Uri Dadush
{
"authors": [
"Uri Dadush"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [
"Transatlantic Cooperation"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [
"Eurasia in Transition"
],
"regions": [
"East Asia",
"China",
"Western Europe",
"France",
"Asia",
"Europe",
"North America",
"United States"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"EU",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Wounded Giants
French President Sarkozy’s request for Chinese money in support of the euro rescue symbolized three historic shifts in great power relations: the fragility and endangerment of the European project, the ascendance of China, and the beginning of the end of the American era.
Source: L'Espresso

It is tempting to read this chain of circumstances as an aberration, the result of a giant financial crisis that happened to hit the United States and Europe especially hard but will eventually fade. That complacent interpretation, however, ignores the deep fault lines exposed by the crisis in the United States and its allies, and China’s steady and remarkable progress over the last 30 years.
On the other hand, the power shift symbolized by Sarkozy's call is not cataclysmic. It does not, for example, signal the end of the United States as the world's military superpower. Moreover, shifts in great power relations are not new, nor have they invariably been the harbinger of disastrous conflicts. But Sarkozy’s call does mark a rapid decline in America's and Europe's ability to shape world events. And history has repeatedly shown that, even when they are peaceful, such transitions are resisted, breed miscalculations, and can spawn enormous tensions.
In the case of the historic power shift towards China, there are three specific reasons why Sarkozy's call to Hu Jintao should worry everyone, beginning with the Chinese.
First, there is no precedent for a great power to advance as quickly as China has. China's GDP has grown by a factor of about ten in 30 years, a feat that had taken previous emerging powers a century or two. The pace of the transition is compounded by the suddenness, severity, and protracted nature of the financial and sovereign debt crisis that has hit the United States and its traditional allies. Mind-sets, politics, and institutions react with a long lag to economic shifts. There is no ready mechanism for China to help Europe, for example, without upsetting the power balance at the IMF.
Second, China is the country least ready for the transition. For the first time in history, the world's largest economy (China’s GDP is set to overtake the United States in a few years) will be a poor country, one whose per capita income is today about one-eighth that of the United States. This means that China will remain more focused on its own development than on providing global public goods, so the priority it gives to setting carbon emission targets, achieving currency convertibility, privatizing its banks, and bailing out its neighbors (especially the rich ones) will not be what many would wish.
Third, there is the dissonance of values. With all the large liberal democracies in deep trouble, the United States increasingly withdrawn, and China a spectacularly successful one-party state and command economy, which model should countries follow? And in a world where—from Japan to Brazil to Latvia—liberal democracy has become the norm, how could China lay claim to be a leader?
Internationally, the leadership vacuum and the confusion of values will make the reconciliation of disputes more difficult and may tempt the strongest to take risks they would not otherwise take. Domestically, the tenets of economic policy, so long guided by the Washington consensus, will also be challenged, including in China. Its Communist Party has for many years cautiously and steadily steered the economy towards markets, but, with social tensions and inequality surging in China as they are in many other countries, staying the course of reform may become more difficult.
Sarkozy’s appeal for help from China illustrates that there is more at stake in the vehement economic policy disputes in Brussels and Washington than most people realize. The United States and Europe are wounded giants, and their internal unity and return to health is vital for preserving the current international order—to assure peace as well as prosperity. Even the Chinese, in whose direction the power pendulum is swinging, know this.
This article originally appeared in L'Espresso.
About the Author
Former Senior Associate, International Economics Program
Dadush was a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He focuses on trends in the global economy and is currently tracking developments in the eurozone crisis.
- The Labors of TsiprasCommentary
- Greece, Complacency, and the EuroIn The Media
Uri Dadush
Recent Work
Carnegie India 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 India
- India Signs the Pax Silica—A Counter to Pax Sinica?Commentary
On the last day of the India AI Impact Summit, India signed Pax Silica, a U.S.-led declaration seemingly focused on semiconductors. While India’s accession to the same was not entirely unforeseen, becoming a signatory nation this quickly was not on the cards either.
Konark Bhandari
- The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil ImportsCommentary
This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.
Vrinda Sahai
- India-China Economic Ties: Determinants and PossibilitiesPaper
This paper examines the evolution of India-China economic ties from 2005 to 2025. It explores the impact of global events, bilateral political ties, and domestic policies on distinct spheres of the economic relationship.
Santosh Pai
- NISAR Soars While India-U.S. Tariff Tensions SimmerCommentary
On July 30, 2025, the United States announced 25 percent tariffs on Indian goods. While diplomatic tensions simmered on the trade front, a cosmic calm prevailed at the Sriharikota launch range. Officials from NASA and ISRO were preparing to launch an engineering marvel into space—the NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), marking a significant milestone in the India-U.S. bilateral partnership.
Tejas Bharadwaj
- Hidden Tides: IUU Fishing and Regional Security Dynamics for IndiaArticle
This article examines the scale and impact of Chinese IUU fishing operations globally and identifies the nature of the challenge posed by IUU fishing in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). It also investigates why existing maritime law and international frameworks have struggled to address this growing threat.
Ajay Kumar, Charukeshi Bhatt