This is true—and the Africa and South America examples are key. Tho I think what we’re seeing is a lagging indicator of the soft power they’ve been wielding here for at least 2 decades.
There’s a reason why think tanks in the US have focused so little on the threat of China—why, for example, is Gordon Chang ubiquitous on TV as a China critic? He’s great, but he’s one of the only ones.
Think tanks require funding. A donor (usually lots more than one) has to think a particular subject area is worth funding. There’s no harm in that; it’s actually how it needs to work. Someone concerned about cartel violence is going to fund people to work on that, for example.
But when it comes to China, there aren’t all that many takers. I think it’s pretty easy to understand why: so many people have gotten rich based on Chinese markets or manufacturing, looking the other way seems like a smarter bet. “Let’s just not think about it.”
Besides, plenty of Smart Set people were saying soothing things about China’s relations with the West. Joe Biden, for one. But the big one—over decades—was Henry Kissinger. You could argue he reprised his 70s role in Detente: living with (and propping up) China was our only play.
I wonder how Kissinger sees the parallels between the Reagan/Neocon stance toward the USSR and the Trump realist position on China. Because they’re very similar. And Kissinger has been, again, arguing for the opposite plan.
