By Liam Childers

For decades, Washington has sought to punish Iran for rejecting its political order. This has once again become apparent in recent weeks, with carrier groups steaming toward the Persian Gulf, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visiting the White House, and the president hinting at “very tough” measures should this phase of negotiations with Tehran falter. Once more, Lindsey Graham (R-SC) cries wolf, belting out warnings of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. All the while, ordinary Americans can sense that their interests are being subordinated, their worries drowned out by the steady beat of Netanyahu’s war drum.

The pageantry is meant to show resolve and confidence in the American military, but reveals American anxiety. The looming prospect of a war with Iran, despite the bravado, demonstrates that the national security state has lost track of its own priorities. Across the Pacific, a patient observer watches optimistically. The Chinese Communist Party has learned that when America weakens itself, Beijing benefits.

Warhawks religiously assert that America’s decline is a result of “weakness.” War is merely diplomacy with bombs, after all. To them, there is a need to display force, to demonstrate America’s strength in a world that seems increasingly doubtful of this hegemony. Yet machismo without prudence devolves into political theater, and kabuki has its cost. A war with Iran would further entrench the permanent state of emergency that has existed since the beginning of the Global War on Terror. Said entrenchment necessarily requires a shift in military priorities, increased national debt, and deferred domestic concerns. The United States’ efforts to dominate the Persian Gulf would consume billions in capital and labor that would otherwise be invested in domestic industry and infrastructure, priorities the administration itself claims to value.

China, by contrast, would not need to respond symmetrically, if at all. As in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and elsewhere, it will simply keep building. Resources devoted to war cannot be devoted to production. While Washington redirects capital into missiles and troop deployments, Beijing invests in ports, industrial production, and supply chains. This imbalance compounds. Over time, the nation that favors pragmatic peace over continuous conflict does not merely save capital, but also magnifies stability. The advantage is subtle; no battlefield victory is required to shift the balance of power.

READ MORE