Thread by @SamRoggeveen

Although the assumption that China is a threat to US security is near universal among analysts, it is vanishingly rare to see anyone spell out exactly why. So when a US analyst attempts such an argument, it is worth applauding and examining:

https://twitter.com/ElbridgeColby/status/1554626099891429377

Elbridge Colby's instinct to critically examine the foundations of American security policy in Asia are laudable. Why does the US have allies and tens of thousands of troops in Asia? Why does the US say it cannot be secure unless Asia is secure? These are critical questions.

But although I applaud Colby's instinct, I'm unpersuaded by his argument. In his thread, Colby argues that the answers to these questions are primarily economic: if China dominates Asia, the US will be much poorer.

First he says China seeks regional hegemony and then global pre-eminence, and implies that these things are inevitable without a US counter. But would India allow that? Europe? Japan? Russia? They certainly have enough means to frustrate that ambition.

If it does happen, China will be "the gatekeeper and the center of the global economy." But even in that unlikely event, a 'gatekeeper' would have limited influence. Markets would not give way to a China-led global command economy. If it did, China itself would suffer terribly.

Colby appears to posit a world economy that operates roughly like the Soviets controlled eastern Europe. But no country has ever achieved that level of command globally.

So no, every company would not suddenly have to "dance to China's tune", any more than they now dance to the American tune while the dollar is the lead currency and the US is the leading economy.

"Europe, the Middle East, Latin America, Africa will orient toward Beijing." True. In fact, they already are. But it's not an exclusive arrangement. There are huge markets elsewhere. Why would that change?

"China will have a strong incentive to push us down. We are the only country that can challenge their ascendancy." Weakening America economically would be a huge own-goal for China. And to repeat, other world powers have an interest and capacity to ensure China doesn't dominate.

"Our economic security would be subject to Beijing's diktat, and our freedoms would clearly suffer as a result." How? The US is not even particularly export-dependent: ft.com/content/fa1f3a…

To close, my point here is not built on a presumption of US weakness or decline. The US has a huge economy, young population, culture of innovation, education etc. It also has a huge military with thousands of nukes, and is flanked by big oceans. The US is very secure.

It is difficult for anyone to threaten that, even a country as big as China. Absent a truly existential threat, why would the US take major risks (including the risk of N war) in Asia? I still don't see it.

Sorry, forgot to tag @ElbridgeColby