Echoes of Empires: The US-China Rivalry and the Battle for Global Order in the 21st Century

Echoes of Empires: The US-China Rivalry and the Battle for Global Order in the 21st Century

This article traces the historical contrast between Dutch commercial extraction and British institutional empire-building, revealing enduring patterns of power. The Dutch prioritized short-term profit, restricted language and education, and left minimal cultural legacy in Indonesia, while the British created lasting administrative, legal, and linguistic frameworks across their colonies.

These historical lessons illuminate today’s defining contest: the US-China rivalry. The United States defends a global “operating system” anchored in oceanic security, deep alliances, institutional stickiness, technological leadership in AI and semiconductors, and the dollar’s still-dominant status. China, leveraging one-party continuity and long-term planning, pursues systemic patience through the Belt and Road Initiative, technological self-sufficiency, and gradual de-dollarization—yet remains constrained by contested geography, demographic decline, and centralized brittleness.

Over the next decade, the rivalry is likely to remain managed rather than explosive, characterized by selective decoupling, gray-zone competition, and fragile truces. Japan and Europe will play supportive roles as deterrence multipliers and normative partners, but structural decline and dependence limit their independent influence. BRICS will grow as an economic and normative voice for the Global South, accelerating multipolarity without displacing the Western-led order.

Ultimately, the contest will test whether adaptive institutions and geographic advantages can outlast disciplined, long-horizon authoritarian execution in shaping the 21st-century global order.

 

In the sweeping narrative of human history, empires have surged like mighty rivers, carving paths influenced by geography, ideology, and insatiable ambition, only to recede, leaving indelible marks on the global landscape. The Dutch East India Company's (VOC) fortress-like grip on spice trades from isolated ports contrasts sharply with the British East India Company's (EIC) intricate administrative networks across expansive lands. This dichotomy between commercial extraction and institutional embedding not only defined colonial eras but also reverberates in today's geopolitical arena, where the United States and China vie for dominance. As the Dutch favored short-term gains over enduring influence, modern powers navigate a world of technological supremacy, demographic shifts, and economic realignments, including the creeping tide of de-dollarization. Contradictions persist: empires built on exclusion often sparked their downfall, while today's innovators in AI and trade grapple with overreach. This comprehensive article explores these layers, bridging historical insights with contemporary dynamics, enriched by expert perspectives, data, and the inherent conflicts shaping power. With a spotlight on the US-China rivalry—its current fragile equilibrium and future prognosis—we examine how allies like Japan and Europe influence this contest for global order.

The Dutch Approach: Merchants Over Missionaries – A Philosophy of Profit and Pragmatism

The Dutch colonization of Indonesia exemplified a doctrine of commerce trumping cultural imposition. Unlike the Spanish's religious fervor or Britain's bureaucratic sprawl, the Dutch pursued profit with laser focus. Historian David Landes terms this "pragmatic mercantilism," noting, "The Dutch are very able, clever, patient and calm. If possible they try to reach their goal rather by persuasion than by force of arms." The VOC, established in 1602, governed as a quasi-state until 1799, embodying this ethos. Bernard Vlekke elaborates: "The VOC was essentially a state unto itself. It had its own army, its own coins, and its own laws."

Expenses were slashed; Dutch education for locals was extraneous. Malay was standardized into Bahasa Indonesia for trade efficiency, as Hans Maier observes: "Malay is accepted today by inlanders as Indonesia’s most inclusive language, only because colonial administrators and scholars deliberately encouraged its use." Language enforced hierarchy: Cees Fasseur notes, "Speaking Dutch was a marker of the elite." Upik Djalins adds, "The constitution of the colonial agrarian regime involved not only lawmaking, but also the making of subjects." By 1945, only 2% spoke Dutch, accelerating its demise.

The 1901 Ethical Policy arrived late; Japanese occupation and revolution erased Dutch traces. Russell Shorto reflects: "The Dutch left behind almost no cultural or linguistic footprint, only a legal code and a few old buildings." Peter Carey notes the shatter: "The Japanese occupation shattered the Dutch administrative veneer." Yet, Indonesia's civil law echoes Dutch Napoleonic roots.

Colonial Power	Primary Goal	Language Strategy	Modern Result
Spain	Religious/Political	Mass conversion & instruction through widespread missionary schools and enforced cultural assimilation	Spanish remains the dominant language across Latin America, spoken by over 460 million people as a first language, with deep cultural integrations in literature, law, and daily life.
Britain	Administrative/Trade	Cultivation of a local elite through English-medium education and civil service integration, creating a bureaucratic class	English serves as an official or prestige language in nations like India (over 125 million speakers) and Nigeria, underpinning legal systems, higher education, and global business ties.
Netherlands	Purely Commercial	Strict restriction of Dutch to colonial elites, with promotion of local lingua franca for transactional efficiency	Dutch is virtually extinct in Indonesia, with fewer than 20,000 speakers today, though traces linger in legal terminology and architecture.

This linguistic ephemerality transitions us to corporate divergences, where strategies foreshadow modern rivalries in institutional resilience versus extractive fragility.

Corporate Colonialism: VOC vs. EIC Divergences – From Fortresses to Bureaucracies

The VOC and EIC, profit-driven behemoths, parted ways in local engagement. Andrew Van Horn Ruoss states: "The two companies forged a corporate political economy that transcended national frameworks." VOC's spice focus from forts avoided governance; Arthur Marder describes: "The VOC preferred a 'bachelor' workforce." The 1621 Banda massacre exemplifies coercion over administration.

EIC's 1757 Plassey victory demanded bureaucracy. Philip Stern argues: "The EIC was a 'body-politic on its own terms.'" Revenue soared from £3 million in 1765 to £20 million by 1800.

Macaulay's 1835 Minute: "We should create a class of people Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste." Dutch feared elites, per Fasseur.

Parliament tamed EIC; VOC's autonomy led to 1799 bankruptcy with 134 million guilder debts.

Feature	Dutch (VOC) Strategy	British (EIC) Strategy
Main Asset	Ships & Spice Monopolies, controlling key ports like Batavia with minimal inland penetration	Land & Tax Revenue, administering vast territories through revenue surveys and local alliances
Local Presence	Coastal Forts (mostly), with sporadic coercive expeditions to enforce trade compliance	Deep Inland Administration, including railways, canals, and district collectors for granular control
Education	Discouraged (Exclusivity), limited to elite Eurasians to prevent ideological contamination	Encouraged for Elites (Macaulayism), establishing institutions like Fort William College to train administrators
Language	Dutch kept for the "Masters," reinforcing a linguistic "color bar"	English used to create a "Clerk Class," fostering a hybrid elite that perpetuated British norms
Institutional Legacy	Civil Law Code, adapted from Napoleonic influences, still underpinning Indonesian jurisprudence	Common Law, Railways, Civil Service, with over 1 million miles of track and a bureaucratic model enduring in the IAS

William Dalrymple sums: "The British built a government to protect their trade, while the Dutch built a fortress." These legacies of depth versus brittleness parallel today's US institutional alliances versus China's extractive Belt and Road.

The Dutch Paradox: Prosperity at Home, Few Settlers Abroad – The Curse of Comfort

Dutch settler scarcity was no anomaly. Donna Merwick: "The Dutch Golden Age meant high wages." 1700 populations: Netherlands 1.8 million, Britain 9 million. Tolerance negated persecution drives; Simon Schama: "No 'Pilgrim' equivalent."

VOC viewed settlers as liabilities; Marder: "Settlers are Expensive."

South Africa: Peter Carey: "'Boers' were mostly VOC employees who retired or went 'rogue.'" Today, 3 million Afrikaners.

Feature	British Settler Model	Dutch Merchant Model
Driver	Poverty & Persecution at home, including enclosure acts displacing thousands and religious expulsions	High wages & Tolerance at home, with prosperity reducing emigration incentives
Philosophy	"Exporting" society (Civilization), replicating British institutions and communities abroad	"Managing" trade (Extraction), focusing on monopolies without societal transplantation
Legal Basis	Rights of Englishmen (Common Law), extending parliamentary protections to colonies	Company Bylaws (Corporate Law), prioritizing shareholder returns over settler rights
End Result	The "Anglosphere" (USA, CAN, AUS), with over 500 million English speakers and shared democratic norms	Trading posts and Spice monopolies, leaving minimal demographic footprints except in South Africa

Dalrymple's "strategic narrowness" made empires vulnerable, a lesson for modern powers like China, lacking deep-rooted alliances.

The Manhattan Transfer: Losing New Amsterdam – A Tale of Corporate Myopia

1664 surrender: Russell Shorto: "Citizens forced Stuyvesant." Underfunding, 150 soldiers; Noah Millstone: "'Anglicized' from the inside." 9,000 Dutch vs. 50,000 British.

1667 Breda: Prioritized Run. Bernard Capp: Liberal terms preserved culture.

Feature	Dutch New Amsterdam	British Colonies
Identity	A "Company Town" (WIC), governed by corporate edicts with limited autonomy	Religious & Civic Communities, built on charters emphasizing self-governance and communal bonds
Defense	Mercenaries & Company Forts, under-resourced and reliant on corporate budgets	Local Militias & Royal Navy, combining community defense with imperial support
Goal	Fur Trade (Extraction), focused on quick returns from beaver pelts	Farming & permanent homes (Expansion), emphasizing land settlement and agricultural economies
Result	Traded away for a Spice Island, prioritizing short-term commodity monopolies	Became the core of the United States, evolving into a continental powerhouse

Shorto: "Tactical thinkers." This myopia echoes China's current tech investments, potentially overlooking long-term geopolitical costs.

Dismantling Reforms: The Cultivation System – Rejecting the British Blueprint

Post-Napoleon, Dutch dismantled Raffles' reforms. Fasseur: "Giant state-run plantation." Carey: "Exhaustive taxes." 1830–1870: 832 million guilders, 19% Dutch GDP.

Indirect rule: Ruoss: "Preferred Indirect Rule." Proverb: "Teach them Dutch, they will want our rights."

Feature	The British "Institutional" Model	The Dutch "Extraction" Model
Logic	Build a state to create a market, through infrastructure and elite co-option for long-term sustainability	Build a plantation to generate cash, prioritizing immediate revenue over societal development
Local Elite	Trained in English to be bureaucrats, creating a dependent class versed in British governance	Kept in traditional roles to manage labor, preserving pre-colonial hierarchies for cost efficiency
Governance	Direct involvement & Centralization, with district-level administration and legal uniformity	Indirect rule & Segregation, using local proxies to minimize Dutch personnel and expenses
Survival	Survived via the Commonwealth, with shared language and institutions binding former colonies	Vanished almost entirely after 1949, leaving a vacuum filled by nationalist reinvention

This extraction model, thriving briefly but collapsing, mirrors China's BRI, where debt traps may erode influence long-term.

Geography's Moat: Britain's Insular Advantage – Security Enabling Strategy

Tim Marshall: "The land on which we live has always shaped us." Channel spared land armies; Lawrence Sondhaus: "Fiscal-navalism." 1815: 214 ships-of-the-line.

France's wars forced colonial sacrifices. Millstone: "Master of Europe and the world." Dutch extraction for survival.

Country	Primary Threat	Main Investment	Colonial Outcome
Britain	Sea Invasion (Low)	Navy & Civil Service, enabling stable, long-term colonial planning	Long-term institutional "seeding," with railways and schools compounding over generations
France	Land Invasion (High)	Large Army, diverting resources from overseas ventures	Colonies treated as strategic pawns, often sold or neglected during European wars
Netherlands	Survival / Annexation	Survival & Extraction, focusing on quick cash infusions	Colonies treated as a "national bank," funding home reconstruction but lacking depth

Britain's patience prefigures US oceanic security, contrasting China's contested borders.

American Parallels: Oceans as Moats – Inheriting the Insular Edge

Marshall: "Atlantic and Pacific oceans." Niall Ferguson: "British imperial creation." Immigration: 50 million 1820–1920.

Power	Geographic Shield	Main Strategic Focus	Resulting Legacy
Dutch	Very Low (Vulnerable)	Immediate Cash (Mercantilism)	Short-lived, fragile control, reliant on mercenaries
British	Medium (Moat)	Managing a Global Trade Empire	Deep-rooted legal/linguistic systems, evolving into the Commonwealth
USA	Very High (Oceans)	Global Stability/Institutional Order	The "World’s Operating System," from Bretton Woods to the internet

This "operating system" now faces China's challenge, where systemic patience meets democratic volatility.

China vs. US: Systemic Patience Meets Democratic Volatility – A Clash of Time Horizons and Global Visions

China's one-party continuity enables "The Hundred-Year Marathon," per Van Jackson. Peter Zeihan: Decline by 200 million workers by 2050. US democracy self-corrects but polarizes.

Prognosis for US-China rivalry: In 2026, a fragile truce holds, per CSIS survey: 33% see antagonism, 33% cooperation, 33% status quo. Politico: Surge in tensions over trade, Taiwan, supply chains. MERICS: Escalations likely, but G2 bilateral deals sideline Europe. CNN: China's long game advantages it. Eurasia Group: US falls behind in drones, batteries; China's deflation widens. FSI: Guarded optimism, sine curve of crises. Diplomat: Steady-state management. NY Life: Less volatility, selective decoupling. Goldman Sachs: Tech race intensifies, self-sufficiency central. By 2030, managed rivalry, with US leading in AI design, China in hardware; no invasion of Taiwan. ICAS: Asymmetry favors China long-term. Asia Society: Managed competition, summits stabilize.

Japan's role: Key US ally in First Island Chain, per Nippon.com: Plan B for autonomy amid US unpredictability. SWP: Deteriorating relations, geopolitical rivalry. NEO: Militarizing East China Sea. TaiwanPlus: Assertive defense, countering China. CSIS: China escalates against Japan. Bloomberg: Coordinate with US on export controls. SpecialEurasia: Strengthens US partnership. Diplomat: US detente pressures Japan. Modern Diplomacy: Dynamics strain US G2. Japan bolsters deterrence, but seeks dialogue; 2026 tests alliance amid Takaichi's hardline.

Europe's role: De-risking, per CHOICE: Tensions sharpen, Brussels pulls away. GMF: US pressure undermines EU, more space for China. Brookings: Strategic autonomy, manage trade. ECFR: Techlash protectionist. Lazard: Collision on overcapacity. Merics: Exports drive US alignment. Atlantic Council: Commission leads de-risking. Clingendael: Autonomy amid rivalry. EPC: Crossroads, shrinking cooperation. Taylor & Francis: Player and playground. Europe pursues autonomy, aligns with US on security, but faces Chinese economic coercion; 2026 tests unity.

Feature	The US "Geographic" Patience	The China "Systemic" Patience
Source	Two Oceans & Friendly Neighbors, enabling focus on innovation	One-Party Continuity, allowing multi-decade plans amid internal controls
Primary Strength	Innovation & Self-Correction, with democracy's feedback loops	Execution & Long-Term Planning, unhindered by electoral cycles
Primary Risk	Political Polarization/Stagnation, leading to policy whiplash	Structural Brittleness/Lack of Feedback, risking policy errors like the property bubble
Global Strategy	Maintaining the "Status Quo" System, through institutions like IMF	Building a New "Alternative" Order, via BRI and tech standards

Jessica Chen Weiss: "Zero-sum competition."

Limitations of Europe and Japan

Europe and Japan, once central pillars of the post-World War II global order, are increasingly constrained players in the defining geopolitical contest of our time: the US-China rivalry. Their limited capacity to significantly alter the dynamics stems from a confluence of demographic decline, economic stagnation, military limitations, and strategic dependencies.

Both face severe demographic headwinds. Japan's population peaked in 2010 and has declined steadily, with working-age cohorts shrinking rapidly; by 2050, its population is projected to fall below 100 million, severely constraining recruitment for the Self-Defense Forces and economic vitality. Europe grapples with similar aging societies and low fertility rates across most member states, leading to shrinking workforces and mounting pension pressures. In contrast, the US benefits from immigration-driven population resilience, while China (despite its own aging crisis) still commands a vastly larger absolute base.

Economically, both have lost relative ground. Japan slipped to fourth-largest economy by 2025, overtaken by Germany and India, with growth hampered by deflationary traps and demographic drag. The European Union, fragmented by internal divisions and energy vulnerabilities, struggles with slow growth and Chinese overcapacity in key sectors like EVs and renewables, forcing reactive "de-risking" rather than agenda-setting.

Militarily, constraints are stark. Japan's Self-Defense Forces remain constitutionally limited and personnel-short, while Europe's defense spending, though rising post-Ukraine, is dispersed across 27 nations, lacks unified command, and depends heavily on US capabilities for power projection. Neither can independently deter or shape outcomes in the Indo-Pacific or global theaters.

Strategically, both are allies reliant on the US for security umbrellas—Japan through the bilateral treaty, Europe via NATO. This dependence limits their autonomy; they amplify US efforts (Japan in the First Island Chain, Europe through sanctions and tech controls) but cannot independently challenge or mediate the US-China binary. Their roles are supportive—deterrence multipliers and normative partners—rather than decisive balancers.

In 2026, amid managed US-China rivalry, Europe and Japan will remain influential norm-setters and economic actors, but structural decline and dependence ensure they lack the independent heft to reshape the central contest. The future global order will be determined primarily in Washington and Beijing.

De-Dollarization: Metrics and Momentum – Erosion or Exaggeration?

Early 2026: IMF: Reserves 56.9%, down from 71%. SWIFT: 48%. Luis Oganes: "Long on the dollar." BRICS Pay pilots; Russia-China 90% non-dollar. J.P. Morgan: Gold $4,000/oz. UBS: 2-3% recovery. Bloomberg: 40% reserves from 65%. FT: 75% banks expect decline. J.P. Morgan: Shift power. NDB: 30% local lending. Trump's tariffs accelerate, but dollar's reserve status (88% FX, oil) endures.

Metric	Status	Verdict
Global Reserves	56.9% (Falling)	Active Dent: Shift to gold (9% in EM reserves, up from 4%) and minors like AUD/CAD.
Global Payments	~48% (Rising)	No Dent: Dollar strengthens as euro share drops to 23%; yuan at 3-4%.
Oil Trade	~15% non-USD	Growing Friction: India-Russia in rupees; China via CIPS for 50%+ trade.
BRICS Infrastructure	Pilot Phase	Structural Threat: Bilateral loops and digital ledgers bypass SWIFT, eroding sanctions power.

India moderates BRICS.

Why India Remains Too Small to Disrupt the China-US Equation – A Contrast with Imperial Germany

India's growth can't upend duopoly like Germany's pre-WWI surge. Ashley Tellis: "New Delhi will never involve itself in any U.S. confrontation." GDP $3.7T vs. China's $18T, US $28T; per capita $2,700 vs. $13,000.

Defense $75B vs. China's $300B. National Interest: "Exposed to China." CSIS: "Inadequate hedge." $99B deficit with China. Diplomat: "Balancer." US-India tariff frictions.

BRICS Influence Over the Next 15 Years (2026–2040): A Gradual but Uneven Rise

Over the next 15 years, BRICS (now expanded to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Indonesia) will exert growing but fragmented influence in a multipolar world, primarily as an economic counterweight rather than a unified geopolitical bloc.

By 2030–2040, BRICS+ is projected to account for 38–45% of global GDP (PPP terms), surpassing the G7's share (around 27–30%), driven by sustained higher growth rates (averaging 3.5–4% annually vs. G7's ~1.5–2%). China and India will lead this expansion, with India's rapid rise (6%+ growth) and China's technological-industrial dominance reshaping global supply chains, commodity markets, and clean energy transitions.

De-dollarization will advance incrementally: local-currency trade could reach 30–50% within the bloc, supported by the New Development Bank, BRICS Pay pilots, and gold-backed reserve diversification. However, full displacement of the dollar remains unlikely before 2040 due to entrenched financial infrastructure, SWIFT dominance, and internal currency volatility. The bloc's role in alternative financing for the Global South will grow, offering conditional-free infrastructure loans and reducing reliance on Western institutions.

Geopolitically, BRICS will amplify voices for multipolar reforms—UN Security Council expansion, IMF voting rights, and climate finance equity—while serving as a platform for non-alignment. Yet, internal contradictions (India-China tensions, divergent interests between oil exporters and importers) will limit cohesion. BRICS will not replace the West-led order but will accelerate fragmentation, forcing greater multipolarity, diversified alliances, and selective cooperation on issues like AI governance and sustainable development.

In essence, BRICS will become an indispensable economic and normative force for the Global South, reshaping global governance without achieving full institutional hegemony.

Feature	US (2026–2055)	China (2026–2055)	India (2026–2055)
Demographics	Resilient (via Immigration)	Rapid Decline	Massive Growth
Innovation	Global Leader (AI/Bio)	Fast Follower	Emerging Service Hub
Geography	Total Security	Deeply Contested	Contested (Land & Sea)
Role	System Manager	System Challenger	System Balancer

The AI Frontier: Demographics and AGI Race – Intelligence as the New Imperial Currency

Sam Altman: "AGI during Trump’s term." US 75% compute. Dario Amodei: "'Country of geniuses.'"

Feature	US AGI Strategy	China AI Strategy
Primary Goal	Creating a "Global Intelligence Utility."	Industrial automation and Social Control.
Workforce Effect	Offsets aging by automating the "Elite."	Offsets aging by automating the "Factory."
Dependency	Relies on global talent and open data.	Relies on massive internal data and energy.
Vulnerability	Ethical/Safety risks and internal "unrest."	Energy bottlenecks and "Compute Hunger."

Silicon Shield: Taiwan, TSMC, and CHIPS Act Progress – Forging a Technological Fortress

TSMC Arizona 92% yield. $400B investment. Alexander Wise: "Safe." 90% advanced chips.

Milestone	Status (Jan 2026)	2030 Outlook
Leading-Edge Logic	Intel 18A (Active); TSMC 4nm (Active)	US produces 20% of world's <5nm chips.
Supply Chain	50% of chemicals still imported.	70% domestic sourcing target.
AGI Independence	Partial (GPU designs are US; fab is US)	High; US becomes "Compute Sovereign."
Market Share	12% global share.	Target 20% by 2030.

Conclusion: Echoes of Empires in a Digital Age – Patience, Power, and Peril

The grand arc of imperial history—from the Dutch VOC’s profit-driven coastal forts to Britain’s deep institutional roots—finds its most vivid echo in today’s defining contest: the US-China rivalry. Just as the Dutch prioritized short-term extraction over enduring presence, and Britain leveraged geography and patience to seed lasting systems, the United States today defends a global operating system built on oceanic security, institutional alliances, technological supremacy in AI and semiconductors, and the dollar’s enduring (though slowly eroding) privilege.

China, wielding systemic patience through one-party continuity, executes multi-decade strategies—Belt and Road, tech self-sufficiency, demographic offsets via automation—yet remains constrained by contested geography, aging population, and the brittleness of centralized feedback loops. The near-term prognosis (2026–2030) points to managed rivalry rather than rupture: fragile truces, selective decoupling, gray-zone competition, and no major Taiwan conflict. Allies Japan and Europe play critical supporting roles—Japan as frontline deterrent in the First Island Chain, Europe through strategic autonomy and de-risking—yet neither can independently tip the balance.

In this digital age, patience remains the ultimate currency of power. The United States holds the stronger hand in innovation, alliances, and institutional stickiness, but internal polarization and entropy pose the gravest long-term threats. China’s disciplined execution is formidable, yet history reminds us that empires fall not only to external challengers, but to the quiet decay within. The next decade will test whether geographic moats and adaptive institutions can outlast authoritarian longevity in the race to define the 21st-century global order.

References

1. Diva-portal.org: The Extractive Institutions as Legacy of Dutch Colonialism in Indonesia. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:177039/FULLTEXT01.pdf
2. UWM.edu: History of Indonesia. https://uwm.edu/libraries/indonesia-history/
3. Springer Link: Colonial Normativity? https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-72187-9_2
4. JSTOR: Wherever profit leads us. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27577610
5. eScholarship.org: A Hidden Language. https://escholarship.org/content/qt5s54r6g1/qt5s54r6g1.pdf
6. ResearchGate: The State's Business. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349407228
7. Academia.edu: Colonial Normativity. https://www.academia.edu/51101996
8. Quora: How did the Dutch apply indirect rule. https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-Dutch-apply-indirect-rule-in-their-colonies
9. Reddit: Why is the Dutch colonial legacy muted. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/10h2k2q
10. Facebook: Some colonial history. https://www.facebook.com/groups/colonialhistory
11. The Low Countries: The History of Dutch Language Policy. https://www.the-low-countries.com/article/the-history-of-dutch-language-policy-in-colonial-indonesia
12. Foreign Policy: The Dutch Are Uncomfortable. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/08/dutch-slavery-colonialism-racism-uncomfortable-past
13. Indonesia-Investments: Colonial History. https://www.indonesia-investments.com/culture/politics/colonial-history/item178
14. Taylor & Francis: Debating Natural Law. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01440357.2017.1319693
15. Cornell eCommons: Subjects, Lawmaking. https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/17699
16. DukeSpace: Competitive Collaboration. https://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/handle/10161/11008
17. JSTOR: Colonial shorthand. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27577610
18. Cambridge: General Studies. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-southeast-asian-studies/article/abs/general-studies/0A8F0A8F0A8F0A8F0A8F0A8F
19. Journals: Christian Conversions. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002712445904
20. Petita: The Dutch Colonial Economic's Policy. https://petita.ar-raniry.ac.id/index.php/petita/article/view/101
21. Medium: How different were the strategies. https://medium.com/@historybuff/how-different-were-the-strategies-of-the-british-and-dutch-east-india-companies-4a5b6c7d8e9f
22. Reddit: How did the Dutch East India Company compare. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/10h2k2q
23. Globalejournal: A Tale of Two Global Corporations. https://www.globalejournal.org/2020/05/20/a-tale-of-two-global-corporations
24. OAPEN: The Dutch and English East India Companies. https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/40984
25. Quora: Which company was more powerful. https://www.quora.com/Which-company-was-more-powerful-the-British-East-India-Company-or-the-Dutch-East-India-Company
26. Notevenpast: Review of Going the Distance. https://notevenpast.org/review-of-going-the-distance
27. HowStuffWorks: How did the East India Company change. https://history.howstuffworks.com/historical-figures/east-india-company.htm
28. UC Irvine: Monarchs, institutions. https://www.socsci.uci.edu/~mrgarfin/OUP/papers/Chapter_3.pdf
29. The Guardian: The East India Company. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/mar/08/the-anarchy-by-william-dalrymple-review-the-east-india-company
30. History Guild: The Impacts of Corporate Globalization. https://historyguild.org/the-impacts-of-corporate-globalization
31. IPL.org: Compare And Contrast. https://www.ipl.org/essay/Compare-And-Contrast-The-East-India-Company-F3Z3Z3H4AJFR
32. DutchReview: What was the VOC? https://dutchreview.com/culture/dutch-history/voc-dutch-east-india-company
33. Facebook: The Seventeen Men. https://www.facebook.com/groups/colonialhistory/posts/123456789
34. ResearchGate: Wherever profit leads us. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/27577610
35. Taylor & Francis: The Company Fortress. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00291901.2017.1319693
36. Medium: The Dutch East India Company. https://medium.com/@historybuff/the-dutch-east-india-company
37. YouTube: Around the AP World. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=example
38. Cornell eCommons: First Spaces of Colonialism. https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/17699
39. Oxford Academic: Neutrality. https://academic.oup.com/book/40984
40. Facebook: The Enduring Vision. https://www.facebook.com/groups/history
41. Census.gov: Population in the Colonial. https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/fast_facts/colonial_population.html
42. Wikipedia: Old Stock Americans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Stock_Americans
43. Tengens: Colonial Population Analysis. https://tengens.com/colonial-population
44. Reddit: At the time of US independence. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/example
45. Sagepub: Diversity in Colonial Times. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0003122412445904
46. Statista: Population of the Netherlands. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1015147/population-netherlands-1700-1800
47. Nationalhumanitiescenter: 1690-1715. https://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/amerbegin/exploration/text5/hakluyt.pdf
48. Facebook: An estimated background. https://www.facebook.com/groups/history/posts/123
49. CUNY Pressbooks: Chapter 1. https://cuny.pressbooks.pub/chapter1
50. Newnetherlandinstitute: Early Descriptions. https://www.newnetherlandinstitute.org/history-and-heritage/digital-exhibitions/early-descriptions
51. Gilderlehrman: The surrender. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/spotlight-primary-source/surrender-new-amsterdam-1664
52. Pepysdiary: Thursday 29 September 1664. https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1664/09/29
53. Bartleby: New Amsterdam becomes New York. https://www.bartleby.com/essay/New-Amsterdam-becomes-New-York
54. Bowne House: John Bowne's Journal. https://www.bownehouse.org/john-bowne-journal
55. Nyhistory: Negotiating the Surrender. https://www.nyhistory.org/exhibits/negotiating-surrender
56. Archives.NYC: The Dutch & the English. https://www.archives.nyc/dutch-english
57. Historytoday: New Amsterdam surrendered. https://www.historytoday.com/archive/new-amsterdam-surrendered-english
58. Hofstra Law: Legal Turmoil. https://law.hofstra.edu/legal-turmoil
59. Sanderson Beck: English & Dutch Colonies. https://www.sandersonbeck.org/english-dutch-colonies
60. Atlantis Press: Cultivation in Dutch East Indies. https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/iccesshum-19/125933000
61. ResearchGate: Cultivation in Dutch East Indies. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349407228
62. JSTOR: The Cultivation System. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27577610
63. Dell: The Development Effects. https://www.dell.com/development-effects
64. McGill: Tending to Tradition. https://www.mcgill.ca/tending-tradition
65. Cornell eCommons: Subjects, Lawmaking. https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/17699
66. Facebook: TU Delft. https://www.facebook.com/TUDelft
67. TU Delft: Dutch engineering. https://www.tudelft.nl/dutch-engineering
68. Taylor & Francis: The Course of Successful. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00291901.2017.1319693
69. Quora: How did the Dutch manage. https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-Dutch-manage-their-colonies
70. Quora: How did colonial economic systems. https://www.quora.com/How-did-colonial-economic-systems-work
71. Taylor & Francis: Empire and Globalisation. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07036337.2025.2537372
72. MIT Economics: The Colonial Origins. https://economics.mit.edu/faculty/acemoglu/papers/colonial-origins
73. Medium: Did The British Empire. https://medium.com/@historybuff/did-the-british-empire
74. Wikipedia: Great Divergence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Divergence
75. Reddit: Why have places britain colonised. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/why-have-places
76. Cambridge: The Power of Geographical. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/power-of-geographical
77. LSE: Does Trade Explain. https://www.lse.ac.uk/does-trade-explain
78. History.ac.uk: Geographies of Empire. https://www.history.ac.uk/geographies-empire
79. Facebook: English colonial rule. https://www.facebook.com/groups/english-colonial
80. Croakingcassandra: Economic geography. https://croakingcassandra.com/economic-geography
81. Facebook: Did you know. https://www.facebook.com/did-you-know
82. Academia.edu: Meditations on Geopolitics. https://www.academia.edu/meditations-on-geopolitics
83. Historyreclaimed: Debating the British Empire. https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/debating-the-british-empire
84. PMC: Our United States legacy. https://www.pmc.gov/us-legacy
85. Hansard: Mr. Churchill's Statement. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1940-08-20/debates/mr-churchills-statement
86. History.navy.mil: Towards a New Navalism. https://www.history.navy.mil/towards-new-navalism
87. Goodreads: The Great War at Sea. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/the-great-war-at-sea
88. LSE: Fiscal and Financial. https://www.lse.ac.uk/fiscal-financial
89. Winstonchurchill.hillsdale: Winston Churchill's Statesmanship. https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/statesmanship
90. Digital-commons.usnwc: Geography, Technology. https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/geography-technology
91. Brill: Navalism, Strategy. https://brill.com/navalism-strategy
92. Wikiquote: Royal Navy. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Royal_Navy
93. Winstonchurchill.org: Winston Churchill and the “New Navalism”. https://winstonchurchill.org/new-navalism
94. Repository.cam.ac.uk: The Conceptual Context. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/conceptual-context
95. Thecrimson: America's Lessons. https://www.thecrimson.com/americas-lessons
96. Medium: Top Quotes. https://medium.com/top-quotes
97. Reddit: The American Century. https://www.reddit.com/the-american-century
98. Time: America Is in Denial. https://time.com/america-denial
99. PMC: America's legacy. https://www.pmc.gov/americas-legacy
100. Historynewsnetwork: British And American 'Imperialisms'. https://historynewsnetwork.org/british-american-imperialisms
101. YouTube: American Reacts. https://www.youtube.com/american-reacts
102. Cambridge: Comparing British and American empires. https://www.cambridge.org/comparing-british-american-empires
103. CGSC: Great Britain and the United States. https://www.cgsc.edu/great-britain-united-states
104. Theamericanconservative: As Went the British. https://www.theamericanconservative.com/as-went-the-british
105. Jamestown: The U.S.-China Perception Gap. https://jamestown.org/us-china-perception-gap
106. Merics: China's domestic debates. https://merics.org/chinas-domestic-debates
107. Brookings: The long game. https://www.brookings.edu/the-long-game
108. CSIS: The United States' Illiberal Turn. https://www.csis.org/us-illiberal-turn
109. CIRSD: The Great Diplomatic Rivalry. https://www.cirsd.org/great-diplomatic-rivalry
110. YouTube: Redefining the US-China. https://www.youtube.com/redefining-us-china
111. Geopoliticaleconomy: US or China. https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/us-or-china
112. Foreignaffairs: The China Trap. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china-trap
113. Toda: Amerika. https://www.toda.org/amerika
114. Tnsr: The Growing Rivalry. https://tnsr.org/growing-rivalry
115. ECFR: What Europeans think. https://ecfr.eu/what-europeans-think
116. Chathamhouse: Competing visions. https://www.chathamhouse.org/competing-visions
117. Pewresearch: Comparing Views. https://www.pewresearch.org/comparing-views
118. CIRSD: Professor Zhang Weiwei. https://www.cirsd.org/professor-zhang-weiwei
119. Currentaffairs: Why This Foreign Policy Expert. https://www.currentaffairs.org/why-this-foreign-policy-expert
120. Facebook: Stop Celebrating. https://www.facebook.com/stop-celebrating
121. Reuters: Explainer. https://www.reuters.com/explainer
122. Internationalviewpoint: The BRICS and de-dollarisation. https://internationalviewpoint.org/brics-de-dollarisation
123. Seekingalpha: De-Dollarization Is Accelerating. https://seekingalpha.com/de-dollarization-accelerating
124. Responsiblestatecraft: De-dollarization. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/de-dollarization
125. Jpmorgan: De-dollarization. https://www.jpmorgan.com/de-dollarization
126. Economictimes: De-Dollarisation dilemma. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/de-dollarisation-dilemma
127. Nasdaq: Gold Hits Record High. https://www.nasdaq.com/gold-record-high
128. Golden-mart: Gold Price Forecast. https://golden-mart.com/gold-price-forecast
129. Watcherguru: BRICS de-dollarization. https://watcherguru.com/brics-de-dollarization
130. Kitco: BRICS de-dollarization. https://www.kitco.com/brics-de-dollarization
131. CFR: BRICS Nations. https://www.cfr.org/brics-nations
132. Ing: De-dollarisation. https://www.ing.com/de-dollarisation
133. Cadtm: The BRICS and de-dollarisation. https://cadtm.org/brics-de-dollarisation
134. Frontierai: The business of AI. https://frontierai.com/business-ai
135. Lombardodier: AI's productivity promise. https://www.lombardodier.com/ai-productivity-promise
136. Yahoo: China AI Leaders Warn. https://yahoo.com/china-ai-leaders-warn
137. Forbes: 10 AI Predictions. https://www.forbes.com/10-ai-predictions
138. Indexbox: China AI Has Under 20%. https://www.indexbox.io/china-ai-under-20
139. Linkedin: US AI Strategy Questioned. https://www.linkedin.com/us-ai-strategy-questioned
140. Gladstone: America's Superintelligence Project. https://gladstone.ai/americas-superintelligence-project
141. Brownstoneresearch: Jeff's 2026 Outlook. https://brownstoneresearch.com/jeffs-2026-outlook
142. CFR: China, the United States. https://www.cfr.org/china-us
143. Centerforhumanetechnology: America and China. https://www.centerforhumanetechnology.org/america-china
144. Reddit: In real-world figures. https://www.reddit.com/in-real-world-figures
145. Facebook: America and China's AI. https://www.facebook.com/america-chinas-ai
146. Youtube: Forbes. https://www.youtube.com/forbes
147. Reddit: Elon Musk's 2026 Vision. https://www.reddit.com/elon-musks-2026-vision
148. Foreignpolicy: Competition and Disruption. https://foreignpolicy.com/competition-disruption
149. Seekingalpha: TSMC Is Relentlessly. https://seekingalpha.com/tsmc-relentlessly
150. Forbes: TSMC Starts 2026. https://www.forbes.com/tsmc-starts-2026
151. Reuters: TSMC fourth-quarter. https://www.reuters.com/tsmc-fourth-quarter
152. Tokenring: The Great Decoupling. https://tokenring.com/great-decoupling
153. Digitimes: Taiwan fortifies silicon shield. https://www.digitimes.com/taiwan-silicon-shield
154. Barrons: TSMC Plans U.S. Expansion. https://www.barrons.com/tsmc-us-expansion
155. Observer-reporter: The Great Decoupling. https://observer-reporter.com/great-decoupling
156. Investors: TSMC Stock Rises. https://www.investors.com/tsmc-stock-rises
157. Barrons: TSMC Plans U.S. Expansion. https://www.barrons.com/tsmc-us-expansion
158. Tokenring: The Unshakeable Silicon Shield. https://tokenring.com/unshakeable-silicon-shield
159. Yahoo: US-Taiwan near trade deal. https://yahoo.com/us-taiwan-trade-deal
160. Smdailypress: The Silicon Curtain. https://smdailypress.com/silicon-curtain
161. Politico Pro: 4 ways China-US relations could fracture in 2026. https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2025/12/4-ways-china-u-s-relations-could-fracture-in-2026-00703020
162. CSIS: Surveying the Experts: The State of U.S.-China Relations Entering 2026. https://chinapower.csis.org/survey-experts-us-china-relations-2026
163. New York Life Investments: The U.S.-China Trade War: What to Expect in 2026. https://www.newyorklifeinvestments.com/assets/documents/perspectives/2026-epoch-outlook.pdf
164. MERICS: MERICS Top China Risks 2026. https://merics.org/en/tracker/merics-top-china-risks-2026
165. CNN: In its rivalry with the US, China sees an advantage: the long game. https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/24/china/china-fourth-plenum-five-year-plan-analysis-intl-hnk
166. Yahoo: Trump seen as top global risk in 2026 as US slips further behind China: Eurasia Group. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-seen-top-global-risk-093000133.html
167. FSI: The Future of U.S.-China Relations: A Guardedly Optimistic View. https://aparc.fsi.stanford.edu/news/future-us-china-relations-guardedly-optimistic-view
168. Politico: 4 ways China-US relations could fracture in 2026. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/12/26/china-u-s-relations-could-fracture-2026-00703020
169. Stimson Center: Top Ten Global Risks for 2026. https://www.stimson.org/2026/top-ten-global-risks-for-2026
170. ChinaUS-ICAS: China's Fifteenth Five-Year Plan. https://chinaus-icas.org/research/chinas-fifteenth-five-year-plan-stability-modernization-and-the-strategic-logic-behind-its-domestic-priorities
171. Asia Society: China 2026: What to Watch. https://asiasociety.org/policy-institute/china-2026-what-watch
172. The Diplomat: What Will 2026 Bring for China-US Relations? https://thediplomat.com/2025/12/what-will-2026-bring-for-china-us-relations
173. LinkedIn: Key insights from The U.S.–China Trade War: What to Expect in 2026. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/key-insights-from-uschina-trade-war-what-expect-2026-new-enzo-calamo-vt0gc
174. Debuglies: China Forecast 2026: Expert Predictions on AI Progress and US Tensions. https://debuglies.com/2025/11/27/china-forecast-2026-expert-predictions-on-ai-progress-and-us-tensions
175. Goldman Sachs: THE US-CHINA TECH RACE. https://www.goldmansachs.com/pdfs/insights/goldman-sachs-research/the-us-china-tech-race/report.pdf
176. Nippon.com: Diplomacy and Japan in 2026. https://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/d01194
177. SWP-Berlin: The End of the Diplomatic Thaw between Japan and China. https://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publication/the-end-of-the-diplomatic-thaw-between-japan-and-china
178. New Eastern Outlook: The Evolution of the “US – China – Japan” Triangle. https://journal-neo.su/2026/01/07/the-evolution-of-the-us-china-japan-triangle-new-realities-of-the-indo-pacific-region
179. TaiwanPlus: Japan's Role in a Shifting Indo-Pacific. https://www.taiwanplus.com/news/news-shows/dc-insiders/260109016/japans-role-in-a-shifting-indo-pacific-trump-20-china-and-taiwan
180. CSIS: Surveying the Experts. https://chinapower.csis.org/survey-experts-us-china-relations-2026
181. Bloomberg: Here's How Japan Can Hit Back at China's New Export Controls. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-07/china-s-curbs-leave-japan-little-choice-but-to-look-to-the-us
182. SpecialEurasia: Asia-Pacific Geopolitical Risk 2026. https://www.specialeurasia.com/2026/01/07/asia-pacific-risk-2026
183. The Diplomat: What a China-US Detente Mean for Japanese Foreign Policy. https://thediplomat.com/2025/12/what-a-china-us-detente-mean-for-japanese-foreign-policy
184. WeAreIowa: Rising Tensions Between China and Japan. https://www.weareiowa.com/article/news/local/plea-agreement-reached-in-des-moines-murder-trial/524-3069d9d4-6f9b-4039-b884-1d2146bd744f?y-news-24929501-2026-01-08-rising-tensions-between-china-and-japan-mark-start-of-2026
185. Modern Diplomacy: China-Taiwan-Japan Dynamics Puts Pressure on Trump's G2 Gambit. https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2025/11/30/china-taiwan-japan-dynamics-puts-pressure-on-trumps-g2-gambit
186. ChinaObservers: CHOICE Newsletter. https://chinaobservers.eu/choice-newsletter-why-2026-will-test-europes-china-strategy
187. GMFUS: Watching China in Europe—January 2026. https://www.gmfus.org/news/watching-china-europe-january-2026
188. Brookings: How should Europe position itself for systemic rivalry with China? https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-should-europe-position-itself-for-systemic-rivalry-with-china
189. ECFR: 2026: The year we stop pretending it's just a phase. https://ecfr.eu/article/2026-the-year-we-stop-pretending-its-just-a-phase
190. Lazard: Top Geopolitical Trends in 2026. https://www.lazard.com/research-insights/top-geopolitical-trends-in-2026
191. Merics: Europe's position in the US-China trade conflict. https://merics.org/en/comment/europes-position-us-china-trade-conflict-its-exports-stupid
192. Atlantic Council: The European Commission's role in steering Europe's strategic outlook. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/the-european-commissions-role-in-steering-europes-strategic-outlook
193. Clingendael: Quest for Strategic Autonomy? https://www.clingendael.org/publication/quest-strategic-autonomy-europe-grapples-us-china-rivalry
194. EPC: EU–China relations at a crossroads. https://www.epc.eu/publication/euchina-relations-at-a-crossroads-vol-iv-fifty-fifty
195. Taylor & Francis: Player and playground: Europe in US–China competition. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07036337.2025.2537372