US-China: High Stakes on the High Seas and What We Know
Trump's "G-2" China Framing: A Dangerous Nostalgia Trip?
Okay, let's unpack this "G-2" idea that Trump seems to be floating again. The notion that the US and China can just carve up the world between them like some 21st-century version of the Congress of Vienna. It's… quaint.
The Illusion of Parity
The core problem, as I see it, is the assumption of parity. Yes, China's naval buildup is impressive. The Pentagon's 2024 China Military Power Report states they have over 370 ships; the world’s largest by hull count. The US Navy has fewer (roughly 290 deployable ships), but with greater tonnage and strike power. It's not just about counting ships, though. It's about what those ships can do. The US Navy operates globally, with nuclear-powered carriers and unmatched experience sustaining operations far from home. China's navy is only now pushing beyond its near seas.
Brent Sadler, a retired Navy submariner at the Heritage Foundation, nails it: "There is no clear winning position… The way we fight is very different." You can't just tally up the metal and declare a winner. It’s like comparing apples to… well, heavily armed, nuclear-powered oranges.
And then there’s the shipbuilding capacity. Analysts estimate China’s commercial and military shipyards have about 200 times the output capacity of the US shipbuilding base. Two hundred times. That's not a gap; that's a chasm. The US relies on a handful of yards (Huntington Ingalls, General Dynamics), while China's state-directed industry can crank out ships without worrying about profit margins.
The Shifting Sands of Power
The "G-2" concept, as C. Fred Bergsten originally envisioned it, was about economic cooperation, about the US and China leading the world out of the 2008 financial crisis. The problem? That was then; this is now. Xi Jinping's China isn't interested in "hiding its strength and biding its time" anymore. They're flexing.
Remember that incident in August when the USS Higgins sailed near Scarborough Shoal? China claimed they "expelled" the US warship for violating their sovereignty. The US called that claim "false," asserting the operation was consistent with international law. These aren't just diplomatic niceties; they're tests of resolve, probes to see how far each side is willing to push.
I read an article, can't recall which one, where Sadler described recent Chinese confrontations with US allies in the South China Sea as "probing with the bayonet to see how we respond." He argues that "bloodying a treaty ally like the Philippines is their way of testing American resolve." It’s a chillingly accurate analogy.
And this is the part of the analysis that I find genuinely concerning. The US defense establishment seems to be waking up to the challenge, focusing on enhancing partnerships and investments to increase production of critical munitions and advanced capabilities. A senior War Department official told Fox News Digital that they're hardening critical infrastructure and supply chains against China’s influence. But are they moving fast enough?
The submarine race is another key area. The US Navy still has the world's most advanced submarine force (around 50 nuclear-powered attack boats). But production is lagging, building only one or two Virginia-class subs a year, short of the goal of three to four. Meanwhile, China is fielding quieter, longer-ranged subs, and the Pentagon projects they could have nearly 80 submarines by the early 2030s. Numbers aren't everything, sure, but a ~60% increase in submarines is a significant increase.
The undersea cable issue is also critical, with 95% of global internet traffic flowing through these cables. This is essentially a digital front beneath the waves.
The "G-2" Mirage
Trump's "G-2" framing ignores the fundamental shift in China's posture. It assumes a level of cooperation and shared interest that simply doesn't exist anymore. It's a dangerous nostalgia trip, a yearning for a simpler time when the US could dictate terms.
It also worries US allies. Will Washington soften its stance on China? Will it prioritize bilateral deals over multilateral partnerships? These are legitimate concerns, and Trump's rhetoric isn't exactly reassuring. How Trump’s ‘G-2’ framing for US-China relations could impact allies