{"id":8143,"date":"2026-08-23T08:46:58","date_gmt":"2026-08-23T11:46:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/?p=8143"},"modified":"2026-08-23T11:11:51","modified_gmt":"2026-08-23T14:11:51","slug":"false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/","title":{"rendered":"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence"},"content":{"rendered":"

Paper presented at the Fourth Latin American Congress of Chinese Studies, <\/a>Argentina \u2013 August 2026.<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

Introduction<\/h3>\n

After 1979, relations between China and the United States took on a form sometimes described as \u201csymbiotic”<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a><\/span>.\u201d Around the 2000s, the bilateral relationship evolved into a phase of competition in which Beijing and Washington once again clashed on the cognitive, normative, commercial, economic, and media fronts, with varying degrees of intensity and in different ways. A closer look reveals, however, that the symbiosis between the two powers remains entirely relevant today and points to a framework that extends far beyond what has been documented in geopolitical and historical literature. Since 1911, the former imperial China has in fact been conquered and subordinated to Euro-Atlantic elites. This subordination, crystallized during the creation of the First Chinese Republic, was kept hidden and transformed into a dialectical strategy\u2014namely, a geopolitical agenda hinging intimately on two ambivalent logics: on the one hand, a stream of more or less superficial frictions with Western rivals; on the other, a structural alignment of the Chinese apparatus with Anglo-American prerogatives. This foundational duality is now being harnessed in the service of a grand strategy and heralds a new phase of offensive unipolarity on a global scale. Paradoxically, this project remains an as yet imperceptible and unidentified entity, much like other variations stemming from the use of dialectics in international power dynamics.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Surface Dichotomies<\/h3>\n

The contemporary international system rests on cognitive and normative pillars essential to the establishment of any governance architecture. The very notion of international order has been the subject of constant ideological construction aimed at legitimizing a power capable of acting on the transnational stage. After 1945, the Pax Americana<\/em>\u2014and even the more diffuse notion of a New World Order<\/em>\u2014served as a cornerstone for shaping the global landscape according to U.S. interests. Beginning in the 1990s, \u201csustainable development\u201d was added to these narratives after several decades of intensive advocacy within multilateral forums. In 2008, the concept of \u201cinclusive capitalism\u201d emerged in the wake of the financial crisis with the aim of breathing new life into the liberal ideological foundation.<\/p>\n

China, for its part, introduced the concept of a \u201ccommunity with a shared future for mankind\u201d beginning in 2008, following its entry into the club of world powers. This notion was linked to a proactive effort to build a \u201cmultipolar world\u201d as an alternative to Western hegemony and the \u201cunipolarity\u201d exercised by the exclusive G7 club. The vision of an \u201cecological civilization\u201d\u2014compatible with the Western concept of sustainability\u2014complemented these ideas, ultimately leading to various initiatives in the areas of development (Silk Roads), security (GSI), and governance (SCO). It should be noted that the European Union is partly aligned with this effort toward global projection through a normative, environmental, and geoeconomic agenda.<\/p>\n

In the realm of narrative, China has thus sought to distinguish itself from the political monopoly established by the Euro-Atlantic liberal axis. In the political and geoeconomic spheres, Beijing and Washington are also in a more pronounced phase of differentiation following the period of normalization that followed the Cold War and China\u2019s accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001. As early as 2017, Donald Trump\u2019s first administration launched a trade war in the areas of tariffs, technology (Huawei, semiconductors), and legal measures (sanctions). China officially became Washington\u2019s main strategic competitor. This shift galvanized a policy of containment that was continued by Joe Biden\u2019s Democratic administration, then resumed and intensified by the current Republican administration.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The contradictions of the political-economic matrix<\/h3>\n

A more in-depth analysis of the relations between China and its Euro-Atlantic adversaries reveals, however, a reality that stands in stark contrast to what has just been summarized. Five lines of evidence demonstrate that a relationship of structural dependence has existed continuously since 1911 between China and Anglo-Saxon decision-making centers.<\/p>\n

The first line of evidence concerns the nature of the formation of the Republic of China. The creation of the first Republic of China in 1912 was precipitated by the overthrow of the Qing dynasty in 1911 by the Triads. These groups, alongside other criminal entities such as the Hakkas, emerged during the 19th century as London\u2019s paramilitary arm and as an instrument for distributing opiates under the coordination of former British Prime Minister Lord Palmerston, a descendant of Britain\u2019s ruling dynasties. The objective of this subversive scheme, cloaked in the ideological guise of free trade<\/span>2<\/sup><\/a><\/span>, was to undermine China\u2019s traditional unity through widespread drug dependency (which began in China as early as 1715) and military coercion exerted on Chinese ports with France\u2019s support. Sun Yat-sen, trained by the British strategists James Cantlie and Patrick Manson<\/span>3<\/sup><\/a><\/span>, led the movement to overthrow the Qing dynasty and laid the foundations for the First Chinese Republic in 1912, whose ideological roots incorporated the conceptual building blocks provided by London. In 1921, Chen Duxiu, Zhang Shenfu, and Li Dazhao founded the Chinese Communist Party under the supervision of various leading figures of the Comintern and the British philosopher Bertrand Russell. Russell, a disciple of the dialectical philosophy previously developed by Moses Hess and passed on to Marx and Engels, was also the mentor of Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai at Yale University in Beijing. In essence, this dialectical approach laid the foundations for a method of dominating and transforming reality through the creation of antagonistic poles and the compartmentalization of the system. The persistence of this same dialectical pattern today tends to demonstrate that the Chinese elites<\/span>4<\/sup><\/a><\/span> still operate within the Anglo-Saxon orbit.<\/p>\n

The second body of evidence concerns the institutional framework that closely links China to London and Washington. Five organizations serve as the transmission belt for politically steering the \u201cMiddle Kingdom\u201d and supervising its elites. The Chinese People\u2019s Institute of Foreign Affairs (CPIFA), the Chinese Association for International Friendly Contacts (CAIFC), the Shanghai Institute for International Studies (SIIS), and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) are responsible for training and guiding the Chinese elites, under the supervision of two Anglo-American entities: the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA or Chatham House) in London and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in the United States. The CPIFA, founded in 1949, sits at the top of the hierarchy. Publicly presented as an arm of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it trains leading academic experts, political leaders, and prominent diplomats, as well as business executives, through a range of publicly visible activities<\/span>5<\/sup><\/a><\/span>. This system allows Chatham House to influence the policies of the Chinese government and the Communist Party. Around the turn of the 1970s, shortly before the modernization led by Deng Xiaoping, London had also established the Great Britain-China Committee (GBCC) with the barely concealed aim of making China a global player: \u201cIn time, the Chinese will become a great power. We must hope that in the process they will acquire the responsibility of a great Power towards the rest of the world. Their conception of time is different from ours. We should not forget the old Chinese saying that the first hundred years of every new dynasty are the worst<\/em>.<\/span>6<\/sup><\/a><\/span>.\u201d<\/p>\n

The third and fourth points relate to the Silk Roads (BRI) and the creation of the BRICS alliance. The concept of the New Silk Road, which became operational in 2013, first took shape intellectually within the framework of the Trilateral Commission, then was first outlined by Zbigniew Brzezinski at the very time when China was being promoted as a new industrial hub. The duo of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger implemented a policy to foster the emergence of the Chinese model under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, through technology transfer, the restructuring of its industry, and later integration into the World Trade Organization. In this regard, senior Chinese officials themselves acknowledge<\/span>7<\/sup><\/a><\/span> that the BRICS alliance, launched in 2009, was an initiative launched by Chatham House. To add to this picture, on the financial front, global industry and major Anglo-Saxon banks have financed the Silk Road project to the tune of nearly 10 trillion<\/span>8<\/sup><\/a><\/span> dollars since its inception in 2013, not counting the participation of Chinese banks.<\/p>\n

The fifth point concerns the current levels of collaboration between Beijing and Washington in the research and development of cutting-edge technologies. Over the past decade, nearly 46,000 scientific articles<\/span>9<\/sup><\/a><\/span> have been co-authored by China and the United States in the field of artificial intelligence, while Silicon Valley unicorns have cooperated directly with their Chinese counterparts<\/span>10<\/sup><\/a><\/span>. Other recent reports<\/span>11<\/sup><\/a><\/span> indicate that U.S. research funding has helped advance China\u2019s strategic objectives, particularly in the areas of critical technologies related to weapons, artificial intelligence, nuclear energy, and semiconductors. This cooperation, which has been kept under wraps and is commonly described as the result of Western carelessness and Chinese espionage, echoes other convergences taking place regarding development visions.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

A False Dichotomy<\/h3>\n

Such a factual account reflects a strategic reality quite different from the one typically presented in government and academic circles. The levels of cooperation established with Beijing bear no relation to the pursuit of mutual interests or win-win synergies that any form of interstate pragmatism would imply.<\/p>\n

In fact, the observed symbiosis has been part of a broader project to transform China into a geopolitical power, through the preliminary step of overthrowing and subverting its ruling elites. From this perspective, China\u2014along with the ideological foundation of its ruling class\u2014does not appear to be a truly sovereign and anti-hegemonic nation. It constitutes an entity subject to the proponents of the liberal order, playing the role of a dissenting force that challenges that order and establishes a new pole of geoeconomic power. The major shift described over the past two decades as the shift of the planet\u2019s geopolitical center of gravity toward Asia thus appears to be a movement that has been deliberately accelerated since the 1970s, primarily by the Anglo-American establishment, with the support of Euro-Atlantic elites. It therefore makes sense that such a collective push in favor of China would be accompanied by the deindustrialization of other developed countries (Europe)\u2014including, incidentally, the United States and the United Kingdom\u2014as well as developing nations. The restructuring of the monetary system (de-dollarization, the decline of the petrodollar, the ongoing financial crisis) is part of this deliberate shift.<\/p>\n

In this context, the portrayal of China and the Western bloc as two antagonistic blocs is artificial and contradictory. The balance of power and its manifestation in various configurations have been orchestrated by the Anglo-American hegemon since the pivotal year of 1911, the year from which onward China\u2019s modernization was exploited to subjugate the former imperial China. This two-tiered framework rests on a false dichotomy\u2014that is, on a division between a distorted and reified image of the geopolitical arena on the one hand, and the structural agenda of the powers involved on the other.<\/p>\n

This decoupling thus fragments perceptions and conceptual categories at the outset, ultimately preventing us from discerning the true nature of the strategic landscape. It is amplified by the machinery of influence and propaganda on both sides of the spectrum. These mechanisms limit access to the historical depth of these entities, reframe subordination as \u201csymbiotic cooperation\u201d or \u201cvirtuous pragmatism,\u201d and confine the two powers to their managed systemic rivalries, drawing on realist conceptions of the international order. In this regard, it is worth noting that the ideological underpinnings further amplify this compartmentalization. Both the liberal camp and the socialist camp\u2014at least the one that was built in China (and in Russia)\u2014have drawn heavily on ontological principles that enshrine the interpretation of international relations through the lens of natural antagonisms.<\/p>\n

One consequence of this strategic framework is that the overwhelming majority of actors in military and economic intelligence, while grasping certain dimensions of cognitive warfare, are unable to comprehend this arena and interpret surface-level frictions as if they were the core of international relations. This loss of a frame of reference not only places them on the margins of the true strategic struggle but also causes them to perpetuate the perceptual containment devised by the architects of the main chessboard.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Dialectical Geometry<\/h3>\n

The deliberate decoupling between the perceptual surface and the structural agenda pursued by the three powers characterizes the strategic register known as \u201cdialectics.\u201d In this configuration, the contradictions made visible in the international arena are interpreted as an intrinsic and spontaneous element of contemporary conflict. The tensions generated are exploited for the purpose of reorganizing the social order, rather than for the binary domination of one camp over the other. Both the interpretive frameworks derived from Marxism and Maoism and those produced by the exegetes of the liberal order have, in fact, naturalized a materialist vision that obstructs the discernment of the logics at work at this strategic depth.<\/p>\n

This approach, whose historical development can be concretely traced throughout history, lies at the heart of a long-term transformation of the global landscape. This transformation mobilizes the three powers mentioned and presupposes a geopolitical unity that allows Beijing, London, and Washington to work together in a hierarchical manner<\/span>12<\/sup><\/a><\/span>. In this three-way game, London plays the role of arbiter, overseeing the United States, whose apparatus is also under London\u2019s control<\/span>13<\/sup><\/a><\/span>. Such an architecture reflects a highly sophisticated strategic art, giving prominence to subversion and methods of coercion against other national entities, particularly their ruling classes.<\/p>\n

Generally speaking, this dialectical art relies on the compartmentalization of all levels of the strategic framework. The cognitive layer portrays Beijing and Washington as autonomous, systemic rivals or as geostrategic partners with converging interests. At the same time, friction is generated in the narrative, technological, economic, and even\u2014potentially\u2014military spheres. In this orchestration, China has never been viewed as a fundamentally antagonistic pole to the liberal bloc or as an ideological or geoeconomic competitor capable of winning a decisive battle against its adversaries on its own. Fundamentally, its ideological foundation stems from a variant of socialism whose guiding principles lead to the same quest for monopoly as that posed by the liberal paradigm, with the art of dialectics serving to exploit the conflictual imbalance between the antagonistic poles. This conflict, which may eventually lead to organized violence, is not a secondary variable. It constitutes a preferred method for creating tension among the entities involved and exploiting violence as a privileged force for transforming reality. The 1911 Xinhai Revolution and the Maoist Cultural Revolution were two examples of this method implemented domestically.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Unipolar Convergence<\/h3>\n

Concluding definitively in favor of unipolar convergence goes, a priori, beyond the scope of this analysis, as an infinite number of other factors would need to be incorporated into the reasoning. The considerable weight of Sino-American relations, however, allows us to sketch out a few perspectives in this direction.<\/p>\n

First, the various points presented here refute the thesis of a multipolar evolution of the international arena driven by the centrifugal forces of fragmentation and the redistribution of power. The dynamics described reflect certain trends toward the fragmentation of the former Pax Americana<\/em> and its Westphalian arbitration. But we have seen that these do not result from the natural emergence of powers that now possess greater ambition or autonomy. The frictions observed\u2014at least those centered on the Sino-American axis and their respective allies\u2014are the result of a managed fragmentation, made possible by China\u2019s prior vassalization. This fragmentation goes hand in hand with the introduction of rising conflict onto the global stage, which brings with it new risks and destabilization.<\/p>\n

Second, the dialectical agenda is, by its very nature, rooted in a unified strategic agenda, transcending the logic of compartmentalization that it itself implements. This unified agenda can exist only on the basis of political cohesion among the three actors involved\u2014that is, a convergence of objectives. In addition to this cohesion, the Chinese and American powers demonstrate several elements of programmatic convergence. China, like Russia, has embraced state capitalism over the past century, while maintaining a high degree of state control and adhering to a series of multilateral agreements set forth by their supposed rivals (climate, Agenda 2030, SDGs, WHO). In fact, Beijing, London, and Washington advocate the same collectivist vision, consistent with the narrative elements we mentioned at the outset. This vision anchors the reform of the global arena in the principle of jointly managing a planet considered to be in a state of environmental crisis. The notion of protecting the \u201ccommon good,\u201d so prominent in the narrative projections on both sides, underpins the legitimacy of this order. Crises are specifically addressed as the preferred means of imposing rules on society from above\u2014a point that brings us directly back to dialectical logic. The restructuring necessary to move toward this order thus relies, on the one hand, on conflict, and on the other, on modes of governance and development that represent a qualitative leap in the intensity of control and their integration.<\/p>\n

There are therefore many indications that the Pax Americana<\/em> had already mutated into a Pax Sino-Anglo-Americana<\/em>, merging the two variants of the same imperial projection. Isn\u2019t it time to understand this phenomenon in its full depth and, to that end, to rid ourselves of some very serious mental blind spots?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Bibliographic References<\/h3>\n
    \n
  1. Kalimtgis, K., Goldman, D., Steinberg, J. (1978). Dope Inc. Britain\u2019s Opium War against the US<\/em>. The New Benjamin Franklin House Company.<\/li>\n
  2. Beeching, J. (1977). The Chinese Opium Wars<\/em>. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.<\/li>\n
  3. Wells, A. (2001). The Political Thought of Sun Yat-sen<\/em>. Palgrave MacMillan.<\/li>\n
  4. Vrhovski, J. (2021). Mr. Luosu and \u201cChina\u2019s Road to Freedom\u201d: A General Introduction to Russell\u2019s Visit to China (1920-1921)<\/em>. In J. Vrhovski, & J. Rosker (Eds.), Bertrand Russell\u2019s Visit to China: Selected Texts on the Centenary of Intercultural Dialogues in Logic and Epistemology (pp. 21-58). University of Ljubljana Press.<\/li>\n
  5. Paisley, John. 2020. Bertrand Russell and China During and After His Visit in 1920<\/em>. Master\u2019s thesis, Harvard Extension School<\/li>\n
  6. Feigon, L. (1983). Chen Duxiu. Founder of the Chinese Communist Party<\/em>. Princeton University Press.<\/li>\n
  7. Roberts, P. (2017). Bringing the Chinese Back In: The Role of Quasi-Private Institutions in Britain and the United States<\/em>. In P. Roberts, O.A. Westad (eds.), China, Hong Kong, and the Long 1970s: Global Perspectives, Cambridge Imperial and Post-Colonial Studies Series.<\/li>\n
  8. US House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party (2024). CCP China on the Quad. How American taxpayers and Universities fund the CCP’s advanced military and Technological Research<\/a><\/em>.<\/li>\n
  9. Shambaugh, D. (2002). China\u2019s International Relations Think Tanks: Evolving Structure and Process<\/em>. The China Quarterly.<\/li>\n
  10. Sutton, A. (1995). Trilaterals over America<\/em>. CPA Books Inc.<\/li>\n
  11. \u00a0Mao Zedong, Skull & Bones, and the Russell family<\/em><\/a>.<\/li>\n
  12. Systems of Deception<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Paper presented at the Fourth Latin American Congress of Chinese Studies, Argentina \u2013 August 2026.   Introduction After 1979, relations between China and the United States took on a form sometimes described as \u201csymbiotic”.\u201d Around the 2000s, the bilateral relationship evolved into a phase of competition in which Beijing and Washington once again clashed on…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":8146,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[31],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8143","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-essay-and-analysis","category-31","description-off"],"yoast_head":"\nFalse Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence - Dunia Platform<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Paper presented at the Fourth Latin American Congress of Chinese Studies, Argentina \u2013 August 2026.   Introduction After 1979, relations between China and the United States took on a form sometimes described as \u201csymbiotic”.\u201d Around the 2000s, the bilateral relationship evolved into a phase of competition in which Beijing and Washington once again clashed on…\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Dunia Platform\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-08-23T11:46:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-08-23T14:11:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/08\/steptodown.com334869.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1600\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1066\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Francois Soulard\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/08\/steptodown.com334869.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Francois Soulard\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Francois Soulard\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/f2e2cf8f29cff867480221ae8c92bacf\"},\"headline\":\"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-23T11:46:58+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-08-23T14:11:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3298,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/20\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/steptodown.com334869.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Essay and Analysis\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/\",\"name\":\"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence - Dunia Platform\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/20\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/steptodown.com334869.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-23T11:46:58+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-08-23T14:11:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/20\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/steptodown.com334869.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/20\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/steptodown.com334869.jpg\",\"width\":1600,\"height\":1066},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"In\u00edcio\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/\",\"name\":\"Dunia Platform\",\"description\":\"Free digital tools and networked communication at the service of geopolitical and citizen transitions\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Dunia\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/20\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/ellipse4853.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/20\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/ellipse4853.png\",\"width\":300,\"height\":307,\"caption\":\"Dunia\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/f2e2cf8f29cff867480221ae8c92bacf\",\"name\":\"Francois Soulard\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b2127e75e3276da885169706011c3aab22f22ff9007c1d2038920d2a1032f1d8?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b2127e75e3276da885169706011c3aab22f22ff9007c1d2038920d2a1032f1d8?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/b2127e75e3276da885169706011c3aab22f22ff9007c1d2038920d2a1032f1d8?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Francois Soulard\"},\"description\":\"Geoscientist, author, founder of Dunia\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/dunia.earth\\\/en\\\/author\\\/francois\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence - Dunia Platform","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence","og_description":"Paper presented at the Fourth Latin American Congress of Chinese Studies, Argentina \u2013 August 2026.   Introduction After 1979, relations between China and the United States took on a form sometimes described as \u201csymbiotic”.\u201d Around the 2000s, the bilateral relationship evolved into a phase of competition in which Beijing and Washington once again clashed on…","og_url":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/","og_site_name":"Dunia Platform","article_published_time":"2026-08-23T11:46:58+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-08-23T14:11:51+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1600,"height":1066,"url":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/08\/steptodown.com334869.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Francois Soulard","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence","twitter_image":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/08\/steptodown.com334869.jpg","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Francois Soulard","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/"},"author":{"name":"Francois Soulard","@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/#\/schema\/person\/f2e2cf8f29cff867480221ae8c92bacf"},"headline":"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence","datePublished":"2026-08-23T11:46:58+00:00","dateModified":"2026-08-23T14:11:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/"},"wordCount":3298,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/08\/steptodown.com334869.jpg","articleSection":["Essay and Analysis"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/","url":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/","name":"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence - Dunia Platform","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/08\/steptodown.com334869.jpg","datePublished":"2026-08-23T11:46:58+00:00","dateModified":"2026-08-23T14:11:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/08\/steptodown.com334869.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/08\/steptodown.com334869.jpg","width":1600,"height":1066},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/false-dichotomy-and-sino-american-convergence\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"In\u00edcio","item":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"False Dichotomy and Sino-American Convergence"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/#website","url":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/","name":"Dunia Platform","description":"Free digital tools and networked communication at the service of geopolitical and citizen transitions","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/#organization","name":"Dunia","url":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2018\/01\/ellipse4853.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2018\/01\/ellipse4853.png","width":300,"height":307,"caption":"Dunia"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/#\/schema\/person\/f2e2cf8f29cff867480221ae8c92bacf","name":"Francois Soulard","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b2127e75e3276da885169706011c3aab22f22ff9007c1d2038920d2a1032f1d8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b2127e75e3276da885169706011c3aab22f22ff9007c1d2038920d2a1032f1d8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b2127e75e3276da885169706011c3aab22f22ff9007c1d2038920d2a1032f1d8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Francois Soulard"},"description":"Geoscientist, author, founder of Dunia","url":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/author\/francois\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8143","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8143"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8143\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8162,"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8143\/revisions\/8162"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8146"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8143"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8143"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dunia.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8143"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}