French philosopher René Girard accurately predicted the US-China trade war nearly two decades ago in his 2007 book "Battling to the End" during the peak of Sino-American optimism.
Girard argues that trade conflicts can rapidly transform into military confrontations, particularly between similar rivals competing for status and dominance.
According to Girard, the US-China conflict stems not from cultural differences but from increasing similarity between the two competing forms of capitalism.
Girard's theory suggests that international trade disputes are particularly dangerous because they lack a third party with a monopoly on violence that could enforce resolutions.
His apocalyptic view suggests that 21st-century conflicts beginning as trade wars could potentially escalate to catastrophic global confrontations.
Girard's Stunning 2007 Prediction of US-China Conflict
In 2007, when Sino-American relations were at their most optimistic, Girard wrote: "A conflict between the United States and China will follow... Trade can transform very quickly into war."
This prediction was made during a time when conventional wisdom held that economic integration would lead to greater harmony between the nations.
The Financial Times recently reported China vowing to "fight to the end" following Trump's threat of an additional 50% in tariffs, echoing Girard's exact phrasing.
Girard's foresight was particularly noteworthy as it contradicted the prevailing globalization narrative that economic interdependence would prevent major power conflicts.
Girard's Non-Economic View of Capitalism and Human Nature
Girard rejects the traditional economic view that humans are rational utility-maximizing agents primarily concerned with absolute material gain.
Instead, he proposes that capitalism and human behavior are fundamentally driven by social desires: prestige, status, and relative social standing.
For Girard, the ancestor of capitalism isn't bargaining or barter, but the gentleman's wars of 17th and 18th century Europe.
He noted: "It's little wonder that the European aristocracy went into business as soon as heroes and warriors went out of fashion."
This perspective explains why economic growth alone cannot prevent conflict: when both sides become wealthier, they become more focused on relative status and power.
The Paradox of Similarity as a Catalyst for Conflict
Contrary to conventional wisdom that differences cause conflict, Girard argues that similarity breeds greater rivalry.
"We always try to see differences where in fact there are none. In fact, the dispute is between two forms of capitalism that are becoming more and more similar."
The "narcissism of small differences" means that rivalries intensify as parties become more alike and competition for status increases.
China and the US share more similarities than differences: both are large, technocratic secular states with global leadership ambitions and similar economic systems.
Rivals exaggerate minor differences to justify aggression, similar to how historically close religious sects (Orthodox vs Catholic) magnified small theological differences.
Why Trade Wars Transform into Military Conflicts
Girard connects his theory of law to explain why trade wars are particularly dangerous in international relations.
He argues that law derives its power not from impartial justice but from a monopoly over violence.
For law to function effectively, there must be an entity with a monopoly on violence over all disputing parties.
International trade disputes occur in a realm where no third party has a monopoly on violence to enforce resolutions.
Unlike domestic commercial disputes where the state can enforce judgments, international trade conflicts lack an effective enforcement mechanism.
Trade wars concentrate national pride, social energy, and mimetic impulses in a domain without effective governance, creating conditions for escalation.
Girard's Anthropological Theory of Violence and Law
Girard argues that all surviving civilizations must develop mechanisms to prevent reciprocal violence from spiraling out of control.
Primitive societies used rituals of expulsion or sacrifice to discharge violence in a cathartic way by selecting an innocent scapegoat.
The transition to law represents the civilization's ability to punish the actual guilty party rather than a surrogate.
This is only possible when there exists an entity with a monopoly on legitimate violence.
The Chuchik clan ritual demonstrates this principle: when someone from one clan kills a member of another, an innocent person (not the murderer) must be sacrificed to prevent further violence.
This practice exists because punishing the actual guilty party would generate even more violence due to the social energy focused on that individual.
The Apocalyptic Vision of "Battling to the End"
Girard's book title reflects his pessimistic conclusion that modern conflicts could lead to catastrophic endings.
He argues that technological and cultural changes have transformed the nature of war in modernity.
The book suggests that trade wars between major powers like the US and China are particularly likely to escalate into military conflicts.
These conflicts could potentially become existential due to the absence of effective international governing mechanisms.
Girard's analysis presents a deeply concerning vision of how economic rivalry can transform into potentially civilization-threatening conflict.
Limitations of Liberal International Order
Girard's analysis exposes the fundamental flaw in the liberal order's premise that free trade would lead to peace.
Even though free trade has made both China and the US richer in aggregate, it has not reduced tensions between them.
The liberal assumption that economic integration creates harmony fails to account for status competition.
International organizations are "impotent" without enforcement capability, as seen in the UN's inability to stop conflicts.
The belief that law derives power from impartial justice rather than enforcement capability masks its limitations in international relations.
