The New Cold War: Is America Adopting Chinese Tactics?

The geopolitical landscape is undergoing a profound transformation, moving beyond traditional ideological divides. What was once a clear distinction between free-market democracy and state-controlled capitalism is becoming increasingly blurred.

Observers note that the United States is adopting policy frameworks and interventionist tactics that closely resemble those historically employed by China. This evolution marks a significant departure from the post-Cold War consensus and signals the beginning of a new, more complex era of global competition.

The confrontation between these two superpowers is no longer just about trade imbalances or military posturing; it is now fundamentally about the structure of the economy and the role of the state in society.

At the heart of this shift is the adoption of State Capitalism, a model characterized by heavy government intervention in the business world. This approach moves away from laissez-faire economics toward a system where the state actively directs economic activity to serve national interests.

Key mechanisms of this shift include:

• Protectionist measures such as tariffs to shield domestic industries.
• Direct public intervention in corporate affairs.
• Strategic alignment of business interests with national policy goals.

These policies represent a strategic pivot, prioritizing national hegemony and economic security over global market integration.

Perhaps the most concerning development for proponents of democratic governance is the increasing pressure on independent institutions. The Executive Branch is reportedly exerting significant influence over traditionally autonomous bodies, including the judiciary and central banking systems.

Specifically, there are documented attempts to undermine the independence of the Reserva Federal (Federal Reserve). The goal appears to be the installation of leadership that is more amenable to political directives, specifically regarding the lowering of interest rates to stimulate the economy.

Attempts are being made to remove the current president of the Federal Reserve to ensure the successor is more compliant with executive demands.

This pressure on monetary policy institutions mirrors tactics often associated with centralized political systems where economic levers are tightly controlled by the ruling party.

Beyond economic policy, the parallels extend to domestic security and social control. Reports indicate the deployment of personalized security forces operating within urban centers, specifically tasked with targeting immigrant populations.

This militarization of domestic policy creates an atmosphere of heightened surveillance and enforcement. Additionally, there is a concerted effort to exert control over academic institutions—a process often described as the domestication of universities. This involves aligning curricula and research with state-approved narratives and limiting academic freedom.

Simultaneously, the government is facing accusations of suppressing freedom of expression, using legal and administrative tools to silence dissent and control the flow of information, further narrowing the space for public debate.

The shift toward a more isolationist and state-centric model is also evident in foreign policy. The United States is increasingly liquidating multilateral agreements, particularly those designed to address global challenges like climate change.

By withdrawing from these frameworks, the nation signals a move away from collective international action in favor of unilateral decision-making. This strategy prioritizes immediate national interests over long-term global cooperation.

Furthermore, the desmantelamiento de la ayuda al desarrollo (dismantling of development aid) suggests a retreat from the role of global benefactor. Instead of fostering stability through aid, the focus has shifted toward imperialist expansion aimed at securing new raw materials to consolidate hegemony.

The emerging conflict is less a clash of civilizations and more a competition between two versions of state-centric governance. As the United States continues to adopt the very tools it once criticized, the distinction between the two superpowers becomes increasingly semantic rather than substantive.

Observers suggest that the coming years will be defined by this rivalry, not as a traditional war, but as a structural struggle for global dominance. The winner will likely be the nation that can most effectively balance state control with economic vitality and social cohesion.

Ultimately, the world is witnessing the rise of a Second Cold War, where the battleground is the economy, the institutions, and the daily lives of citizens.