Home 亚洲 Does China Really See America as Declining?——A Discussion with The New York Times
亚洲北美

Does China Really See America as Declining?——A Discussion with The New York Times

Share

Abstract: This article examines and challenges the implicit assumption in a recent The New York Times commentary that China has formed a unified perception of the United States as a declining power. It argues that Chinese views of America are far more diverse and internally contested than many external narratives suggest. While some Chinese scholars, commentators, and policy elites believe the United States is experiencing structural decline, others continue to view America as possessing enduring strengths in innovation, finance, institutional resilience, and global influence. The article further contends that both China and the United States are increasingly vulnerable to “cognitive simplification” — the tendency to reduce complex societies into singular strategic identities. It concludes that such simplification may itself become a strategic risk in contemporary international relations, narrowing the space for mutual understanding and increasing the potential for miscalculation.

Key Words: American Decline Debate, Cognitive Simplification, international communication, Strategic Perception, US-China Relations

By BI Yantao

May 12, 2026

Recently, The New York Times published an opinion article titled Trump Is Coming to a China That Has Moved On, which implicitly advances an important proposition: that China increasingly views the United States as a “declining power.”

This observation is not entirely unfounded.

Over the past decade, narratives about “American decline” have become increasingly common in Chinese online discourse, parts of academia, and strategic studies circles. Especially after the global financial crisis, the withdrawal from Afghanistan, rising political polarization, mounting debt, and the “Trump phenomenon,” arguments about a “crisis of the American system” have gained broader traction in China. The phrase “the East is rising while the West is declining” has become one of the most recognizable expressions of this sentiment. Yet such views do not mean that China has reached a unified internal consensus about America’s future.

To conclude from this, however, that “China has formed a unified perception of American decline” risks oversimplifying the country’s far more complex and internally diverse cognitive landscape. The issue is not merely whether the United States is declining, but who gets to define how “China” sees America.

“China Thinks” Is Not a Simple Proposition

When discussing China, Western media often unconsciously employ what might be called a “single-subject narrative”, such as “China believes,” “Beijing thinks,” “China sees the United States as,” “China is preparing for”.

Such formulations are common in journalism, but they often obscure an important reality: China is not a cognitively homogeneous community. Particularly regarding perceptions of the United States, substantial differences have long existed within China.

One school of thought argues that the United States is entering a phase of structural decline.

Those who hold this view typically emphasize intensifying political polarization, growing social fragmentation, deindustrialization, unsustainable fiscal deficits and debt, declining global governance capacity, the rising costs of alliance maintenance, challenges to dollar hegemony, and the weakening appeal of liberal Western narratives.

In their view, America’s problem is not imminent collapse, but the increasing cost of sustaining global hegemony. This assessment aligns in many ways with the logic of “hegemonic decline” in international relations theory.

China Also Has a Strong “America Remains Powerful” Camp

At the same time, another markedly different perspective has long existed within China.

A number of strategic analysts, business leaders, and intellectuals do not accept the conclusion that the United States is undergoing irreversible decline.

They argue that despite America’s serious internal problems, its deep structural advantages remain extraordinarily strong, including the world’s leading innovation ecosystem, elite universities and research networks, dominance of the dollar and global financial system, a powerful alliance structure, the ability to attract top global talent, advantages in AI, semiconductors, biotechnology, and other frontier sectors, and strong institutional self-correction mechanisms.

From this perspective, the United States is experiencing a cyclical adjustment rather than a civilizational decline.

This group is particularly wary of one strategic danger: mistaking America’s temporary disorder for irreversible long-term decline.

Historically, the United States has repeatedly been predicted to decline — during the rise of Japan in the 1970s, after the Vietnam War, and following the 2008 financial crisis. Yet each time, the United States demonstrated a significant capacity for reorganization and adaptation.

For these observers in China, the most important thing about America is not its problems, but its resilience.

China and the United States Are Both Misreading Each Other

What deserves greater attention is that China has not formed a unified “American decline consensus,” just as the United States has not formed a unified “China rise consensus.”

In recent years, the American strategic community has also displayed deep divisions:

some believe China is steadily rising; others argue that China has already peaked; some foresee long-term economic stagnation in China; others still view China as possessing enduring systemic competitiveness.

In other words, both China and the United States are attempting to interpret each other while failing to reach stable internal consensus themselves.

This suggests that one of the greatest risks today may not be confrontation itself, but cognitive simplification — and the media play a major role in this process.

When a complex, multilayered China with substantial internal disagreements is compressed into a singular strategic actor, the outside world is more likely to develop the illusion that “China unanimously believes America is declining.”

Reality is far more complicated.

The “American Decline” Narrative May Itself Become a Strategic Risk

Historically, one of the most dangerous moments in international politics occurs when one major power believes another is declining while that power still retains enormous capabilities.

A “declining power” is not necessarily a safer power. In some cases, it may become more sensitive, more reactive, and more determined to defend the existing order. Similar cognitive structures appeared historically between Germany and Britain, and between Japan and the United States.

This is partly why the phrase “declining but dangerous” has become increasingly common in American strategic discourse.

In fact, many within China’s strategic community hold a similar view. They argue that the real question is not whether America is declining, but whether it is willing to accept relative decline.

Therefore, the most important issue today may not be whether America is declining, but whether China and the United States are developing increasingly rigid and deterministic perceptions of each other.

Once such judgments become ideological, emotionalized, and heavily mediated, the space for genuine mutual understanding may continue to shrink.

Cognitive Complexity Matters More Than Emotional Judgment

The New York Times article captures certain real emotional and cognitive shifts within Chinese society. But its problem lies in the impression it may leave on outside audiences: that China has already formed a unified, stable, and definitive consensus regarding American decline.

In reality, Chinese perceptions of the United States are far more diverse than many outsiders assume.

Some believe America is declining. Some believe it remains the world’s strongest country. Others believe America is both declining and still dangerous. These differences themselves demonstrate that China is not a single-track cognitive community.

In international communication, an increasingly important question is this: Are we trying to understand the real “other,” or are we continuously constructing a simplified image of the other? 

That question may ultimately matter more than whether America is declining.

BI Yantao is Professor at the School of International Communication and Arts, Hainan University, China and Senior Research Fellow at the Charhar Institute. The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not represent the positions of affiliated institutions.

Please follow and like us:
Related Articles

北京锡安教会:一个进入中美议题的中国家庭教会

随着美国总统特朗普即将访华,宗教与人权议题再次进入中美舆论场。 文/唐摩崖  发表时间:2026年5月12日 特朗普近日表示,他与中国国家主席习近平会面时,将讨论对台军售、黎智英案以及“锡安教会领袖金明日”等问题。 相比黎智英,很多中国公众对“金明日”以及“北京锡安教会”并不熟悉,但在美国宗教自由组织、保守派政治圈以及国际人权网络中,北京锡安教会近年来已成为一个具有象征性的中国家庭教会案例。 某种程度上,它已经从一个中国城市宗教组织,逐渐进入中美关系的话语体系。 什么是北京锡安教会? 这里所说的“锡安教会”,特指北京的Zion Church。 它并不是一个全球性宗教组织,也不是某种跨国教会总部,而是中国城市家庭教会体系中的一个新兴教会。 “锡安”(Zion)原本是《圣经》中的宗教概念,象征神圣之地与信仰共同体。因此,世界很多国家都存在名为“Zion Church”的教会,它与政治意义上的“犹太复国主义”(Zionism)并不是同一概念。...

中国认为美国正在衰落?——与《纽约时报》商榷

中国并不是一个认知高度统一的思想共同体。 作者:毕研韬   发表时间:2026年5月12日 近日,《纽约时报》(The New York Times)刊发题为《Trump Is Coming to a China...

特朗普访华七大议题前瞻:中美进入“有限共存”时代

今天的中美关系,已经不再是“合作大于竞争”,而是“竞争中的有限合作”。特朗普访华背后,一个新的国际结构或许正在浮现:中美开始进入“有限共存”时代。 作者:毕研韬  发表时间:2026年5月10日 随着美国总统特朗普即将访问北京,中美关系再次进入全球关注中心。 从当前国际局势与双方政策轨迹看,这次访问并不意味着中美关系回暖,更像是一场围绕“如何管理竞争”的高层战略谈判。过去十余年,中美关系已经从“接触优先”逐渐转向“安全优先”。如今,双方都越来越意识到:两国已经很难回到过去的全球化蜜月期,但又无法真正彻底脱钩。 某种意义上,中美关系正在经历一个重要历史转折。过去数十年,中美关系大致经历了三个阶段: 第一阶段是“接触与合作”阶段;第二阶段是“竞争与防范”阶段;第三阶段则是“安全化与结构对抗”阶段。 特朗普此次访华,可能意味着双方正在逐渐进入第四阶段:“有限共存(limited coexistence)”。 所谓“有限共存”,并不意味着关系改善,更不意味着重新回到过去的合作时代,而是承认竞争长期存在;承认彼此无法改变甚至消灭对方;承认全面脱钩成本过高。“有限共存”就是维持一种“竞争中的最低稳定”。 如果按对国际体系影响的重要性排序,特朗普此次北京之行,大概率将围绕以下七大议题展开。 一、台湾问题:中美关系最危险的引爆点...

“看不上我,就让你们看清楚我”:缪伊雯式的“复仇”为何赢得满堂彩?

2026年4月的亚冠女排赛场上,中国姑娘缪伊雯代表哈萨克斯塔出场,率队打败北京队,却赢得中国网民集体喝彩。 作者:程一鸣   发表:2026年5月9日 2026年4月的亚冠女排赛场上,一场看似普通的俱乐部对决,却在中国的互联网掀起了一场罕见的情感海啸。身披哈萨克斯坦战袍的中国球员缪伊雯,在对阵北京女排的比赛中砍下22分,率队鏖战五局打败北京队。对此,中国社交媒体上几乎一边倒地出现了“干得漂亮”“全网祝福”“太解气了”的声音。短视频平台上,“你不要我,我就用实力抽回去”“体制不要我,那就在体制外打败体制”等标题获得了数以万计的点赞。 一个中国球员,代表外国俱乐部击败了国内的队伍,不仅没有招致“叛徒”式的骂名,反而赢得了全网的喝彩与共鸣。这反常的一幕,到底是怎么回事? 一场“爽文”背后的现实剧本 表面的答案并不难找:缪伊雯的职业生涯本身就是一个“逆袭”范本。2022年,她曾短暂入选国家队集训,在世界联赛中仅获得一次替补登场的机会,扣了一个球便被换下,之后再未得到重用。在国内竞争激烈、机会渺茫的困境下,她选择远赴意大利、土耳其,最终落脚哈萨克斯坦。在杰特苏俱乐部,她不仅率队拿下联赛和杯赛双冠,还荣膺“最佳主攻”。此次在亚冠赛场上亲手淘汰国内传统强队,无疑是一次完美的“实力正名”。 然而,如果仅仅将其解读为“个人励志故事”,便远远低估了这场舆论风暴的深度。真正让无数网友“破防”并自发加入喝彩阵营的,并非缪伊雯一个人的成功,而是她所触动的、弥漫于整个社会的一种普遍而隐秘的情绪——对“怀才不遇”的感同身受,以及对僵化人才选拔机制的集体不满。 “为她喝彩”的本质:为自己发声 网民的留言和弹幕中,高频出现的关键词不是“排球”,而是“机会”“公平”“关系”与“憋屈”。人们从缪伊雯身上看到的,不仅仅是一个运动员,更是一个隐喻:一个被“体制内”边缘化的优秀个体,在外部环境中野蛮生长,最终用硬实力证明——不被你们选中,不是我不行,而是你们的眼光与机制有问题。 “看不上我,就让你们看清楚我。”这句短视频标题之所以能引发强烈共鸣,是因为它在无数普通人的心里投下了回声。在职场中,有多少年轻人因为“没有关系”而被晋升名单忽略?在科研领域,有多少学者因为“资历不够”而申请不到本该属于他的项目?在艺术圈,有多少创作者因为“不符合标准”而被主流平台拒之门外?缪伊雯的故事,就像一面镜子,映照出每一个曾因僵化规则、人情门槛、论资排辈而被否定的个体。 人们为她喝彩,本质上是在为自己从未被正视的才华与努力喝彩;人们为她“打败体制内”而欢呼,实际上是在为自己无力打破却又无比渴望冲破的“天花板”而呐喊。...