THREAD // I fully agree with @AaronFriedberg that there's reason to believe a liberal China would be better for U.S. national security standpoint than an authoritarian China. That said, I'm not sure that liberalizing China would fix our problem. https://twitter.com/AaronFriedberg/status/1262859713907228672

Ultimately, our problem with China isn't just about intentions. It's also about capability. A liberal China that's more powerful than the USA can still pose a terrible threat to our interests, not to mention those of our allies and partners.

So while we should seek to moderate Chinese intentions where it's possible to do so at tolerable risk to ourselves, even if we succeed, that won't be enough. Put differently, even if China does liberalize, the game's not over. History didn't end (again).

We've got to reform the international order and system so that even a liberal China never has the ability to impose its will on the United States and our allies and partners. That's the long game, and it's a game that will play out in all aspects of statecraft (DIME, etc.).

The other nice thing about remembering that capability is ultimately the problem here is that it hedges against strategic surprise. China might liberalize. It also might not. It also might liberalize and then reverse course. Or any number of other permutations.

So long as we're hedging against China's ability to hurt us, then we'll be much better positioned to deal with unexpected turns of events than if we bet too heavily on solving our problem by liberalizing China. // END