The Commentary Magazine Podcast
Episode: Breaking the China
Date: December 9, 2025
Host: John Podhoretz, with Abe Greenwald, Christine Rosen, Eliana Johnson

Episode Overview

This episode centers on the evolution, contradictions, and current confusion in U.S. policy toward China, particularly in the context of recent moves by the Trump administration concerning trade, AI technology, and national security. The panel discusses the increasing threat posed by China to American military and economic security, the history of U.S.-China relations, and the schizophrenic approach from Washington that appears caught between short-term economic gain and long-term strategic peril. The discussion is candid, critical, and broad, covering everything from AI chips to university espionage, the weakening of Congressional oversight, and political opportunism.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Correction and Context: The National Security Strategy's Authorship and Blind Spots

[02:44]

• John Podhoretz clarifies a previous error about the national security strategy's authorship, crediting Michael Anton rather than Elbridge Colby.
• He emphasizes a "paucity" in discussion about the threat from China, recalling his own decades-old warnings about America's misguided hopes to integrate China into the world system.

"This is a long-term issue for me... the answer has been pretty conclusively given in the negative."
— John Podhoretz, [04:05]

2. The Nvidia Deal What Does It Mean?

[05:59]–[07:22]

• Trump announced approval for exporting Nvidia AI chips to China (not the top-tier, but still powerful). The U.S. government gets a 25% cut from every sale.
• Panel is concerned that supplying China with such tech could boost their AI ambitions and weaken U.S. strategic advantage.

"We are about to provide China with the tools to advance its AI ambitions. What's going on, Christine?"
— John Podhoretz, [06:52]

3. China's Real-World Edge and U.S. Strategic Failures

[07:22]–[10:08]

• Christine Rosen highlights that China already dominates open-source AI and is ahead in the field.
• She laments the elimination of the Office of Net Assessment—a body critical to long-term strategic planning regarding China.
• The Office's reports detail just how vulnerable the U.S. is to Chinese countermeasures.

“In the Pentagon's war games against China, we lose every time.”
— Christine Rosen, quoting Pete Hegseth, [08:49]

4. Historical Parallels: Japan in the 1980s vs. China Now

[12:19]–[15:08]

• Podhoretz draws a comparison to the semiconductor battles with Japan, noting that while Japan was a U.S. ally, China is decidedly not.
• Difference: Japan cooperated under duress; China is an economic rival at best, and likely an enemy.

"But Japan was our ally, was never our enemy ... China is not our ally. It may not be our enemy as we define it, but it is our competitor. It is our main [adversary]."
— John Podhoretz, [14:28]

• Christine Rosen counters more directly:

"I would define it as our enemy. Any nation state that puts malware into the computer infrastructure at our military bases ... is an enemy. That is enemy behavior."
— Christine Rosen, [15:08]

5. Schizophrenic U.S. Policy: Nationalism vs. Trade Deals

[15:41]–[16:16], [27:54]–[29:43]

• The conversation repeatedly returns to the contradiction in the Trump administration’s policies: calling for renewed industrial and defense base, while simultaneously enabling China’s technological rise by selling critical technology.
• Both Podhoretz and Rosen call out the lack of coherent long-term strategy, and the panel questions Trump's prioritization of "deals" over genuine trade or security strategy.

“Trump wants to rebuild America’s industrial base... and then simultaneously, he's going to sell our best chip to China in mass numbers, which could have been prevented. The schizophrenia here is, like, maddening.”
— John Podhoretz, [16:07]

"He just wants to say, I made a deal ... but he doesn't believe in a free market. His industrial policy is putting the government involved directly in the hand of decisions that the free market wants."
— Christine Rosen, [30:10]–[30:18]

6. Soft Power and Espionage on Campus

[16:30]–[17:55]

• Eliana Johnson describes the recent arrest of Chinese students at the University of Michigan, alleged to be spying for China.
• The conversation expands to the widespread infiltration of Chinese influence in American universities, as well as inadequate official response.

"Every university in China essentially is an arm of the government... The partnership at the University of Michigan turned into a major national security issue."
— Eliana Johnson, [16:36]–[17:08]

7. Tilt in Republican Stance: Economics over Security

[17:55]–[19:33]

• Johnson points out a noticeable softening of U.S. government rhetoric on China—from adversarial, Reagan-esque framing to a focus on commercial ties.
• Treasury Secretary Scott Besant’s gaffe at a summit, referring to China as an ally, encapsulates this shift.

"The language on China was markedly different ... It's primarily focused on trade, commerce and those things, which is a departure."
— Eliana Johnson, [17:55]

8. Critique of Trade Policy: From Neoconservatism to "Global Neoliberalism"

[22:51]–[25:38]

• Podhoretz and Greenwald discuss how the Trump administration’s approach, while pitched as nationalist, in effect embraces neoliberal logic when it comes to China and trade.
• The panel points out that neocons, typically criticized for “utopian” policy, are now the voices prioritizing the U.S. national interest regarding China.

“Neocons are standing here both on terms of Israel, Ukraine, and China defending the American national interest ... and we're accused of being like unpatriotic ... They’re the ones who are going for short term gain with long term consequences.”
— John Podhoretz, [24:23]

"Why does the Trump administration think that China is going to play by the rules when it comes to trade or Russia for that matter?"
— Abe Greenwald, [25:16]

9. Lack of Innovation in U.S. Defense Strategy

[26:08]–[27:54]

• Rosen argues that the Trump administration has failed to update or innovate in military procurement and weapons systems, missing a critical chance to catch up or leap ahead of China despite the rhetoric about military modernization.

"To truly reform the sclerotic bureaucracy ... and to make sure we’re ready for the next war ... that requires really innovative thinking, new kinds of weapons ... I feel like we’re lacking the leadership at the very top."
— Christine Rosen, [26:38]–[27:54]

10. "Deals," Tariffs, and Interest Group Politics

[33:16]–[36:22]

• Podhoretz and Rosen explain how tariffs operate more as political patronage tools than as coherent economic policy.
• The administration, they argue, is caught in "horse trading," redistributing tariff revenue to bail out harmed constituencies (e.g. farmers), in a pattern similar to local machine politics.

"Trump is playing a classic corrupt urban pol game. It’s a version of the spoil system ... It's by the way, according to what I've been reading, it's not like the subsidies that he's going to provide back to the farmers … are going to make them whole."
— John Podhoretz, [36:29]

11. Polling, Inflation, and Political Messaging

[37:26]–[41:32]

• The group analyzes shifts in economic messaging as inflation and strategic uncertainty over tariffs take their toll on public opinion.
• There's skepticism about Trump's ability to persuasively defend his record or policies in the face of worsening affordability.

"The early results are coming in, people are not happy. And his solutions are always these weird sort of rearranging deck chair on the Titanic moves … voters look at that and say, wait, so farmers are getting a bailout, but my electrical bills are still really super high and so is the cost of groceries."
— Christine Rosen, [41:32]

12. Supreme Court, Independent Agencies, and the Fed

[44:50]–[49:13]

• The panel briefly pivots to the Supreme Court case regarding agency independence ("Humphrey's Executor"), the powers of the President to fire independent agency heads, and the possible impact on the Federal Reserve.
• Concerns surface about Trump’s view that the Fed should be subject to more overt political/Presidential control.

"If you have a certain view of the Constitution, Humphrey's Executor was a terrible decision ... The problem, it's like the poison chalice that Trump represents ... he will use the power in the worst possible way."
— John Podhoretz, [46:56]

13. Congress: Dysfunction, Extremism, and Social Media

[52:15]–[58:52]

• Podhoretz and the group discuss the increasingly performative nature of Congressional politics, as exemplified by Jasmine Crockett, drawing parallels with Republican extremists.
• Blame is cast on nationalized campaigns and fundraising enabled by social media.

"Everything is about the introduction of social media and high, high broadband … things that used to be local ... are now all national. They can all be made national in five seconds."
— John Podhoretz, [57:18]

14. CARE, Anti-Terror Legislation, and the Complexity of Designation

[60:08]–[62:47]

• With states like Texas and Florida seeking to designate CAIR as a terrorist organization, Congress is considering bills to do the same for the Muslim Brotherhood.
• Panel notes Constitutional complications and the challenge of navigating free speech, religious freedom, and national security.

"It is something to watch."
— John Podhoretz, [61:27]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the U.S.-China Rivalry:
  "In the Pentagon's war games against China, we lose every time." — Christine Rosen [08:49]

• On Trump/Biden Industrial Policy:
  "The schizophrenia here is, like, maddening." — John Podhoretz [16:07]

• On the U.S. Exporting AI Tech:
  “We're about to give it to them. I don't understand the logic of it. And there is no logic of it." — John Podhoretz [29:03]

• On Congressional Dysfunction:
  "Congress ... is kind of not up for the job." — Christine Rosen [52:15]

• On Political Graft via Tariffs:
  "Trump is playing a classic corrupt urban pol game. It’s a version of the spoil system." — John Podhoretz [36:29]

• On China’s Soft Power in U.S. Academia:
  "Every university in China is essentially an arm of the government." — Eliana Johnson [16:36]

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [04:05] — Long-term warnings about China as a threat.
• [06:52] — Trump export deal for Nvidia chips to China.
• [08:49] — Office of Net Assessment/war games: U.S. loses to China.
• [12:19] — Lessons from the 1980s Japan semiconductor battle.
• [15:08] — Christine Rosen: “China is our enemy.”
• [26:38] — U.S. military procurement and innovation shortcomings.
• [30:10] — Internal contradictions of Trump’s “deal”-oriented policy.
• [36:29] — Analysis of tariffs as patronage.
• [41:32] — Voter reaction: bailouts for some, high prices for all.
• [46:56] — Administrative state and the Supreme Court.
• [52:15] — Performance politics in Congress, Jasmine Crockett.
• [61:27] — Legislative attempts to designate Muslim Brotherhood/CAIR as terrorist entities.
• [63:02] — Book recommendations: Chip War by Chris Miller; Why Congress by Phil Wallach.

Book Recommendations

• Chip War by Chris Miller (on semiconductor rivalry, updated intro for paperback)
• Why Congress by Phil Wallach (deep dive into Congressional dysfunction and possible reforms)

Closing Thoughts

The episode frames current U.S. China-policy as a "schizophrenic" mix of transactional deal-making and nationalist rhetoric, with neither side squaring up to the long-term strategic risk. The hosts bemoan the lack of substantive vision, innovation, and coherent national policy, expressing grave concern about American security, the politicization of trade, and the ongoing weakness of Congress. All the while, they provide significant historical and policy context—along with their signature, biting wit.

Recommended Listen for:
Anyone concerned about U.S.-China relations, the pitfalls of industrial and trade policy, the intersection of tech and national security, or the state of American political institutions.

Notable Moments:

• The blunt assessment of U.S. military war-gaming with China ("we lose every time").
• The description of U.S. tariff policy as political spoils.
• Candid takedown of performative, social media-driven politics in Congress.

For deeper dives, check out "Chip War" and "Why Congress," as recommended by Christine Rosen.