The Rivalry Peril: How Great Power Competition Threatens Peace and Weakens Democracy

Episode: Lawfare Daily: ‘The Rivalry Peril’ with Van Jackson and Michael Brennis
Release Date: March 13, 2025
Host: Tyler McBrien
Guests: Van Jackson, Professor of International Relations at Victoria University of Wellington; Michael Brennis, Associate Director of the Brady Johnson Program in Grand Strategy and Lecturer in History at Yale University

Introduction

In this episode of The Lawfare Podcast, hosts Tyler McBrien engage in an in-depth discussion with Van Jackson and Michael Brennis about their new book, "The Rivalry: How Great Power Competition Threatens Peace and Weakens Democracy." The conversation delves into the nuances of great power competition, particularly focusing on the US-China relationship, and critiques the prevailing narrative within US foreign policy establishments.

Defining Great Power Competition

Tyler McBrien initiates the conversation by seeking clarity on the term "great power competition." Michael Brennis explains that while great power rivalry is a historical phenomenon dating back to the 16th and 17th centuries, its modern interpretation as a framework for understanding current global affairs is problematic.

Michael Brennis [02:16]: "Great power competition as a framework for understanding the US China relationship today is bad. And it's bad because... policymakers have yet to account for [the resulting] instability."

Historical Context

Brenniss elaborates on the historical instances of great power competition, such as the struggles between the British, French, Dutch, and Spanish empires over colonies and resources. He highlights how the Cold War served as a dominant framework for contemporary understandings of great power rivalry, emphasizing the ideological and military struggle between the US and the Soviet Union.

Michael Brennis [04:10]: "The Cold War becomes the framing for understanding great power competition today... it's creating a lot of instability and violence."

Current US-China Rivalry

Van Jackson discusses the alignment between US national security institutions and the concept of singular great power rivals, noting that the current focus on China mirrors Cold War-era dynamics.

Van Jackson [12:02]: "Orienting yourself in a primacist way toward the world while the world is becoming more multipolar is just setting us up for like an explosion or an implosion."

Threat Inflation and Misperceptions

A significant portion of the discussion centers on the perceived inflation of the China threat. Michael Brennis argues that the narrative portraying China as an existential threat to freedom and the liberal world order is exaggerated and not fully supported by evidence.

Michael Brennis [17:55]: "China poses a series of threats... But do these present collectively, do they represent an existential threat to freedom? No."

He further explains how this inflated perception leads to policies that inadvertently fuel Chinese nationalism and antagonism.

Michael Brennis [21:24]: "It's just wrong. But two, it foments bad policies and gives license to the worst actors in our political culture."

Impact on US Society and Democracy

Van Jackson and Brennis explore how the pursuit of great power competition adversely affects domestic policies and societal cohesion in the United States. They critique the overwhelming focus on military spending at the expense of social welfare and job creation.

Van Jackson [36:03]: "The framework that justifies it is pouring money into the defense establishment... That's capital intensive."

Michael Brennis adds that this militaristic approach weakens democratic institutions and exacerbates social divisions.

Michael Brennis [39:50]: "You just get animosity towards Asian Americans, Chinese Americans... it's xenophobic and nationalist in many ways."

Policy Recommendations

The guests propose alternative strategies to the current framework of great power competition. They advocate for a policy shift towards détente, emphasizing mutual coexistence and cooperation rather than zero-sum rivalry.

Van Jackson [26:43]: "There has to be room to relate differently and that kind of changes everything that's possible... policies that would be cooperative, stabilizing, create mutual prosperity."

They also suggest significant reductions in defense spending and reallocation of resources to sectors that promote domestic well-being and economic stability.

Van Jackson [43:33]: "Establishing a detente with China, relating to them in a way that doesn't involve jingoism, but involves military restraint..."

Political Viability and Challenges

Addressing the political landscape, Van Jackson criticizes the Democratic Party for lacking a coherent and powerful foreign policy strategy. He urges Democrats to embrace a more pacifist and cooperative foreign policy stance to distinguish themselves from militaristic approaches.

Van Jackson [43:33]: "The Democrats should take them up... create a new coalition... oppose militarism in all of its forms."

Michael Brennis concurs, highlighting the need for Democrats to prioritize domestic issues to build a strong coalition that can support more rational and peaceful foreign policies.

Michael Brennis [44:29]: "There needs to be a coalition the Democrats can create out of the complete disaster of the 2024 election that wins people in domestic policy first and foremost."

Conclusion

In their concluding remarks, the guests emphasize the urgency of restoring rationality to American foreign policy to prevent further destabilization and societal harm.

Van Jackson [53:00]: "The urgent task is to restore sanity or rationality to American foreign policy... everything else is downstream of that."

They advocate for a significant departure from the current trajectory of great power competition, urging policymakers to adopt strategies that promote peace, stability, and democratic resilience.

Final Thoughts

The episode provides a compelling critique of the prevailing narrative surrounding great power competition, particularly between the US and China. Van Jackson and Michael Brennis argue for a fundamental reevaluation of foreign policy priorities, emphasizing the need for cooperation over rivalry to ensure both global peace and the strengthening of democratic institutions.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps:

• Van Jackson [01:36]: "Orienting yourself in a primacist way toward the world while the world is becoming more multipolar is just setting us up for like an explosion or an implosion."

• Michael Brennis [02:16]: "Great power competition as a framework for understanding the US China relationship today is bad."

• Michael Brennis [17:55]: "China poses a series of threats... But do these present collectively, do they represent an existential threat to freedom? No."

• Van Jackson [12:02]: "China was just too perfect as the Soviet Union 2.0."

• Michael Brennis [39:50]: "You just get animosity towards Asian Americans, Chinese Americans... it's xenophobic and nationalist in many ways."

• Van Jackson [26:43]: "There has to be room to relate differently and that kind of changes everything that's possible."

• Michael Brennis [44:29]: "There needs to be a coalition the Democrats can create out of the complete disaster of the 2024 election that wins people in domestic policy first and foremost."

• Van Jackson [53:00]: "The urgent task is to restore sanity or rationality to American foreign policy... everything else is downstream of that."

This summary encapsulates the critical analysis presented by Van Jackson and Michael Brennis regarding the detrimental effects of the current approach to great power competition, advocating for a strategic pivot towards more cooperative and domestically focused policies.