admin
Ben Shapiro published a blunt op‑ed this week arguing what many conservatives already say in private: China is not merely a “rival” — it is an outright geopolitical enemy. The column appeared on Townhall and was quickly syndicated, and it pushes hard for economic decoupling, tighter security, and what some will call a wake‑up call for American policy. Love him or roll your eyes at his tone, the piece forces a necessary debate about strategy and realism in U.S.–China relations.
Shapiro’s case: treat China like an enemy, not a business partner
Shapiro’s core point is simple and stark: decades of engagement and trade did not change the Chinese Communist Party’s aims. He points to a long history of intellectual property theft, influence operations on campuses, and geopolitical ambition that runs counter to American interests. That hawkish line is now standard in conservative circles — the idea that the CCP plays the long game while democracies flinch from long‑term planning.
What the facts back up — and where the op‑ed goes too far
There’s plenty of evidence that justifies hard stare policies. U.S. counterintelligence agencies and the FBI have repeatedly warned about China‑linked economic espionage and influence campaigns. Congressional reports and GAO work have documented united‑front activity and pressure on American institutions. At the same time, not every rhetorical flourish in the column is nailed down. China’s official holdings of U.S. Treasuries are under one trillion dollars in recent Treasury reporting, not “trillions” stacked like a threat. And while the column blames China for releasing COVID‑19, the scientific and intelligence records still say the origins remain unresolved: panels found zoonotic spillover more likely on balance, but gaps in data keep other hypotheses on the table.
Policy prescriptions that make sense — and a few that need realism
Shapiro’s prescriptions are straightforward: use economic leverage, cut off revenue sources, strengthen domestic supply chains, and clamp down on espionage. Those are good, practical ideas. The recent U.S. actions involving Venezuela’s leadership and oil supplies illustrate how energy policy can affect Beijing’s access to resources — and why allies and trade deals matter. On the controversial proposal to stop all Chinese foreign students, the argument on national security has weight: many university programs were exploited by hostile actors. Still, a smarter path is vigorous vetting and enforcement, reduced dependence on tuition dollars from hostile regimes, and targeted bans for applicants with clear ties to PRC security programs — not a blunt, cover‑all ban that throws out useful talent and fuels propaganda victories for Beijing.
Conclusion: Be tough, be smart, and stop pretending openness is a defense
Ben Shapiro’s column is loud and unapologetic because the situation demands urgency. America should be willing to use trade, alliances, and sanctions to make strategic choices costly for rivals. But toughness needs accuracy and strategy, not hysteria. Call China what it is: a strategic adversary. Then implement smart, surgical policies — shore up supply chains, protect research, force other countries to choose, and keep our financial and political house in order. That approach wins over sanctimony every time.
