COUNTERPOINT: China's not a competitor -- It's an adversary

Roslyn Layton, InsideSources.com on Sep 17, 2026

Published in Op Eds

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

Is China a competitor — or an adversary?

The distinction matters because "competitor" implies a contest governed by rules. Competitors agree to play the same game, use common standards, submit to refereeing and accept the outcome. Economic competition assumes a positive sum: companies compete, consumers benefit, innovation expands the market and the overall pie grows.

That’s not how the Chinese Communist Party sees it. For China, engagement is a struggle for national power and global dominance. There is no need to fire a missile if you control the technology, supply chains, capital, data, industrial capacity and critical infrastructure on which the world depends.

China has repeatedly demonstrated its willingness to deploy economic, technological, legal, diplomatic and intelligence tools in pursuit of strategic objectives. Intellectual property theft, cyber espionage, state subsidies, market restrictions, forced technology transfer and economic coercion are tools in the box.

Beijing’s National Intelligence Law requires organizations and citizens to support, assist and cooperate with national intelligence work. China maintains extensive authority over companies and can mobilize economic resources in pursuit of national security objectives.

Washington wagered that capitalism would “democratize” China. That was the prevailing hope surrounding China’s accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001. Under Xi Jinping since 2012, however, the Communist Party has built a military capable of challenging the United States, clamped down on human rights and tightened its control over enterprise. If the expectation was that American companies would enter China and flourish, the opposite happened. Nike, Starbucks, Best Buy, Home Depot, Uber, Google, LinkedIn, Yahoo, eBay and Gap have exited or significantly reduced their footprint in the Chinese market. Most U.S. media and content companies were never allowed to compete in the first place.

Meanwhile, China has built enormous industrial capacity, often with state support that has been the subject of WTO disputes. China now accounts for 80 percent or more of global production capacity in major parts of the solar photovoltaic and battery supply chains and dominates electric vehicles, telecommunications equipment, drones, shipbuilding, steel and critical-mineral processing, among other strategic industries such as biotech.

The problem is not simply that foreign companies lose market share. Once industries become dependent on China, economic dependence becomes a source of leverage. Nor is the problem Chinese enterprise or its extraordinarily capable, industrious and innovative entrepreneurs. The problem is a political system that can capture foreign assets and technology, direct private enterprise toward state objectives, and use economic tools to advance national power.

The same distinction must be made between the Chinese people and the Chinese Communist Party. China’s citizens should not be conflated with the government. Millions have little meaningful ability to challenge state policy, organize politically or seek independent redress. Chinese military, government, business and cultural figures who challenge the party can face detention, disappearance, imprisonment or, in some cases, execution. Leaders of Hong Kong’s Tiananmen vigil received lengthy prison sentences. Human rights movements in Tibet, Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia and elsewhere are crushed while ethnic and religious assimilation is enforced. Taiwan is next on the roadmap.

Americans are vulnerable, particularly to Chinese technology. TikTok’s ownership structure leaves China’s ByteDance with a 19.9% stake and ownership of the recommendation algorithm, which it licenses to the U.S. joint venture. Cameras, smartphones, telecommunications equipment, cloud services, sensors, wearables, vehicles and other connected devices generate extraordinarily valuable information. China excels in aggregating data on identities, relationships, locations, purchases, communications and behavior on an enormous scale, creating another instrument of geopolitical power.

President Donald Trump knows China does not play by WTO rules. Xi comes to Washington seeking access to essential American tech. Let’s hope Trump keeps America first.

_____

ABOUT THE WRITER

Roslyn Layton is executive vice president of Strand Consult and a senior fellow at the National Security Institute. She wrote this for InsideSources.com.

_____