How China Wins Without Firing a Shot

China has silently but inexorably ascended the international geopolitical landscape through the acquisition of strategic infrastructure, the imposition of an ironclad internal homogeneity, the systematic repression of ethnic and religious minorities, and the consolidation of an economic model that has made the world dependent on its industrial production. The result is an undeclared but already palpable supremacy.

Externally, China has gained global influence through massive infrastructure investments, particularly in vulnerable countries. This strategy, institutionalized in 2013 with the "Belt and Road" initiative, consists of financing ports, roads, railways, and power plants in dozens of countries, creating trade corridors dominated by Chinese capital. The stated objective is Eurasian connectivity; the practical effect is the expansion of China's presence in strategic assets, often at the expense of the financial sovereignty of the countries involved.

It is in this context that the concept of a "debt trap," coined by analyst Brahma Chellaney, emerges. This is a tactic by which China finances massive projects in developing countries that, by accumulating unpayable debts, are forced to cede control over resources or infrastructure. The case of Sri Lanka is paradigmatic: unable to repay a billion-dollar debt, the government granted China the concession of the Port of Hambantota for 99 years. In Africa, this practice is common. Angola, for example, contracted more than $45 billion in Chinese financing between 2000 and 2022, with approximately 40% of its external debt now owed to China. Countries like Zambia and Chad faced financial defaults and were forced to renegotiate the terms of their Chinese loans. Even in Europe, Montenegro took out a $1 billion loan to build a highway, seeing its public debt exceed 100% of GDP. The contract provides that, in the event of default, China may claim assets and land as collateral.

Europe did not escape this economic offensive. After the 2008 financial crisis and the subsequent sovereign debt crisis, countries like Greece, Portugal, and Italy opened their doors to Chinese capital. The Port of Piraeus in Greece is a striking example: drowning in debt, Greece privatized assets, and the Chinese state-owned company COSCO Shipping acquired 51% of the port, later increasing its stake to 67%. Today, Beijing manages this crucial port, the main gateway for Asian goods into Europe. COSCO has already negotiated the purchase of a stake in the Port of Hamburg in Germany, and the Shanghai International Port Group has taken over the Port of Haifa in Israel. It is estimated that Chinese companies control around 100 ports in more than 60 countries, stretching from the Mediterranean to the South China Sea.

Portugal, given its delicate financial situation at the beginning of the last decade, followed the same trend. China became one of the country's main investors, taking advantage of the post-troika privatizations. China Three Gorges acquired 21% of EDP, State Grid acquired 25% of REN, and the Fosun group acquired the insurance company Fidelidade. Vital sectors such as energy, insurance, and banking came under partial control of Chinese shareholders. In return, Portugal received an influx of capital at a time of need. However, in the long term, the question arises: by divesting parts of its critical infrastructure and corporate assets, isn't Portugal facilitating China's victory?

It's important to emphasize that these Chinese companies are not private entities in the Western sense of the term. In China, the distinction between the public and private sectors is, in practice, nonexistent. Large corporations are closely linked to the state and the Chinese Communist Party, often led by party cadres and subject to political guidance. Their operations abroad follow strategic goals defined by Beijing, not mere commercial interests. Thus, when a Chinese company acquires a port, a power grid, or an insurance company, it is the Chinese state that indirectly extends its influence.

Parallel to external economic expansion, China worked to forge a cohesive and obedient society internally, a result of the homogeneity imposed by the communist revolution. Since 1949, with the proclamation of the People's Republic of China by Mao Zedong, the country has been unified under the rule of the Communist Party, eliminating dissent and standardizing society.

The Cultural Revolution, though chaotic, was emblematic of this effort to shape the population: traditions were swept away, intellectuals persecuted, and youth mobilized to impose Maoist orthodoxy. Today, China is reaping the fruits of this standardization: it can plan for the long term without internal opposition, but it lives with a disturbing level of repression to keep everything under control.

The persecution of ethnic and religious minorities is the darkest side of this quest for national cohesion. The case of the Uyghurs, a Turkmen Muslim minority in Xinjiang, is the most condemned internationally. More than a million Uyghurs have been sent to political "re-education" camps, where they are forced to renounce their Islamic faith and customs, learning instead loyalty to the Party and the official Chinese language. Testimonies of families being separated, mosques being demolished, forced sterilizations, and forced labor are multiplying. Documents reveal that Chinese authorities changed the names of approximately 3,600 villages in Xinjiang between 2010 and 2022, removing Uyghur linguistic or religious references and replacing them with Mandarin terms or Party-aligned concepts such as "Happiness," "Unity," and "Harmony." Similar repression is taking place in Tibet. Tibetan culture is systematically diluted, the language is discouraged in schools, and monks are subjected to "patriotic education." Xi Jinping, on a recent visit to Lhasa, emphasized the need for "ethnic unity and religious harmony," which, in practice, means zero tolerance for parallel identities. Surveillance is constant, and any loyalty not directed to Beijing is considered subversive.

Added to all this is an inescapable fact: the world has become structurally dependent on Chinese production. The global economy, as it stands today, cannot function without "Made in China." From electronic components to heavy machinery, including consumer goods, medicines, and construction materials, the global supply chain is deeply rooted in Chinese industry. Any significant disruption to Chinese production or exports has ripple effects on international markets. This dependence grants Beijing a silent but formidable power: to influence the political and economic decisions of others without resorting to force.

After examining all these elements—strategic economic expansion, internal ideological rigor, calculated repression, and global industrial dependence—the conclusion is clear: China has patiently and systematically achieved a position of quiet supremacy. By buying infrastructure and favors worldwide, Beijing has gained influence without engaging in conventional battles; by taming its population, it has ensured that nothing can divert it from its long-term goals; and by making itself indispensable to the global economy, it has shielded itself from effective retaliation. The result is that, on numerous boards, China has already won or is on its way to winning.

Once ridiculed, the idea of ​​a non-militarized global Chinese hegemony has become a reality. The West watches, stunned and belated, as this new order consolidates. It remains to be seen whether liberal democracies will be able to articulate a coordinated response worthy of this historic challenge, or whether we will be destined to accept a 21st century shaped like Beijing—where roads, ports, and 5G networks bear the "Made in China" label, and where the values ​​of pluralism and freedom give way to the "harmony" defined by the social engineers of the new Middle Kingdom.