli strikes on Gaza schools, HRW says
Israel has used US-made bombs in 'unlawful attacks' on schools sheltering displaced civilians in Gaza, Human Rights Watch (HRW) has said. In a report released Thursday, HRW said Israel had carried out hundreds of strikes on schools since the start of its war on Gaza in October 2023, including 'unlawfully indiscriminate attacks' using US munitions, which violated international law. In its report, HRW investigated two incidents in 2024 in which it found that GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs supplied by the United States were used. One attack on the Khadija girls' school in Deir el-Balah on July 27, 2024, killed at least 15 people, and another attack on the Zeitoun C school in Gaza City on September 21, 2024, left at least 34 dead. Israeli authorities have not publicly shared information relating to the attacks. Israel has often said that its attacks on schools were targeting Hamas fighters. It has provided no evidence to indicate the presence of military targets at the sites of the attacks documented by the rights group. In both attacks, HRW and that there was no evidence of a military presence at the schools on the days of the attacks. The rights group also warned that recent Israeli attacks on schools sheltering displaced people were worsening the dire humanitarian situation in the territory. HRW said that from July 1-10, 2025, Israeli forces struck at least 10 schools where displaced people were sheltering, killing 59 people and displacing dozens of families, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). The group emphasised that schools used to house civilians remain protected under international law unless used for military purposes. The rights group called for an immediate halt to arms transfers to Israel, warning of potential complicity by governments providing military support. 'These strikes on schools sheltering displaced families are just one window into the carnage in Gaza,' said Gerry Simpson, associate director at HRW. 'Other governments should not tolerate this horrendous slaughter of Palestinian civilians merely seeking safety.' It also urged states to uphold their obligations under international law, including the Genocide Convention. 'Governments supporting Israel militarily can't say they didn't know what their weapons are being used for,' said Simpson. According to the United Nations, nearly 1 million displaced Palestinians have taken shelter in Gaza's schools since October 2023. HRW said the repeated targeting of civilian infrastructure, including shelters, hospitals and schools, showed a pattern of attacks that may amount to war crimes. HRW noted that nearly all of Gaza's 564 schools have sustained damage, with 92 percent requiring full reconstruction or major repairs. The UN has reported that at least 836 people sheltering in schools have been killed.


Al Jazeera
7 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Majority seek end to Israel weapons sales: Survey spanning three continents
A majority of people in five nations – Brazil, Colombia, Greece, South Africa and Spain – believe that weapons companies should stop or reduce trade with Israel as its onslaught on Gaza continues, a poll released on Thursday reveals. Spain showed the highest support for weapons deals to be halted, with 58 percent of respondents saying they should stop completely, followed by Greece at 57 percent and Colombia at 52 percent. In Brazil, 37 percent of respondents believed arms companies should completely stop sales to Israel, while 22 percent believed they should be reduced. In South Africa, those levels stood at 46 and 20 percent, respectively. Commissioned by the Global Energy Embargo for Palestine network, endorsed by the left-wing Progressive International organisation, and fielded by the Pollfish platform last month, the survey comes in the wake of a call by Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territory, on countries to slash financial relations with Israel as she decried an 'economy of genocide'. 'The people have spoken, and they refuse to be complicit. Across continents, ordinary citizens demand an end to the fuel that powers settler colonialism, apartheid and genocide,' said Ana Sanchez, a campaigner for Global Energy Embargo for Palestine. 'No state that claims to uphold democracy can justify maintaining energy, military, or economic ties with Israel while it commits a genocide in Palestine. This is not just about trade; it's about people's power to cut the supply lines of oppression.' The group said it chose the survey locations because of the countries' direct involvement in the import and transport of energy to Israel. More than 1,000 respondents in each nation were asked about governmental and private sector relations with Israel to measure public attitudes on responsibility. Condemnation of Israel's action in Gaza as the humanitarian crisis escalates was the highest in Greece and Spain and lowest in Brazil. Sixty-one percent and 60 percent in Greece and Spain respectively opposed Israel's current 'military actions' in Gaza, while in Colombia, 50 percent opposed them. In Brazil and South Africa, 30 percent were against Israel's war, while 33 percent and 20 percent, respectively, supported the campaign. To date, Israel's genocide in Gaza has killed more than 60,000 people – most of them women and children. Now home to the highest number of child amputees per capita, much of the besieged Strip is in a state of ruin as the population starves. As the crisis worsens, arms dealers and companies that facilitate their deals are facing heightened scrutiny. In June, as reported by Al Jazeera, Maersk divested from companies linked to Israeli settlements, which are considered illegal under international law, following a campaign accusing the Danish shipping giant of links to Israel's military and occupation of Palestinian land. On Tuesday, Norway announced that it would review its sovereign wealth fund's investments in Israel, after it was revealed that it had a stake in an Israeli firm that supplies fighter jet parts to the Israeli military. In recent months, several wealth and pension funds have distanced themselves from companies linked to Israel's war on Gaza or its illegal occupation of the West Bank. Responding to the poll, 41 percent in Spain said they would 'strongly' support a state-level decision to reduce trade in weapons, fuel and other goods in an attempt to pressure Israel into stopping the war. This figure stood at 33 percent in Colombia and South Africa, and 28 and 24 percent in Greece and Brazil, respectively. 'The message from the peoples of the world is loud and clear: They want action to end the assault on Gaza – not just words,' said David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International. 'Across continents, majorities are calling for their governments to halt arms sales and restrain Israel's occupation.'