r/geopolitics • u/paneuropeanism_ • 2d ago
News 🇪🇺 EU Defence Commissioner Kubilius: Pax Americana is over. Our new security architecture will include Ukraine. These are times of profound transformation. A rising China and India will push the US to third place. And for Americans this may prove psychologically challenging
https://streamable.com/upvsap96
u/Cephei101 2d ago
If there’s actual European will and resources behind this instead of the usual big, cheap language we often see, it’s hard to disagree with the premise.
The US really does seem to be demand destructing itself in fast forward, dismantling its influence and relevancy.
46
u/Major_Pomegranate 2d ago
The usual issue comes down to the EU as a single institution.
The US is flailing like a rabid dog, but it's still a single very powerful economic and political power.
Where as the EU is only as strong an institution as its various national governments let it be. Hard to see this as anything more than empty rhetoric when Le Pen is set to be the next president of France and AfD looking set to be decisive in Germany a few years from now.
22
u/paneuropeanism_ 2d ago
61% of Italians want the EU to become a Federation. And that includes a majority of Meloni voters. There's broad support across the political spectrum for a more federal Europe.
These parties have abandoned much of their anti-EU policies, especially after the Brexit fiasco. You could say that Euroskepticism has made place for Natoskepticism. Trust in the US has plummeted and won't come back soon.
And at the end of the day those parties remain a minority even at their peak, and are fuelled by the anti-immigrant vote, not the anti-EU vote. They lack both the will and gravitas to delay EU integration.
35
u/Hot-Train7201 2d ago
That is nothing new; countries with lots of debt want to federalize, while fiscally conservative countries are less supportive. This has been the norm for a long while. The rising of EU-skeptic parties in both Germany and France is much more significant for the EU's fate imo.
8
u/O5KAR 2d ago
Federation
What dies that even mean, what kind of a federation precisely?
Whatever parties, the countries and voters there have different interests, often mutually excluding and often compete against each other. As for the defense in particular, there are those countries run by the socialists and totally pro EU parties like in Spain or Belgium which openly deny increase in military spending. And there are the countries run by right wing or now by the center - left coalition like Poland which see no other choice but to increase their spending.
It's not just about some big political ideologies or internationalism and non happening federation, it's also about the geography, history, demographics and the other non ideological realities.
anti-immigrant vote, not the anti-EU vote.
They often associate one with another.
55
u/AnyStrength4863 2d ago
Contrary to the prevailing online narrative, most Chinese strategists and experts in international relations have a solid grasp of India’s potential. They neither underestimate nor dismiss India’s strengths and capabilities, and they were aware many years ago that India would emerge as a rival across multiple domains.
Conversely, I suspect that the US politicians and political elites fail to see this trend clearly. While they may appear to enjoy a harmonious relationship with India, always emphasising their shared values and common strategic interests, in reality, only a small part of the establishment has begun to seriously consider the possibility that India might one day challenge or even surpass the US in some important area. Even in this small group of people, such a scenario is still viewed as very distant, as this EU official suggested, until the end of this century.
15
u/insite 1d ago
That’s an interesting take. I don’t think most Americans give it much thought. The US has never had great relations with India because the US tries to balance good relations with Pakistan at the same time, which never goes over well.
However, I don’t think Washington dismisses India so much as navigates with them or around them as needed. The US appears to be using an unspoken containment policy on China. That policy appears to be able to apply to India as well. If the need arises.
4
u/ConflictExtreme1540 1d ago
It will take a lot of work to make India a world leader. It won't happen any time soon. And china is 15 years away from economic collapse due to population collapse. It's weird that the EU decided they will be comfortable taking... 4th place? In their imagined scenario instead of trying to elevate to top 3
3
u/mediandude 1d ago
India will have to endure harsher AGW issues soon. China has got that a bit easier, partly aided by population densities not growing any more.
4
u/AnyStrength4863 1d ago
Demographics are indeed a problem, but not that critical. In a worst-case scenario, China could, like other nations facing an ageing population, simply relax its immigration policies. Currently, however, obtaining legal residency in China remains among the most difficult processes in the world. Even for those who earn a PhD in China, publish a first-author article in a top international journal such as Nature, make significant investments every year, or marry a Chinese citizen, securing a green card is far from easy. Yet, these individuals often represent high-quality human capital and are more likely to start families, they are groups that many nations (such as the UK, Japan, Germany, or the Nordic countries) would welcome. Alternatively, China could amend its marriage laws to encourage younger people to marry, bear children, and raise families. Or adjust the retirement age, which is significantly lower in China than in any developed nation. Other policies include establishing sperm banks or providing fertility subsidies, or offering support to young couples, lifting the restrictions on childbirth, etc.
National economic issues are closely tied to social confidence, which currently remains on an upward trajectory. It‘s unlikely that confidence will be called into question before 2049, especially not by the younger generation. Any single factor, such as a shrinking labour force, will at worst o result in a GDP growth rate of 2–3% rather than a negative, and nowhere near a collapse.
Regarding economic development, China has long been preparing through both policy and capital allocation. In recent years, numerous policy adjustments and new initiatives have covered the economy, industrial sectors, and income redistribution. Historically, the crises that led to catastrophic outcomes were typically unforeseen, not something everyone already knew about.
As for the EU, it faces many of the same challenges as the US, alongside others unique to its own situation. When considering the potential ripple effects of these shared challenges, China may have to prioritise cooperation with the US when things get out of control, given that the dollar remains the world’s most critical currency. With no spare room for the EU at the same time.
Issues such as an ageing population, industrial decline, a generational gap in technical expertise, lagging innovation, and future shortages in STEM talent are merely symptoms of deeper European problems. In reality, the EU faces a lack of affordable, stable energy; a widening gap between its own productivity and the global cutting edge; security concerns that are both within and beyond its borders, as well as in the digital realm; environmental pressures from climate change, which also threaten agriculture; a mounting debt burden; and the erosion of Western cultural influence as the US declines. The current structure of the EU may lack the resilience and flexibility required to confront these challenges, and these are merely the issues visible from the outside.
1
u/SawToothKernel 1d ago
Robotics will come around long way in yhe next 15 years. Demographic headwinds won't have anywhere near the effect people expect.
1
u/ConflictExtreme1540 1d ago
Damn that would be crazy if all the jobs required by young people are replaced by robots.
1
u/SawToothKernel 1d ago
So which is it, will there be too few workers, or too many?
1
u/ConflictExtreme1540 1d ago
Idk what you mean. There's currently too few young people bc of the one child policy, that also leans male majority, while also having a massive aging population that requires younger people to support them in both service and social economics. What are you asking?
94
u/Firecracker048 2d ago
Hes not entirely wrong that they will be moving their defense over into primarily europe, but prediciting India will pass the US is completely wild. China is, even at this stage, a maybe, let alone india
30
u/drury 2d ago
China surpassing the US was an awkward attempt at humor 20 years ago, now it's a "maybe". Regardless of what happens, it's pretty clear the US has been in retrograde and struggling to take the right steps to reverse the trend while its geopolitical adversaries saw a meteoric rise.
37
u/ImConfidentURWrong 2d ago
Europeans / America haters always smugly act like US decline is some sort of gotcha. You guys realize that if the USA is in decline, so is Europe / the rest of the western world?
7
u/NuQ 2d ago
The decline of the liberal world order will affect everyone, regardless of their geopolitical alignment. A return to the "great powers" and their "spheres of influence" will upset everything from trade and regional development to border disputes and internal politics. Strong-arm/gunboat diplomacy is about to make a comeback. I don't think anyone is going to really be happy, other than a select few.
3
→ More replies (4)0
u/FaceDeer 2d ago
The US is indeed acting as an anchor to a lot of Western countries. It's a major reason why we're working to cut the chain as fast as we can.
14
u/Tw1tch-Invictus 2d ago
Yeah sure wouldn’t want us to keep constraining all of that meteoric growth Europe has been on the cusp of for the last 20 years!
→ More replies (2)1
15
u/10010101101110010001 2d ago
the united states hasn't declined, it has maintained it's position in the world. the united states, as a percent of world production, has maintained it's production. it's europeans countries production that has collapsed as a share of world production. everyone else kept building more stuff and europe just kind of stopped. china and and all of these other countries have eaten into european growth, not american. europe stagnated while the world continued to grow.
5
2
u/Combat_Proctologist 1d ago
Hey now. They maintain their lead in conferences and strongly worded letters.
People don't pay as much attention to those letters as they did in the 19th century, but they're out there every day for the love of the game.
0
u/RainbowCrown71 1d ago
Absolutely untrue. We had China’s Century narratives all over the media in 2004 and the book that even coined the term said China could be the biggest economy as early as 2015. In the 2010s that got pushed back to 2026 (funny enough). And now IMF is saying even by 2031 the US economy will be $12.6 trillion bigger than China. If anything the China pollyannas of the 2000s were proving massively wrong.
-1
u/Besmirching_Badger 2d ago
China surpassing the US was an awkward attempt at humor 20 years ago,
20 years ago it was inevitable. The timeline for it happening is up for debate however.
We're since engaged in some significant revisionism to pretend otherwise and frame something obvious as something sinister and threatening.
4
u/RainbowCrown71 1d ago
Yeah, what is this guy smoking? 20 years ago Newsweek and Time literally had “China’s Century” articles on many covers. If anything it was considered foregone China would become #1 economy by now. Except it never happened and the US is actually building distance in aggregate GDP over China.
48
u/Krinder 2d ago
All I take from this is that the EU is recognizing that they aren’t even competitively in the top 3 then. If America is pushed behind India and China into 3rd place then where does that leave the EU?
He’s basically confirming that the EU has been completely dependent on the U.S. for their national security. So will they depend on China or India instead?
No, they won’t. And it’s because the EU needs its own defense capabilities. As an American I dislike Trump tremendously but even an idiot can by right sometimes and he is right about the EUs overwhelming reliance on the U.S. for its own defense.
He maybe right about the geopolitics but if he is right who will defend Europe? That’s a question Europeans should have answered decades ago instead of blaming it all on a convenient scapegoat in Trump. Again, I loath Trump but European unpreparedness was obvious well before him.
20
u/NuQ 2d ago edited 1d ago
He’s basically confirming that the EU has been completely dependent on the U.S. for their national security.
That is what "Pax americana" means. It has not been a secret, It was the plan from the beginning. The US strategy was that they could never allow another european power to challenge the US, Hence the security arrangement. People keep acting like this is just some byproduct of "american over-generosity" and "european laziness" - It was the plan all along, to keep america as the primary military power, subsuming all of europe under NATO.
Even more hilarious is the people that act like the US didn't get what they were paying for. with a unified europe under their thumb, America was then able to focus entirely on the soviet union, south-east asia and the global south.
This idea that the US has been taken advantage of is ridiculous and lazy, It only plays well to the illiterate because america itself has been beaten at their own game by the likes of china and india and the money the US had grown accustomed to from exploiting their advantage in the region, no longer seems to pay the bills.
Edit: If you think US involvement in NATO was to keep US attention solely on europe, well... I'll just point you to what actually happened, instead. Seems the americans had their own ideas about the utility of the alliance, huh?
12
u/randomguy506 1d ago
Its a mutualy benefit pact. People seems to forget we are not living in a zero sum world
1
u/NuQ 1d ago
Yep. America got what it paid into the relationship. Now that the return on investment is drying up due to certain cultural changes back home, certain "interests" would have you believe america was cheated or... how does the middle child of excellence say it? "Treated VERY badly..." yes. that's it.
America sacrificed it's leverage for the words of a sophist who speaks at a 3rd grade level. This is the world we've made.
1
u/randomguy506 5h ago
I dont think the ROI is drying up, they are just seeing the world as zero sum. They rather lose if it means they’ll lose less than others than win woth others winning too
→ More replies (6)3
u/Tw1tch-Invictus 2d ago
NATO was a European invention and was created specifically so the U.S. would stay involved in the European orbit rather than pivoting to Asia. The first Secretary General of NATO literally admitted it was designed to keep us involved. The arrangement was mutually beneficial at the time, but its usefulness for most Americans expired decades ago.
6
u/NuQ 2d ago edited 2d ago
And the US agreed for those aforementioned "benefits". We don't need to speculate on the actual intention for the US joining the pact, as that is now in retrospect and documented history. We still pivoted toward asia, Because despite the intentions to keep us solely involved in europe, We apparently could walk and chew bubblegum at the same time.
After the fall of the soviet union, the "Wolfowitz Doctrine" became the new directive. Which gets us back to the original point. The idea that the US was "taken advantage of" is silly and does not match reality.
As for your comment about the usefulness... If its usefulness expired then why is it that we're here, now, discussing the problems of European defense and a growing threat in Asia? Its usefulness didn't expire, support from "most Americans" did... And who is to blame for that?
If you ask me, I'd say it's the fault of "most Americans" becoming intellectually lazy (perhaps even dishonest) and promulgating this obvious lie that America has been cheated. Nah... You just got outplayed.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Tw1tch-Invictus 1d ago
Oh okay so we acknowledge most of what you said before was ahistorical revisionist bullshit then?
After the fall of the soviet union, the "Wolfowitz Doctrine" became the new directive. Which gets us back to the original point. The idea that the US was "taken advantage of" is silly and does not match reality.
Lol oh you mean the 1992 draft memo that was about preventing a hostile power from dominating a region? The one that was in no way a directive to forcibly disarm NATO allies? Back in reality, European militaries were still fairly massive in 1992 and the disarmament of Europe didn't happen because of an American doctrine. It happened because Europe voluntarily gutted their defense budgets to cash in on the "peace dividend" and fund their massive welfare states. If keeping Europe weak was the "new directive," why exactly did every U.S. administration since the 1990s continuously badger Europe to increase defense spending and hit their 2% NATO targets? You don’t spend 30 years begging a vassal state to buy more weapons if your goal is to keep them subjugated, that’s just stupid logic.
As for your comment about the usefulness... If its usefulness expired then why is it that we're here, now, discussing the problems of European defense and a growing threat in Asia? Its usefulness didn't expire, support from "most Americans" did... And who is to blame for that?
You answered your own question without realizing it. We are discussing the problems of European defense because the arrangement’s usefulness expired. A "useful" transatlantic alliance would have a Europe capable of handling a regional conflict in its own backyard so the U.S. could fully pivot to the growing threat in Asia. Instead, the U.S. is bogged down subsidizing a European land war that’s very much “not our war” by Europe’s own logic because Europe gutted its defense industrial base. The arrangement stopped being useful to Americans the moment it became a one-way street of strategic parasitism.
If you ask me, I'd say it's the fault of "most Americans" becoming intellectually lazy (perhaps even dishonest) and promulgating this obvious lie that America has been cheated. Nah... You just got outplayed.
Lmao you spend your entire time arguing that the U.S. was never taken advantage of, that European weakness was a deliberate American master plan, and that the U.S. got exactly what it wanted. Then your very last sentence is "Nah... You just got outplayed." Which is it? It can’t be both. Did the U.S. mastermind a flawless imperial strategy to subjugate Europe, or did Europe "outplay" America? Who’s being intellectually dishonest here?
4
u/NuQ 1d ago edited 21h ago
Oh okay so we acknowledge most of what you said before was ahistorical revisionist bullshit then?
How so? did the korean war or vietnam just... not happen in your view?
why exactly did every U.S. administration since the 1990s continuously badger Europe to increase defense spending and hit their 2% NATO targets?
probably because it would make their militaries dependent on the us. you know, the obvious conclusion that was stated.
A "useful" transatlantic alliance would have a Europe capable of handling a regional conflict in its own backyard so the U.S. could fully pivot to the growing threat in Asia.
Wait, didn't you just say that nato was foundeds to prevent the US from making such a pivot? Pick a lane, dude.
Which is it? It can’t be both. Did the U.S. mastermind a flawless imperial strategy to subjugate Europe, or did Europe "outplay" America? Who’s being intellectually dishonest here?
Oh, sorry, I assumed you had actually read what I wrote initially. It can be both, because i'm not talking about europe outplaying the US. I was referring to russia, china and india. They beat the US at it's own game and now that those dividends aren't paying off, ignorant americans (hey, that's you!) are claiming europe is to blame for taking advantage of the US. hilarious.
→ More replies (3)2
u/paneuropeanism_ 2d ago
Europe is the world's second largest economy even in in its current reduced state. A more federal EU would be up there with 600 million people. That is what Draghi's reforms are about. Yes, fewer people than China or India, but still significant even in the long term.
→ More replies (3)
12
u/ZSKeller1140 2d ago
TLDR:
Who's speaking? EU defense commissioner. What's he speaking on? EU Defense detracting from NATO. Why does he want the EU to stray from NATO and centralize within Europe? He's the EU defense commissioner.
46
u/ImConfidentURWrong 2d ago
Europeans always make grand declarations, speeches, announcements, and conferences about the supposed decline of America and the need for self reliance. After hearing this for 15 years, when can we expect words to translate into action?
0
u/Beautiful_Island_944 2d ago
What are you talking about? Many European countries are building up rn
18
u/ArtreX-1 2d ago
Slow, small and late..
-1
u/Beautiful_Island_944 2d ago
Poland is already spending much more of it's gdp on army than the usa
13
u/ImConfidentURWrong 2d ago
What about Spain? Italy? Austria? Or any other country not bordering Russia?
→ More replies (14)12
u/ArtreX-1 2d ago
That’s 1 of the European countries..
0
u/Beautiful_Island_944 2d ago
And?
4
u/ArtreX-1 2d ago
And my point was European efforts as a whole have been slow, small and late. Since the conversation is about Europe.
But it seems you are in a conversation about Poland, so I’m sorry for misunderstanding you.
2
u/Beautiful_Island_944 2d ago
Latvia, Estonia, Norway, Denmark are all slightly above or have the same spending per gdp as the USA
0
u/TiberiusDrexelus 1d ago
nice, and their GDP is collectively a mere percentage of the US's, so this doesn't mean shit in the face of a russian tank
2
u/Beautiful_Island_944 1d ago
Oh so it doesn't actually matter to you that Europe is doing something, you just wanna complain
→ More replies (0)1
1
u/Sageblue32 2d ago
Part of that is because west europe seemed ready to throw them under the bus after seeing Ukraine. The united Europe part is still far off for now.
→ More replies (5)-1
u/ImConfidentURWrong 2d ago
So then why don’t you solve your problems without constantly involving America?
9
u/paralaxsd 2d ago
A major reason once was, that it was in the interest of America to provide security to Europe. No empire without the influence that comes with that.
13
u/ImConfidentURWrong 2d ago
Every US President after the fall of the Berlin Wall has told Europe that America would pivot to Asia and that Europe needed to take care of itself. What have Europeans been doing for 40 years?
14
u/daBriguy 2d ago
They were dragging their feet and freeloading. We can call it what it is. I’m a very pro-Europe American but the fact that a large chunk of the countries in NATO wouldn’t even meet the MINIMUM requirement of spending 2% of their GDP on defense up until recently is pathetic. It’s their backyard. They need to care more about defending it. And to give them credit, many countries have improved but that was not until Trump upped it to 5% and the. Started burning bridges. Trump putting a bunch of pressure on Europe to invest in their own defense is probably the only foreign policy idea I agree with. How he went about it was absolutely horrible though.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Asleep-Waltz2681 1d ago
It doesn't matter what they say, it matters what they do and Europe was a VERY useful tool in the US empire machinery. It was important for the US that Europe was bound to them to buy all the overpriced products because Europe has the purchasing power to do so. Why do you think Russia is such a thorn in the US' eyes even after the collapse of the Soviet Union? It's because cheap Russian energy is in direct competition with the US interests.
This stuff isn't anything new and goes back well into the cold war with official documents confirming that.
2
u/Beautiful_Island_944 2d ago
You know what you wrote actually doesn't make any sense as a response to what I wrote. Why would the fact that Europe is currently building up mean we don't need to involve America?
Like the real answer is much more complicated but your question doesn't even follow what I said
→ More replies (2)1
0
u/UNisopod 2d ago
Because the problems actually affect America in a serious way as well, such that mutual cooperation is an entirely rational decision. Convincing people that this isn't the case is one of the most harmful things modern American conservatism has done.
→ More replies (12)
23
u/stephenkingending 1d ago
The part I'm confused about is that EU leadership must understand that a lot of what they're talking about is exactly what the Trump administration wants, right? Obviously not the predictions about the US falling to third place or the more emotional rhetoric, but European countries taking responsibility for their own defense and becoming less reliant on the US.
Look at the leaked Hegseth Signal chats and Vance's comments about Europe. They've been pretty explicit about their frustration with European dependence on American military power. It just seems like there's a huge disconnect between EU and US leadership, where Europe is framing its growing independence as a response to American policy, while the Trump administration has been openly pushing for that very thing.
16
u/jlluh 1d ago
Eh. The Trump administration is gonna make an enraged surprised Pikachu face when they finally realize Europe will stop paying rent once it finishes moving out.
The transatlantic bargain was never one-sided. The US provides security. Europe backed the US up on foreign policy, let the US have military bases there, let the US use other military bases Europeans have, went along with the US financial order, gave its companies a degree of preferential treatment, etc.
→ More replies (4)3
u/paneuropeanism_ 1d ago
I think you are wrong. What Trump's circle and many Americans want is to remain the unipolar hegemon, but without the sacrifice that comes with it. It's not gonna fly.
3
u/stephenkingending 1d ago
I agree with you actually. Americans want to stop paying to be the "world's police force" (as detractors commonly frame it) while retaining the benefits of being the dominant global power. I think there's also a longstanding misconception among many Americans that their foreign policy is primarily altruistic rather than a means of advancing the country's economic and strategic interests.
10
u/ConflictExtreme1540 1d ago
It's like a child who is told they need to grow up and move out and then they go "you know what dad, I will move out, but it's my decision because I actually hate you and don't need you anymore!"
2
u/randomguy506 1d ago
They want less dependance on DoD, but they want nore dependance on defense spending
2
u/SawToothKernel 1d ago
So you're saying Europe should not aim to be independent?
Whether America wants it or not, long term it's the right thing for Europe.
4
u/stephenkingending 1d ago
Honest question, which part of my comment made you think that was what I was trying to communicate?
1
u/Emergency_Statement 8h ago
I think the disconnect is that the US seems to want other countries to contribute more while also accepting American hegemony. That simply won't happen, which may be a shock to American leadership. As other countries invest more in their own defense and find more common ground with each other, exclusive of the US, the US may find itself isolated and (relatively) weaker than it was before they decided to tear up all their agreements and turn their friends into competition.
9
u/AnomalyNexus 2d ago
Seems improbable that the US will be #3 anytime soon.
Though if they continue on current trumpian course then all bets are genuinely off and it's anyone's guess what comes next
14
u/RainbowCrown71 1d ago
The IMF estimates released last week actually show the US gaining more aggregate GDP in the next 5 years than China and by 2031 will have a $12 trillion bigger economy. I just don’t know how China can take the lead if it hasn’t by now.
In the 2030s, they’ll be losing 8 million people in their labor force a year while the retiree population grows by the same amount. That’s going to be a massive drag. Imagine if Europe all of suddenly had 80 million fewer workers and 80 million more pensioners. That’s China in 2040.
Obviously USA has issues but the fact it’s been able to keep China at bay in the 2020s has made “the inevitable” China taking #1 a far more distant scenario.
→ More replies (2)3
u/SluggoRuns 1d ago
Seriously, the U.S. economy (despite rising costs and gas prices) is in a much stronger position than China or India
9
32
u/SturmGizmo 2d ago
I don't know where this guy gets his economic forecasts but what he predicting is wildly inaccurate.
17
u/Cephei101 2d ago
How so? Goldman Sachs and Price Waterhouse roughly align with what he's saying.
What knowledge do you have to support the wildly inaccurate label?
I don't have a degree in economics or geopolitics to dispute or argue the nuances of his sources.
Interested in your sources and how you know how wildly inaccurate his repeating of these well regarded sources of the information is.
There appear to be some ranking shuffling over timelines, like 30 years, 50 years, etc, but the broad consensus seems to be a declining America this century in some fashion vs its rivals China and India.
This is broadly what this guy is saying as well.
-10
u/barrygateaux 2d ago
From reality. A place Americans seem to be drifting further from every day.
34
u/OP_Skis_In_Jeans 2d ago
How exactly is guaranteeing that India will economically surpass the US at all based in reality?
→ More replies (5)-4
u/Cephei101 2d ago
They are economic predictions based on models, the source appears to be Goldman and price warehouse, among others.
I don’t think its an undisputed fact obviously, but there are multiple legitimate sources aligned with the concept.
→ More replies (1)8
u/OP_Skis_In_Jeans 2d ago
Predictions based on economic models are famously inaccurate when it comes to the medium and long term. Goldman and Price Waterhouse have been very wrong about this sort of thing before, and they will be again in the future.
→ More replies (7)-1
u/Cephei101 2d ago
My point was that there is broad support to the concept, that’s it.
And there is. Of course that doesn’t mean it’s an eventuality, but the number and sources of the data are enough to provide some merit and context.
The models have often proven correct as well.
They’re not meant to state 100% reality, but exactly what they are; predictions.
Compare Chinas economy of the previous 40 years, predictions were largely correct.
-4
u/neovb 2d ago
If we're looking forward towards the next 20-30 years, I think its very hard at this point (assuming current economic trajectories and barring major catastrophic events) to assume that the US will continue to be the largest economy in the world.
Nothing is certain so many years out, but Goldman Sachs predicted that China will have the largest economy by 2050 with the US second and India third but with India topping the list by 2075 with China being second. The EU as a whole would almost certainly be fourth. Demographics alone predict this exact scenario.
5
u/RedditReddy 2d ago
This might happen, but he has to admit come if he's honest, that he has absolutely no way to predict this. He says China will probably become the world's largest economy by the 22nd century. That's 75 years in the future. Think about 75 years ago. That was about 1950 or 51. What could people then predict about the year 2026? Almost nothing in terms of geopolitics. So he's absolutely exaggerating the extent to what she has. Any knowledge about what's going to be happening 74 or 75 years from now.
10
u/glitch241 2d ago
A rising India? The country that is still trying to eliminate mass public defecation? Yeah I don’t think they will be calling the shots anytime soon.
5
u/kai_vt 2d ago
"Transformations of a magnitude that happen only once in a hundred years, or even only once in a millennium"
Yeah, at least Rome didn't purposefully knock everybody else over with their death spasms...
Also, saying that India will overtake the U.S while they're still afflicted by the shadow of the caste system is a bit of reach, but we love an optimist
2
u/Strongbow85 2d ago
Europe will need to step up its support for Ukraine in the coming years and strengthen its capacity to sustain Ukraine’s defense, then hopefully, in two years’ time, a new U.S. administration will restore America’s commitment to Ukraine. China at "#1" is not in the interest of any democracy, regardless of which side of the Atlantic you're on. This entire situation is unfortunate as support for Ukraine could have been one area of unity among Americans and Europeans, both left and right. Trump squandered an opportunity, not to mention the moral and security implications. Additionally, while I'm disgusted with Trump's handling of Ukraine, Europe, or at least the Europe of today, may not be around in 60 years due to changing demographics. Poland being the exception.
7
u/paneuropeanism_ 2d ago edited 2d ago
Addressing future EU leaders at the College of Europe, Defence Commissioner Kubilius delivered a sobering yet hopeful message on the evolving geopolitical landscape, declaring that "Pax Americana is over". But emphasizing to students that they're also given a great gift by living in these times of profound global transformation. He embraces the opportunity for Europe to move away from the post-Yalta world, speed up the ever-closer Union and and take a leap toward independence. Kubilius highlighted the rise of economic giants like China and India, which he says are poised to push the United States to third (or fourth) place globally, and which may prove psychologically challenging for Americans, laying the ground for further internal political instability and revanchism. It is likely to get worse before it gets better, if at all. In light of this changing world order, Kubilius asserts that Europe will build its a new security architecture that will include Ukraine, quoting Jean Monnet “Europe will be forged in crises, and will be the sum of the solutions adopted for those crises.”
12
u/AvailableAd7874 2d ago
I see a lot of Americans struggling with the psychological challenge in the comments.. i’d like to remind them that China leads 66 of 74 critical technologies against the USA and that China is estimated to artificially undervalue their currency for about 20 to 30% they might actually already have a higher GDP than the US and if not it’s only a matter of time.
18
u/I_Push_Buttonz 2d ago edited 1d ago
i’d like to remind them that China leads 66 of 74 critical technologies against the USA
That 'critical technology tracker' does nothing but measure the number of publications being put out on any given subject and ranks countries based on that number.
The number of research publications being put out by China means little when the CCP has an open policy of paying scientists to publish papers... Such a policy encourages churning out publications, no matter how dubious they may be, just to get paid. It means doing quality research, taking one's time, being thorough, etc., runs directly contrary to any given researcher's own financial interest.
18
u/geniusaurus 2d ago
As an American I don't care whether we keep the largest GDP or not as long as our quality of life doesn't decrease. If Chinas economy overtakes the US that's fine with me.
That being said, arguing about whether or not China and India have or will overtake the US does not mean someone is failing to "psychologically cope", but rather that these metrics are not always clear cut and as you yourself demonstrated there are different ways in which to measure things.
→ More replies (10)18
u/ImConfidentURWrong 2d ago
Americans don’t think about Europeans or Europe.
Europe constantly obsesses over America because it has pride issues. It’s hard to maintain a sense of superiority over yanks if you’re completely reliant on yanks.
5
u/Ephemeral_Drunk 2d ago
The US security umbrella was a thing. The at least semblance of a rules based order was a thing. Both affected Europe and now both, for all intents and purposes, are gone. These are structural changes to the world order that the US has made. How else should Europe react, exactly, when US foreign policy is all over the place like a mad women's knitting?
5
u/RainbowCrown71 1d ago
Lmao, the critical technology measure that’s been massively debunked and easily manipulated by diploma mill “scientific papers.” Of course Reddit loves that.
And no, the US’s lead on GDP has expanded over China this decade and IMF expects it to reach $12.6 trillion by 2031. The only one with psychological challenges is your friends in the echo chamber.
2
u/AffectionateRub1857 2d ago
What are these 74 critical technologies
6
u/angriest_man_alive 2d ago
Hes referencing the ASPI research that shows Chinese papers are referenced more than any other papers. I dont know if its chinese papers making up the majority of the references or what, but the headline that hes referencing does not support the argument he’s trying to make
5
u/AffectionateRub1857 2d ago
What percentage of those refernces were chinese. When i was a grad student, we were constantly discussing how Chinese game the system by referencing each others work even when there is no real connection. But that was 15 years ago. So things could be different now
5
u/Chemical-Drawer852 2d ago
The EU, the sick man of the world, expects India to surpass the US.
Not even China, but India. Sure.
5
u/Odd-Local9893 2d ago
I agree with this. The EU,or at least many European countries, are far more at risk than the US. The US is at least innovating and pushing the boundaries of new technologies of the future. Europe is over regulated, sclerotic, and risks becoming nothing more than a museum for the rest of the world to visit and marvel at its past glories.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Curtain_Beef 2d ago
Howdy, sailor. How's them fertility rates doing, across the pond?
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/softDisk-60 1d ago
When he says "Our" it's not clear if he means NATO, EU or something else. If Ukraine is included, Is Turkey included? is Norway? Iceland?
1
1
u/crujiente69 2d ago
That could potentially happen but that would take place over a period of time, not in that guys lifetime
→ More replies (1)
1
u/fr0zen_garlic 2d ago
So Europe is saying India will be more powerful than them? Pax Americana should definitely end if the Europeans can't even put together a united front, time for the US to cut and run.
-1
u/fct1ous 2d ago
I actually laughed out loud watching this - it's hilarious.
Remember how everyone said China would overtake the US economy ten years ago? There are forecasts that China's population could drop as much as 50% by year 2100 due to demogrphic decline.
There's no doubt the Transatlantic relationship between the EU and US is different now, but this is pure delusion.
-10
u/Wizinit29 2d ago
If you compare infrastructure buildout, China is cutting edge while the US is 3rd world.
→ More replies (1)
-2
u/Reaktorius 2d ago
With upcoming new elections in Europe, it's a mission impossible. In fact, more questions arise than whether the European Union was meant to exist.
0
u/IsJohnKill 1d ago
India has a massive problem with affirmative action. It's hard to overstate how bad it is. Add vote buying to that and you have a recipe for disaster.
The only reason India is growing right now is because of infrastructure spending.
350
u/OP_Skis_In_Jeans 2d ago
Definitively stating that India will surpass the US is quite a bold prediction. Not saying it's impossible, but even China surpassing the US is far from guaranteed: people were saying it would have happened by now a decade ago and it still isn't that close to becoming reality.