• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Michael Pettis"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie China"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "China’s Foreign Relations"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "AP",
  "programs": [
    "Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "China"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economy",
    "Security",
    "Global Governance"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Holding Out Hope For a Multipolar World

Strange as it may seem, many years of miracle growth are always the “easy” part for a poor country. The tough part is usually the subsequent adjustment needed to accommodate the changes generated over the miracle years.

Link Copied
By Michael Pettis
Published on Jul 25, 2013
Program mobile hero image

Program

Asia

The Asia Program in Washington studies disruptive security, governance, and technological risks that threaten peace, growth, and opportunity in the Asia-Pacific region, including a focus on China, Japan, and the Korean peninsula.

Learn More

Source: New York Times

As a "small-r" republican I would much prefer to see a multipolar world than one easily dominated by an imperial U.S., but I am skeptical about this happening within my lifetime. As the Pew report suggests, our predictions of the rise and fall of dominant powers tend to be driven more by popular excitability than by historical logic. For example in the 1930s, most people believed that Germany would overtake the U.S. In the 1960s it was obvious the U.S.S.R. would do so, and in the 1980s Japan’s rise to global dominance seemed inevitable.

There are however few cases in history, and none in modern history, of a less open power replacing a more open one. This is probably not a coincidence. The great strengths of the U.S., and fundamental to its rise, include its ability to adjust rapidly and its enormous creativity. It is hard to believe these qualities will become less important in the future.

China, on the other hand, faces tremendous challenges that will determine how successful its 30 years of economic reform will have been. This is not to say that China cannot meet the challenges, but it does mean that the jury is still out.

Strange as it may seem, many years of miracle growth are always the “easy” part for a poor country. The tough part is usually the subsequent adjustment needed to accommodate the changes generated over the miracle years. Few countries have done so successfully. As someone who loves living in China I hope that the country is able to open up its society, create the kinds of institutional reforms that encourage innovation and creativity, and allow the necessary cultural and intellectual space for its people, but for now I worry that unless Europe recovers its elan the days of a truly multipolar world are still far away.

This article was originally published in the New York Times.

About the Author

Michael Pettis

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie China

Michael Pettis is a nonresident senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. An expert on China’s economy, Pettis is professor of finance at Peking University’s Guanghua School of Management, where he specializes in Chinese financial markets. 

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    The Plaza Accord and Its Relevance for China

      Michael Pettis

  • Commentary
    Who Paid for China’s Last Debt Cleanup, and Who Will Pay for the Next?

      Michael Pettis

Michael Pettis
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie China
Michael Pettis
EconomySecurityGlobal GovernanceEast AsiaChina

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Price Analysis Shows China Holds Upper Hand in Russia Gas Supply Talks

    A leak of Russian gas price data helps establish that China is paying Russia far less than Central Asian countries and Gazprom’s former European customers.

      • Sergey Vakulenko

      Sergey Vakulenko

  • Commentary
    The Spring and Autumn of Chinese Politics

    China’s political future will be shaped between now and next October. As the Communist Party enters its intense “campaign season” to prepare for a major political transition in 2027, reading Beijing's actions and responses may become more difficult as domestic politics weigh on its behavior more than usual.

      • Damien Ma

      Damien Ma

  • Men in suits watching people dancing
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Central Asia Wants U.S. Investments. It Is Less Sure About U.S. Conditions.

    Rubio’s recent visit brought welcome attention, but more capital requires governance changes that may be a hard sell for regional governments.

      Jennifer B. Murtazashvili

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Why Has Tokyo’s Response to Kremlin Challenges Been So Muted?

    Japan’s long-term security policy is driven by concerns about China, and there is little appetite for (or interest in) pursuing a confrontation with Moscow.  

      James D.J. Brown

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Containing Escalation in the Black Sea

    Russia is testing the waters of NATO’s mutual defense clause. What do strikes in Romanian territorial waters mean for the alliance’s posture toward Moscow?

      Dimitar Bechev

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.