• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "C. Raja Mohan"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie India"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie India",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Asia",
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Southeast Asia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie India

Raja Mandala: The Expansion of Sinosphere

Asian nations must find ways to adapt to the structural changes in the Asian balance of power, the essence of which is the rise of China and the perceived decline of the United States.

Link Copied
By C. Raja Mohan
Published on Oct 25, 2016
Program mobile hero image

Program

South Asia

The South Asia Program informs policy debates relating to the region’s security, economy, and political development. From strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific to India’s internal dynamics and U.S. engagement with the region, the program offers in-depth, rigorous research and analysis on South Asia’s most critical challenges.

Learn More

Source: Indian Express

It is not often that nations undertake big foreign policy shifts. US President Richard Nixon’s outreach to China in 1971 after a quarter century of American effort to isolate the People’s Republic is one celebrated instance. In 1972, the then president of Egypt, Anwar Sadat, threw out Russian military advisers from his country and soon after became a leading partner for America in the Middle East.

President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines has now done something similar. Last week he announced the “separation” of his country from the United States. Speaking during an official visit to China, Duterte pronounced that “it is time to say good bye to America”, Manila’s military ally for nearly seven decades. He said that America had “lost now”. “Both in military, not maybe social, but economics also. America has lost,” he said.

Duterte underlined his personal Chinese racial lineage, recalled historic ties between China and the Philippines and pleaded for a commercial alliance between the two nations. “I have realigned myself in your ideological flow,” he said. Duterte also promised to reach out to Russia. “There are three of us against the world — China, Philippines and Russia. It’s the only way,” Duterte added. That he chose to do it in front of very appreciative interlocutors in Beijing makes Duterte’s pivot to China that much more significant. It is surprising, coming as it does after a period of escalating maritime tensions with Beijing in the South China Sea. Duterte’s attempt to placate Beijing is also shocking since an international tribunal in July ruled entirely in favour of Manila.

Why does Duterte kowtow to a China that is threatening the territorial integrity of the Philippines and abandon its alliance with its most likely protector, the United States? Thereby hangs a tale — of power shifts and their consequences. Many have pointed to the political populism of Duterte, an abusive personal style and a running argument with the United States over his ruthless war against drugs as the proximate cause for the outburst in Beijing. Others insist that Duterte can’t sustain his anti-Americanism given the deep interconnections between the Philippines and the United States. They point to Duterte’s attempt to “clarify” some of his statements in China after his return from Beijing. Some hope that during his visit to Japan this week, the president of the Philippines will make some much needed amends.

All these factors, important as they are, do not mask the larger trend in Asia — the region’s adaptation to the structural changes in the Asian balance of power, the essence of which is the rise of China and the perceived decline of the United States. Strategic communities in Asia and America have long debated the nature of this power shift. But few have been prepared for its expression in such a definitive manner by the Philippines president. In the US, as well as in Asia, there has been persistent underestimation of China’s political will and material capacity to press for a rejigging of the regional order. Beijing, especially under President Xi Jinping, has made no secret of its claim to primacy in Asia and for what it sees as its rightful role in the management of the global order.

Consider, for example, its successful pressure on most Asian countries to not criticise Beijing’s refusal to accept the international verdict in the South China Sea. It has successfully divided the Association of South East Asian Nations, ASEAN — the foremost regional organisation in Asia. China’s boldest move, however, has been its active probing of the cleavages in America’s regional alliances. Growing economic integration with its Asian neighbours, including those quite close to the United States, has given considerable leverage to Beijing. Few in the region are willing to forgo the presumed economic benefits of a partnership with China and question its political assertiveness.

Beijing has also stepped up its effort to revive that old resonating slogan of “Asia for Asians”. While few in Asian chancelleries might be willing to bite, China’s campaign does tap into the enduring anti-American resentments in Asia. The idea of “Asia for Asians” has also helped China to develop alternatives to the traditional US-led regional institutions in Asia. China also reminds its neighbours of an important geographic reality — that Uncle Sam is far away and can’t really protect them against Beijing. America might still be the biggest military power in the world, but China’s growing armed strength has begun to constrain the US’ forward presence in Asia.

Even as China tempts America’s Asian allies with the benefits of neutralism, it is teasing the United States with the prospects for a G-2. Instead of trying to limit Chinese power in the region, Beijing is asking Washington to accept a Sino-centric order in Asia. Those who don’t wish to fold into the Sinosphere will need much strength and determination to survive Beijing’s extraordinary power play. Meanwhile, India could learn a trick or two from China on how to divide your opponents, pacify the periphery, do deals with rival powers, turn adversaries into neutrals, and neutrals into friends and friends into allies.

This article was originally published in the Indian Express.

About the Author

C. Raja Mohan

Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India

A leading analyst of India’s foreign policy, Mohan is also an expert on South Asian security, great-power relations in Asia, and arms control.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Deepening the India-France Maritime Partnership

      C. Raja Mohan, Darshana M. Baruah

  • Commentary
    Shanghai Cooperation Organization at Crossroads: Views From Moscow, Beijing and New Delhi
      • Alexander Gabuev
      • +1

      Alexander Gabuev, Paul Haenle, C. Raja Mohan, …

C. Raja Mohan
Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India
Foreign PolicyAsiaNorth AmericaUnited StatesSoutheast Asia

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

  • U.S. President Donald Trump (C) oversees "Operation Epic Fury" with (L-R) Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles at Mar-a-Lago on February 28, 2026 in Palm Beach, Florida. President Trump announced today that the United States and Israel had launched strikes on Iran targeting political and military leaders, as well as Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs. (Photo by Daniel Torok/White House via Getty Images)
    Paper
    Operation Epic Fury and the International Law on the Use of Force

    Assessing U.S. compliance with the international laws of war is essential at a time when these frameworks are already fraying.

      • Federica D'Alessandra

      Federica D’Alessandra

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Moldova Floats a New Approach to Its Transnistria Conundrum

    Moldova’s reintegration plan was drawn up to demonstrate to Brussels that Chișinău is serious about the Transnistria issue—and to get the West to react.

      Vladimir Solovyov

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Iran Rewrites Its War Strategy

    In an interview, Hamidreza Azizi discusses how Tehran has adapted in real time to the conflict with the United States and Israel.

      Michael Young

  • apan's 8,900-ton Maritime Self-Defense Force supply ship Oosumi leaves Muroran port escorted by the 4,550-ton destroyer Murasame bound for Kuwait February 20, 2004 in Muroran, Japan.
    Article
    Japan’s Security Policy Is Still Caught Between the Alliance and Domestic Reality

    Japan’s response to U.S. pressure over Hormuz highlights a broader dilemma: How to preserve the alliance while remaining bound by legal limits, public opinion, and an Asia-centered security agenda. Tokyo gained diplomatic space through an alliance-embracing strategy, but only under conditions that may not endure.

      • Ryo Sahashi

      Ryo Sahashi

  • Article
    Kenya’s Health Deal Is a Stress Test for the America First Global Health Strategy

    U.S. agreements must contend with national data protection laws to make durable foreign policy instruments.

      • A Black woman with long hair wears a black blazer

      Jane Munga, Rose Mosero

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • 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.