China Is Offering Global Opportunities

One of Sigmund Freud’s most widespread concepts is projection. It happens when individuals attribute to others the feelings, desires, prejudices, or characteristics that actually belong to themselves. This concept could be applied to international relations. The attitudes of the U.S. political elite, for example, reflect a tendency to project onto other countries the very behaviors and practices that the United States itself systematically pursues in the international arena.

Under the banner of human rights, the U.S. government has sponsored humanitarian tragedies of great proportions in  Afghanistan, Iraq, Venezuela, Syria, and, more recently, against Iran and Cuba. Meanwhile, Trump Administration undermines the foundations of human rights by arresting and expelling migrants and separating them from their families, without guaranteeing their right to full defense. It has also adopted policies that discriminate against ethnic minorities while promoting Anglo-Saxon supremacism.

The U.S. government also pressures governments of other countries to serve its economic and commercial interests, as in the case of the Panama Canal, through the generalized imposition of tariffs, and by openly interfering in electoral processes in various parts of the world, particularly in Latin America. It calls itself a champion of free trade, yet it adopts protectionist policies, imposes economic and technological blockades, and sanctions companies and individuals worldwide. Not to mention the CHIPS Act and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). In fact, it is a classic case of projection in the Freudian sense. To paraphrase the French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, “hell is other people” for the United States.

Considering this context, China has become the target of the United States’ psychological projection. The Washington elite attributes all of its defects to the Asian country, such as hegemonism, authoritarianism, militarism, and unfair competition in international trade. Through this narrative, the specter of the “China threat” has been created, feeding the bipartisan consensus and the military-industrial complex.

It is interesting to note that this type of discourse occurs when China becomes a major competitor in international trade, creating global companies, developing new brands, new processes, new products, and competing head-to-head for leadership in high-tech sectors.

However, those who have studied China’s history reasonably know that the Chinese people do not seek hegemony, nor proselytize their political and social system, abide by international rules, and remain firm in adhering to the foreign policy of the “Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.” What the Chinese government seeks, in practice, is the economic, environmental and cultural development of its people, without the interference of any other country, like England in the past or the United States today. If the country seeks to advance in high-tech industries, it is because this is essential for it to become a fully developed nation by 2049.

Thus, to speak of a “China Shock” that would undermine the stability of the international economy is untrue and a great hypocrisy. On the contrary, since 2008, China has become the main engine of the world economy growth, sustaining demand and economic flows amid turbulence and unilateralism.

In this sense, it is worth drawing attention to Chinese Premier Li Qiang’s speech at the opening session of the 17th Annual Meeting of the New Champions, also known as the Summer Davos, held in Dalian, China, in which he highlighted the concept of “China Opportunity 2.0”, as a clear counterpoint to the Western narrative of a supposed “China Shock 2.0,” which claims that China is pursuing a strategy of flooding global markets with highly subsidized exports.

The “China Opportunity 2.0” strategy, according to the Premier, should be seen as an opportunity, not a threat, as Chinese technologies and products in emerging sectors empower the world empowerment and create room for growth, rather than cause economic shocks, enabling broader global access to advanced technologies and more shared development benefits.

One frontier technology that can be shared with other countries is artificial intelligence (AI), in which China is experiencing explosive growth, with daily token consumption by large language models surpassing 100 trillion by the end of May 2026. Unlike Western companies’ proprietary models, Chinese companies embrace open AI models, which have already registered more than 10 billion downloads worldwide. This opens the door to the shared development of applications in various fields of social life.

Brazil, as a strategic partner of China, has ample space to share the “China Opportunity 2.0” strategy in precision agriculture, leveraging 5G connectivity, the Internet of Things, and AI, as well as in the development of new, more resistant and productive seeds. There are opportunities to scale up clean energy generation (solar, wind, and green hydrogen), which could drive the creation of sustainable data centers. In terms of critical minerals, Brazil not only possesses large deposits but also has qualified technical personnel capable of developing value chains with greater added value, such as electric batteries for vehicles and other applications related to green reindustrialization. The partnership with China can also enable the expansion of the digital economy beyond e-commerce, such as developing sustainable solutions for public and environmental management. Brazil does not see China as a threat, but as a stable and reliable partner.

In conclusion, the international community must view China through its actions and their effects, not as a mirror of what the Western powers try to project, placing all their defects onto a developing country. China’s development creates opportunities for all countries, including companies in countries that project their defects onto others. In an interconnected world, the success of one country depends on the success of all others. Selfishness is a dead end.

The article reflects the author‘s opinions, and not necessarily the views of China Focus.