Global Power Plays

China's dean on US decline: reading the leverage shift, not the spin

Fudan University scholar Wu Xinbo argues US global primacy is waning. That claim signals shifts in institutional leverage—narrative, economic ties and alliances—not just a change in rhetoric.

Why this matters: Wu Xinbo is the dean of the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai and a leading Chinese researcher on the US.

What happened

Wu Xinbo, dean of Fudan University's Institute of International Studies, told the South China Morning Post that US dominance is fading. He frames this as a structural shift driven by recent US foreign-policy decisions, changing alliance dynamics, and the relative gains of other powers. The public line is simple: a rising multipolarity. The analytic point worth extracting is less the slogan and more the levers that produce diminishing US primacy—economic interdependence, alliance cohesion, and institutional credibility.

Who gains leverage

China gains diplomatic and strategic leverage from perceptions of US retrenchment: narrative control in global fora, stronger bilateral ties with non-Western states, and bargaining power in trade and technology disputes. Regional actors also gain room to pursue diversified relationships rather than automatic alignment with Washington. Private-sector actors—exporters, financial institutions and technology firms—pick up transactional advantages when geopolitical risk reconfigures supply chains and standards-setting.

What mechanism is operating

The working mechanism is a composite of reputation effects and material interdependence. US policy choices that unsettle allies lower the threshold for hedging, which amplifies rival states’ soft power. Economic coupling—trade, investment and supply chains—translates diplomatic signals into concrete leverage: states with indispensable markets or critical inputs can convert ties into policy concessions without firing a shot. At the institutional level, weakened US leadership reduces willingness among partners to back Washington-led initiatives, shifting agenda-setting to alternative platforms.

Why it matters

This matters because shifts in leverage reshape outcomes that affect everyday lives: trade costs, access to technology, and the credibility of international rules that protect consumers and investors. If partners hedge away from the US, coalition-based responses to crises (sanctions, security guarantees, climate action) become harder to organize or less credible. For domestic audiences, the result can be policy drift—markets and legislatures reacting to external instability with higher costs and slower reforms.

What to watch next

Watch US alliance signaling (defense commitments, joint exercises, diplomatic visits), China’s outreach to middle powers, and concrete economic moves—new trade agreements, investment pledges, or alternative financial infrastructures. Track whether partners visibly diversify suppliers or voting behavior in institutions like the UN and IMF changes. Those observable shifts will show whether this is declaratory rivalry or a durable reallocation of global leverage.

LensGlobal Power Plays
TypeReporting
PublishedJuly 2, 2026
Read time3 min read
SourceSouth China Morning Post – China
Source attribution

This is NOLIGARCHY.US analysis of reporting first published by South China Morning Post – China. The source reporting remains the factual starting point; this page applies the site's eight-lens civic analysis layer.

Read the original at South China Morning Post – China
Reader paths

Keep drilling through the topic map.

analysisnews analysisglobalaccountability
Subscribe for moreExplore this lensBrowse all issues