This week on Sinica, I speak with Daniel Bessner, the Anne H.H. and Kenneth B. Pyle Assistant Professor in American Foreign Policy at the Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies at the University of Washington and co-host of the American Prestige Podcast. If you follow U.S.-China relations even casually, you can’t avoid hearing that we’re in a new Cold War — it’s become a rhetorical reflex in D.C., shaping budgets, foreign policy debates, media narratives, and how ordinary Americans think about China.

But what does it actually mean to call something a Cold War? To think clearly about the present, I find it helps to go to the past, not for simple analogies but to understand the intellectual and ideological machinery that produced and now sustains a Cold War mentality. Danny has written widely about the architecture of American power, the rise of the national security state, and the constellation of thinkers he calls Cold War liberals who helped define the ideological landscape of U.S. foreign policy. We explore how Cold War liberalism reshaped American political life, how the U.S. came to see its global dominance as natural and morally necessary, why the question of whose fault the Cold War was remains urgent in an age of renewed great power rivalry, the rise of China and anxiety of American decline, and what it would take to imagine a U.S.-China relationship that doesn’t fall back into old patterns of moral binaries, ideological panic, and militarized competition.

6:20 – Danny’s background: from Iraq War politicization to studying defense intellectuals

11:00 – Cold War liberalism: the constellation of ideas that shaped U.S. foreign policy

16:14 – How these ideas became structurally embedded in security institutions

22:02 – The Democratic Party’s destruction of the genuine left in the late 1940s

27:53 – Whose fault was the Cold War? Stalin’s sphere of influence logic vs. American universalism

31:07 – Are we facing a similar decision with China today?

34:23 – The anxiety of loss: how decline anxiety distorts interpretation of China’s rise

37:54 – The new Cold War narrative: material realities vs. psychological legacies

41:21 – Clearest parallels between the first Cold War and emerging U.S.-China confrontation

44:33 – What would a pluralistic order in Asia actually look like?

47:42 – Coexistence rather than zero-sum rivalry: what does it mean in practice?

50:57 – What genuine restraint requires: accepting limits of American power

54:14 – The moral imperative pushback: you can’t have good empire without bad empire

56:35 – Imperialist realism: Americans don’t think we’re good, but can’t imagine another world

Paying it forward: The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and Responsible Statecraft publication; The Trillion Dollar War Machine by William Hartung and Ben Freeman

Recommendations:

Danny: Nirvana and the history of Seattle punk/indie music (forthcoming podcast project)

Kaiser: Hello China Tech Substack by Poe Zhao (hellotechchina.com)

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This week on Sinica, in a joint episode with the China-Global South Podcast, I speak with Eric Olander, host of the China Global South Podcast and founder/editor-in-chief of the China-Global South Project.

In the early hours of January 3rd, U.S. forces carried out a coordinated operation in Venezuela that resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, followed by their rendition to the United States to face drug trafficking charges. The operation unfolded quickly, with minimal kinetic escalation, but has raised far-reaching questions about international law, hemispheric security, and the Trump administration's willingness to use force in the Western Hemisphere. Just before the raid, China's Special Envoy for Latin America, Qiu Xiaoqi, had met with Maduro in Caracas. Commentary linking Trump's action to China has ranged widely—claims about spheres of influence, arguments this was all about oil or rare earths, and pronouncements about what this means for Taiwan. Eric helps us think through China's actual stake in Venezuela, how deeply Beijing understands Latin America, what this episode does and does not change about China's role in the region and the global South more broadly, China's immediate reaction and concrete exposure on the ground, how it manages political risk when partner regimes collapse, and what Chinese military planners may be studying as they assess how this operation unfolded.

5:18 – How Beijing is reading this episode: official messaging versus elite thinking

7:40 – The Taiwan comparisons on Chinese social media and why they don't work

11:09 – How deep is China's actual expertise on Latin America?

14:56 – Comparing U.S. and Chinese benches of Latin America expertise

18:02 – Are we back to spheres of influence? Why that framing doesn't work

20:09 – Where is China most exposed in Venezuela: oil, loans, personnel?

23:41 – The resource-for-infrastructure model and why it failed

28:27 – The political assets: China as defender of sovereignty and multilateralism

36:25 – Will this push left-leaning governments closer to Beijing?

40:07 – The "China impotence" narrative and what doing something would actually mean

46:26 – What Chinese military planners are actually studying

51:46 – The Qiu Xiaoqi meeting: strategic failure or intelligence delivery?

58:40 – What actually changes and what doesn't: looking ahead

Paying it forward: Alonso Illueca, nonresident fellow for Latin America and the Caribbean at the China Global South Project

Recommendations:

Eric: "China's Long Economic War" by Zongyuan Zoe Liu (Foreign Affairs)

Kaiser: The Venetian Heretic by Christian Cameron

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.