PDF Summary:New Cold Wars, by David E. Sanger

Our current era is marked by complex global affairs reminiscent of the Cold War. In New Cold Wars, David E. Sanger delves into America's strained diplomatic relationships with Russia and China, two powers vying to subvert U.S. dominance.

Sanger examines the missteps that led to recent escalations, including Russia's annexation of Crimea and ongoing war in Ukraine. He also explores the meteoric rise of China under Xi Jinping, from strides in technological fields to far-reaching trade initiatives like the Belt and Road. With the U.S. embroiled in multiple geopolitical crises, Sanger argues its traditional foreign policy strategies must evolve. New challenges emerge, from drone warfare's moral quandaries to an increasingly precarious system of alliances and threats to democracy.

(continued)...

Xi Jinping's consolidation of power has led to an increasingly assertive Chinese stance.

The swift rise of Xi Jinping signified a profound and lasting shift in the domestic priorities of China. He swiftly changed course from a consistent method of carefully calibrated diplomatic and economic tactics. Now Beijing, operating with a newly muscular military and an increasingly sophisticated global footprint, found itself in open competition with the West-a competition that seemed destined to define the coming decades.

"Made in China 2025" aims to achieve dominance in key technological fields, surpassing the United States.

The strategy titled "Made in China 2025" did not emerge abruptly. The declaration from China's leadership regarding its ambition to dominate crucial technology industries was at first seen by certain specialists as just another extended policy projection spanning five years. China often announced ambitious goals which, upon encountering practical difficulties or shifts in priorities, were subsequently scaled back, altered, or abandoned.

The unique attributes of the "Made in China 2025" plan were promptly recognized by American intelligence and financial circles. Xi Jinping's government has strategically invested vast sums, totaling hundreds of billions, into key and swiftly evolving sectors of international rivalry, such as achieving supremacy in the semiconductor field, enhancing robotics, developing robust batteries, advancing quantum computing, and fostering the expansion of artificial intelligence. China implemented a plan and provided assistance to secure a leading position in the technological domains that will define the forthcoming epoch.

China is expanding its influence through the implementation of a strategy that involves substantial investment and trade activities within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative.

China's launch of the Belt and Road Initiative signified a pivotal change in its approach to enhancing its international sway during Xi Jinping's tenure. Sanger explores how China allocates significant government resources to enhance its influence worldwide, investing in a range of initiatives such as constructing ports, bridges, highways, and medical facilities, in addition to setting up digital communication networks and installing undersea cables for internet access.

This benevolence was cleverly orchestrated and purposefully guided. Developing countries, tired of constant lectures and guidance on transparency and anti-corruption, looked for a new supporter who would have confidence in the promises of their rulers. Beijing invested several billion dollars. For years, nations that became part of China's Belt and Road initiative may have ignored the criticism that the terms of the loans they accepted resulted in overwhelming debt burdens, which they aspired to sidestep, while China maneuvered to potentially take over essential facilities. The story took a darker turn when nations were forced to cede control of ports, energy projects, and crucial mineral rights to Chinese financiers, which brought to light the more concerning elements of the promises given by the Chinese leader.

Xi envisions China's evolution from a nation rising peacefully to becoming a formidable strategic competitor.

During the initial phase of his presidency, China's stature grew significantly under Xi Jinping's leadership. In fact, its success had sparked considerable envy across numerous Western nations. Xi appeared to view the assuredness of such a path as far from guaranteed. Sanger argues that China currently finds itself in a distinctive phase of economic, political, and military competition with countries from the West, a reality that Xi has clearly conveyed to the leadership of the party. The time for subtle strategies had passed. Xi made it clear to China's top officials and in his public statements that his objective was to surpass the United States and position China as the dominant global economic and military force, rather than to work on joint ventures.

The end of "Engagement" marks the beginning of a new era characterized by rivalry.

The progressively confrontational approach of Xi Jinping has compelled the United States to confront a new and distinctly uncomfortable reality. The hope that Beijing would eventually adopt Western-style norms, respect human rights, and avoid using its growing military and economic power to challenge or coerce other countries or redefine global power politics had finally dissipated. Proponents of engaging through diplomacy increasingly acknowledged that the era of relative bipartisan collaboration in the United States had come to a sudden end.

The commercial and technological disagreements that began under the Trump administration

During Donald Trump's tenure as president, the strategy of Washington in engaging with the Chinese government underwent a substantial and potentially enduring transformation. He claimed that China was vying for strategic advantage with the United States, a scenario that quickly escalated into a trade conflict that prioritized "America First." This disagreement was marked by assertive rhetoric and the introduction of import duties on Chinese goods to protect American jobs and shield against the theft of intellectual property, while also catering to the economic interests of his base. Trump believed firmly that his tariff strategy, even though it inflicted considerable damage on the agricultural sector, would pressure China into accepting conditions that would lead to the resurgence of manufacturing employment in the United States.

Sanger details the manner in which Trump's focus on trade figures often eclipsed other measures, yet the tactical moves made by his administration to counter China's increasing international influence were more consequential than either his trade restrictions or intermittent displays of friendship with the Chinese leader. As the administration drew closer to seeing China as a multifaceted national security threat, they became the first government to name China as the one nation capable of displacing the United States. The Trump administration escalated its examination of China's unfair economic and tech practices, expanded sanctions, and made firm moves to hinder China's access to Western semiconductors, essential for progress in numerous fields such as military aviation and artificial intelligence development.

Implementing a strong protective measure to secure essential technologies.

The strategies initiated during President Trump's tenure persisted into the early phase of President Biden's administration. Instead, they systematized them. The updated strategy focused on impeding the Chinese government's attempts to obtain cutting-edge Western technologies that could enhance its military or intelligence prowess, or undermine the United States' dominance in areas such as artificial intelligence, space exploration, and quantum computing. Initially reluctant to justify their position or explain their reasoning to voters, the administration under President Biden proceeded carefully with the idea of supporting "industrial policy," cognizant of the possible backlash.

The construction of the tall barriers occurred in a three-phase process:

1. Restoring alliances with distant allies to form a united front against China's aggressive economic strategies. ** The situation required convincing European heads of state, especially from Germany, who were hesitant to jeopardize substantial business ties with Beijing, to understand that China's technological ambitions presented a threat extending well beyond the confines of Southeast Asia. The Biden administration has underscored the significance of learning from the Ukrainian conflict, urging allies to stay alert and prepared for any indications that China might shift from its tranquil rise to a stance that is more contentious.
2. Making sure the U.S. could survive even if its chip and industrial dependencies on China were disrupted. The strategy included revitalizing America's scientific and industrial capabilities, notably by persuading a leading semiconductor producer, TSMC, to set up a production plant on American soil. The current U.S. administration has taken steps to bring back the production of vital raw materials for semiconductor manufacturing, such as rare earth elements, to American soil.
3. Preventing China from obtaining sophisticated technologies from the West. Upon uncovering that American-made semiconductors were being employed by China to advance its hypersonic armaments, intricate surveillance systems, and artificial intelligence projects, the Biden administration took action to curtail the export of these critical tech elements to China.

As we face the prospect of a new era marked by escalating hostilities reminiscent of the Cold War era, this time involving China, it is crucial to evaluate the risks and limitations associated with disengaging from diplomatic interactions.

By 2023, the idea that the economic connections between the United States and China could be easily severed had lost its allure among officials in both nations. Under the guidance of Xi Jinping, the Chinese administration initiated a long-term strategic plan to become self-reliant in critical technologies. The Biden administration acknowledged that although its goal was to bolster the manufacturing capabilities within the United States and diminish dependence on Beijing regarding matters of security, it was impractical to completely sever economic ties, especially considering the American consumers' accustomed to low-cost goods. The presentation of the iPhone by Apple is particularly memorable. For a long time, Foxconn has been putting together the company's iPhones at its facilities located within China. The executives at Apple calculated that transferring just a modest portion, about 10 to 15 percent, of their manufacturing operations from China to alternative locations could take as long as a decade, even in the best conditions.

The two countries developed a relationship that balanced their competitive strategies with collaborative endeavors in areas where their interests converged. Despite their attempts to minimize mutual dependence, the United States and China remained obligated to manage their interconnectedness with a carefully calibrated approach that required continuous adjustments and a clear strategic vision.

Other Perspectives

• The belief that economic liberalization would lead to political liberalization in China may have been based on a Western-centric view that does not fully account for China's unique cultural, historical, and political context.
• The integration of China into the global trade system, such as the WTO, may have been overly optimistic about the willingness of an authoritarian regime to adopt Western legal and regulatory frameworks.
• The assumption that economic interconnectedness would prevent nationalistic aspirations overlooks the historical precedent of nations pursuing their interests aggressively, even when economically interdependent.
• The focus on technological theft and intellectual property disputes may not fully recognize the complexity of international trade, where nations often engage in similar practices to some extent.
• The "Made in China 2025" initiative could be seen as a legitimate strategy for a sovereign nation to advance its technological capabilities and economic development.
• The Belt and Road Initiative, while criticized for creating debt burdens, can also be viewed as a form of international development assistance that provides much-needed infrastructure to developing nations.
• The portrayal of China's strategic competition may not acknowledge the possibility of a multipolar world where different powers can rise without necessarily resulting in direct conflict.
• The shift in U.S. policy under the Trump administration towards a more confrontational stance with China could be criticized for potentially escalating tensions rather than seeking mutual understanding and cooperation.
• The protective measures to secure essential technologies might be seen as protectionist and could hinder international cooperation in science and technology.
• The argument that economic ties with China cannot be easily severed might overlook the potential for diversification of supply chains and the development of alternative trade partnerships.

The intricacies of international power relations are clear in a realm marked by multiple centers of influence.

This part of "New Cold Wars" seeks to outline the changing landscape of current global politics. Sanger argues that the United States is currently confronting multiple crises at once, which makes the traditional Cold War framework—with its clear divisions, two dominant powers vying for global dominance, and the expectation of a decisive victory for one side—obsolete.

Managing Multiple Geopolitical Crises Simultaneously

The United States is embroiled in a complex web of global conflicts, collectively known as the "New Cold Wars," which, despite seeming unrelated, are deeply interconnected. The author calls for a reassessment of the United States' strategy in foreign affairs, considering the intricate difficulties presented by a world in which traditional zones of control are becoming indistinct and where domestic political conflicts increasingly intersect with worldwide strains.

The United States' reduced stature after pulling out of Afghanistan.

The advisors responsible for national security during President Biden's tenure encountered a multitude of difficulties, and the precipitous withdrawal of the United States from Afghanistan tarnished its international standing, providing adversaries with an opportunity to highlight the limitations of American power. The chaotic exit from Kabul epitomized the waning confidence in the United States' international reputation. Sanger emphasizes that although there may have been justifiable grounds for the retreat, the way it was executed demonstrated to countries around the globe the superpower's significant shortcomings in setting up a new government, despite its capacity to depose an incumbent one.

The image of Biden shaking hands with Taliban representatives, along with the desperate attempts by Afghans to escape and the abandonment of partners who supported the United States, fueled the view that Biden, and by extension the country he represents, was perceived as untrustworthy. The belief that the United States could no longer be relied upon as a steadfast partner would endure for a considerable time, particularly while allies pondered their response to the more aggressive postures adopted by China and Russia, both of which were eager to advance the notion that reliance on the U.S. was now uncertain.

The situation in Ukraine has laid the groundwork for a strengthened partnership between China and Russia.

Russia's swift military action in Ukraine, following the pullout from Kabul, provided a clearer perspective on the changed global standing of the United States. Prior to the aggressive move, a multitude of cautions from specialists in the fields of espionage and military security suggested that the assertive transition under Xi Jinping's leadership was the precursor to an era marked by fierce rivalry, where China's goal was to eclipse the United States in global dominance. Discourse among the public and politicians increasingly echoed the sentiment that China represented a substantial threat to existence, being the only nation with the comprehensive economic, political, and technological prowess to mount a serious challenge to America's dominance. During informal and sometimes humorous exchanges, the Chinese often commented on their ascending status relative to Russia's declining prominence.

Despite what it seemed at first, the forceful progression of Russia into Ukraine, coupled with China's clear proclamation of solidarity with Russia, signaled an alternate truth. Sanger emphasizes that Xi and Putin are well aware of the benefits they gain from working together to challenge the United States' supremacy, even though they do not have an official military alliance. The Biden administration had to determine if China's provision of vital technological help and critical economic aid to Russia was simply a strategic maneuver or an indication of a substantial new partnership forming on the global stage.

The reemergence of long-standing disagreements signals a renewed period of persistent strife in the Middle East.

In 2023, the flaring of tensions between Hamas and Israel highlighted the limitations of President Biden's foreign policy strategy, illustrating how quickly entrenched conflicts and persistent hostilities in the Middle East can undermine the advances achieved through extended diplomacy and lead to increased calls for US engagement. Sanger argues that perceiving the worldwide struggle merely through the lens of democracy versus autocracy underscores the perils inherent in such a limited viewpoint. The endeavor to secure enduring harmony between Saudi Arabia and Israel through dialogue with the Saudi Crown Prince, an authoritarian figure, exposed weaknesses and contradictions in his international outlook.

The rising death toll in Gaza ignited new criticism amid views that the United States hesitated to use its sway with Israel, appearing to rationalize Palestinian deaths while at the same time condemning the hostilities in Ukraine. The global strategy that Biden had meticulously developed was compromised by the resurgence of familiar dangers: the threat posed by Islamic State militants, Iran's advancement in nuclear technology, and a regional conflict that could distract the United States from its strategic objective of prolonged involvement in Asia, potentially drawing Biden into a third new, unwanted, and unpredictable conflict.

The emergence of digital technologies has fundamentally transformed the nature of contemporary warfare.

At the onset of Biden's presidency, the United States found itself already embroiled in several conflicts. While this conflict presented a unique set of challenges compared to those faced by previous U.S. administrations, it still bore the significant potential for intensification—a struggle for Ukraine's existence, a contention over an Iranian vessel transporting crude, a digital assault targeting a Russian intelligence bureau, or a close encounter involving a Chinese aircraft and an American aerial reconnaissance could spark a wider and more lethal war, potentially escalating to the use of nuclear weapons.

Conflict arises due to strategies based on algorithms within a cohesive command system.

At the core of this peril was the profound influence of progress in the realm of digital technologies, which fundamentally transformed the tactics of waging war, collecting and analyzing intelligence, exerting influence, and possibly averting hostilities. It was a leap from the old era of counterterrorism and its emphasis on "find, fix, and finish" to a new era of "algorithmic warfare," one in which the U.S military, along with its adversaries, increasingly relied on artificial intelligence to sort through avalanches of data and guide the real-time decisions that could win or lose a battle.

David Sanger's narrative emphasizes contemporary methods of conducting warfare by examining the Pentagon's launch of the Maven project. What began as a simple trial to employ computer vision for aiding Pentagon analysts in making sense of the immense volume of video from military surveillance systems expanded into a vast initiative to gather all available data, including significant contributions from commercial satellite companies and social media streams, and channel it into a centralized hub known as "the Pit," which provided a nearly instantaneous, continuously refreshed, and unparalleled perspective of the combat zone, often described as a comprehensive visual overview. The integration of this information with highly classified intelligence provided Ukrainian officials with a considerable advantage over the lackluster and demotivated Russian military forces.

The involvement of private enterprises and commercial technology in modern conflicts.

The confrontation in Ukraine has laid bare the perils and potential of the current era, illustrating the significance of corporate tech platforms for military endeavors, which are equally important as their role in everyday applications like Google Maps and Waze. Sanger suggests that minor military powers are now capable of using technologies accessible on the market to secure a substantial edge in confrontations with more formidable countries, emphasizing how strategies from the Cold War period, which depended on clandestine, sophisticated technologies, have become outdated.

Maxar and Planet Labs, via their satellite networks, offered unparalleled perspectives on the true state of affairs on the ground during a global conflict. The complexities that can arise when private companies play a pivotal role in shaping and supporting military-related decisions were underscored by Ukraine's dependence on the satellite network provided by Elon Musk's Starlink. When Musk refused to enable Starlink access to Ukraine's military forces so that they could attack Russian ships around Crimea, fearing that a Ukrainian victory might trigger a broader escalation by Putin, he was making a unilateral call on a key national security matter for a non-NATO ally that was fighting for its survival. The potential for private companies to use emerging drone technology in a way that could either escalate or alleviate conflicts seemed to be a matter of considerable importance for the future.

The deployment of autonomous aerial vehicles presents moral and ethical dilemmas.

The emergence of digital technologies has revolutionized how conflicts are waged, expanding the range of possible participants and changing the dynamics of military engagements. For an extended period, the Pentagon, in conjunction with China, Russia, and other rivals, had been testing the concept of "drone swarms" - formations of inexpensive, interconnected unmanned vehicles operating in unison. These groups could potentially identify and defend themselves against attackers, even counterstrike. They were designed with the intention of being expendable.

The idea that drone warfare, which primarily targets hardware, might make conflict appear less savage, was strongly contested by events that unfolded on Ukrainian soil. Sanger depicts the stationed soldiers as perpetually on edge due to overhead surveillance conducted by pilots operating at a great distance from the combat zone. The drone operators knew they were being watched and that there could be counterattacks in response. The progress in artificial intelligence technology has led to worries regarding the ability of unmanned aerial vehicle groups to accurately identify friend from foe and to function autonomously, particularly when cut off from human oversight, igniting substantial moral discussions about the reduced role of people in warfare execution.

Forming alliances and partnerships is crucial in lessening the impact of rising threats.

Confronting the challenges of multipolarity required an updated understanding of the role of alliances and partnerships in an era in which the West's former military and economic dominance could no longer be taken for granted. The United States found it necessary to not only reaffirm its commitment to NATO and strengthen ties with countries like Japan, South Korea, and Australia, but also to start building relationships with new allies who were increasingly worried about the choice between siding with the U.S. or moving closer to the sway of China.

Reinvigorating the United States' partnerships by concentrating on Asia, which significantly transforms global political dynamics.

In reaction to the increasing boldness of China under Xi Jinping's rule, American authorities have strengthened their country's partnerships, highlighting an often-ignored strength of the United States. During his tenure, President Barack Obama redirected the United States' attention away from extended military involvements in the Middle East towards a policy that prioritized enhanced engagement with nations across the Asian continent. The transition proved more challenging than expected because of America's widespread global commitments and the reluctance of many Asian partners to acknowledge the harsh reality of a deepening Cold War with China.

The Biden administration sought to revitalize its approach to international relations by characterizing its strategy as one that prioritizes forming partnerships centered around particular objectives rather than creating rigid alliances. This involved fostering a common ground among countries with differing perspectives, all sharing a concern regarding China's aggressive behavior. The security alliance's cooperative endeavors received new vigor, involving the United States, India, Japan, and Australia. The situation led President Biden to emphasize the importance of fortifying partnerships to counterbalance China's regional sway, even though India was hesitant to publicly condemn the incursion into Ukraine, and he worked simultaneously with Japan and South Korea to mend their longstanding historical conflicts.

Maintaining unity in the face of Russia and China's aggressive tactics presents significant challenges.

The assault on Ukraine by Putin highlighted how delicate the Western coalition is and the difficulties involved in maintaining a cohesive democratic front throughout a prolonged and fierce conflict. The transatlantic allies stood together in consensus on the necessity of imposing sanctions, but they showed considerable variation in their views on the kind of military support to provide, the financial responsibilities they were willing to assume, and, most importantly, their ultimate objectives. The coalition of European countries, from the Baltics to Poland, which bordered Russia, stood firm in their conviction that Putin's aggressive maneuvers should be met with a strong response; they argued that yielding even a minor portion of Ukrainian territory would only embolden more territorial advances in times to come. Countries in Western Europe demonstrated considerable hesitation. As they backed the strategy to oppose Putin's maneuvers and to maintain Ukraine's independence, their hopes for a decisive victory that would force Russia to substantially change its ways were tempered by the ongoing stalemate and the worry that a cornered Putin might lash out at NATO.

The Biden administration grappled with the challenge of balancing various issues, evoking concerns reminiscent of the early stages of the Cold War era. The extended duration of the conflict, now exceeding a year, has escalated worries that American support for Ukraine's unwavering defense might wane, especially with the upcoming presidential election in the United States adding to these fears. In confidential discussions, numerous presidential advisors conceded the difficulties they faced in deterring allied nations from influencing Ukraine to enter negotiations that might result in ceding territory, essentially yielding to the forceful strategies employed by Russia. Concerns were raised about Germany's steadfastness in supporting Ukraine due to its modest military capabilities and apprehension about relying too heavily on American protection.

Countries are progressively charting different paths.

Amidst the intensification of the new Cold Wars, a coalition of countries maintained neutrality and started to carve out their own sphere of influence. The escalating strain between significant global players, including the United States, China, and Russia, has re-emphasized the significance of a strategic stance known as the "hedging middle," which has its roots in the Non-Aligned Movement of the 1960s. In India, Israel, South Africa, and throughout numerous regions of the Global South, governments prudently steered their strategic choices, avoiding a rigid alliance with either the United States or China, and instead maneuvered through the competition of these two superpowers to carve out their own spheres of influence.

This balance was preserved by a mix of self-interest, ethical values, and the conventional powers that influence and direct worldwide influence. The security pact between China and the Solomon Islands was initiated under the leadership of Prime Minister Sogavare.

Other Perspectives

• The United States' international standing may not be as diminished as suggested; some could argue that the withdrawal from Afghanistan allowed the U.S. to reallocate resources and attention to more strategic areas of interest.
• The partnership between China and Russia could be seen as opportunistic and not as strong as it appears, with both countries having their own agendas and potential points of contention.
• The conflicts in the Middle East are complex and multifaceted, and some might argue that the U.S. has limited influence over these long-standing issues.
• The transformation of warfare through digital technologies could be viewed as an evolution rather than a fundamental transformation, with many principles of conflict remaining unchanged.
• The role of algorithms and AI in warfare might be overstated, as human decision-making and oversight remain crucial in military operations.
• The involvement of private enterprises in conflicts could be seen as a continuation of historical patterns where governments have relied on private sector innovation and production for military purposes.
• The ethical dilemmas presented by autonomous aerial vehicles are not new to warfare; similar debates have occurred with the introduction of other new military technologies in the past.
• The importance of alliances and partnerships could be challenged by those who advocate for a more isolationist or unilateral approach to foreign policy.
• The focus on Asia might be criticized for potentially neglecting other important regions or global issues that require attention.
• The unity of Western allies in response to Russia's actions in Ukraine could be seen as stronger than suggested, with shared democratic values and mutual interests binding them together.
• The idea that countries are charting different paths could be countered by the argument that many nations still rely heavily on the existing international order and the influence of major powers.