This study undertakes a critical examination of the logic behind the so-called “China global price revolution,” exploring how and why it has functioned, where it shows structural weaknesses, and under what conditions it might fail. By situating this analysis within a broader historical and economic context, the discussion considers how China’s impact on global prices has influenced the evolution of the world economy—specifically, whether it marks a departure from the long-standing pattern of the Great Divergence and signals a move toward a more conditional form of global economic convergence.
Related article:
I. Reframing the “Great Divergence”: Not Race or Values, but Cost-Efficient Violence and Industrial Power
1. The Structural Foundations of the Great Divergence
The historical divide known as the Great Divergence between the Global North and the Global South was not the outcome of inherent racial traits, superior cultural values, or greater moral legitimacy. Rather, it was enabled by material and structural forces rooted in power. Central to this divergence was the industrialization of violence: the ability of certain states to systematically produce, organize, and deploy coercive force at scale. Advances in mass production were not limited to civilian goods but extended decisively to military capacity, allowing for sustained dominance through superior weaponry, logistics, and institutionalized force projection. These cost advantages in coercion made global expansion, control, and extraction feasible. As Samuel P. Huntington argued, Western dominance stemmed less from the universal attraction of its political ideals than from its unmatched capacity to apply organized force effectively. In this sense, the Great Divergence was fundamentally a product of asymmetric power backed by industrial and military capabilities, rather than ideology or values.
2. Industrialization and the Expansion of Coercive Power
The Industrial Revolution fundamentally transformed violence by amplifying its scale, efficiency, and economic logic, turning industrial capacity into a decisive multiplier of coercive power. Advances in firearms, naval technology, and logistical systems enabled states to project force across vast distances with unprecedented reliability. At the same time, industrial methods introduced economies of scale into warfare and control, reducing the marginal cost of repression, conquest, and enforcement. These developments created enduring structural advantages for industrialized powers in colonization and resource extraction, allowing domination to be maintained through relatively cheap violence while securing expensive monopoly rents from global trade and imperial control. In this framework, the dominance of the Global North did not rest on the universal appeal of its moral claims or institutional models, but on the asymmetric capacity to organize, deploy, and sustain coercion through industrial means.
II. China’s Core Intervention: A Global Price Revolution, Not a Rule Revolution
China’s ascent is historically unique in that it is not chiefly about exporting ideology or institutional models. Rather, it drives down global marginal costs across five core domains. This is less a narrative of China supplanting the West and more a story of a worldwide recalibration of relative prices.
III. The Five Pillars of China’s Global Price Revolution
1. The Productivity Revolution and the Reshaping of Global Trade
The modern productivity revolution has made manufactured goods so inexpensive that they can fundamentally restructure global trade patterns. A striking example is the relative price of mobile phones compared with crude oil: in 1998, acquiring a single phone required roughly 40 barrels of oil, whereas by 2025, only 1–2 barrels are needed—a 20–30-fold collapse in relative cost. This dramatic price shift allows resource-exporting countries to obtain far more goods for the same quantity of raw materials, raising living standards without necessitating deep institutional reforms. Simultaneously, China’s reliance on Western consumer markets diminishes structurally, as its manufactured goods penetrate global markets at unprecedented affordability. Yet, this transformation comes with a caution: falling prices alone do not automatically secure loyalty or enduring influence, as beneficiaries may hedge, re-nationalize, or resist alignment in response to shifting incentives.
2. Transportation Capacity Revolution: Low-Altitude Logistics Transforming Development
The transportation capacity revolution leverages low-altitude logistics to overcome the constraints of broken or inadequate infrastructure. China’s approach relies on cargo and personnel drones, which operate with minimal ground-based infrastructure and bypass traditional bottlenecks such as poor roads, customs delays, and weak governance systems. This innovation holds particularly large developmental potential for the Global South, where conventional infrastructure is often insufficient to support economic expansion. However, the approach is not without limitations: drones still require effective airspace regulation and operational governance, and without robust institutional frameworks, local elites may capture the benefits, preventing the broader societal gains that the technology could enable.
3. Electricity Revolution: Distributed Energy Overcoming Grid Failures
The electricity revolution is reshaping energy deployment by shifting focus from centralized grids to distributed, modular systems. China has gained a strategic advantage through rapidly falling costs of photovoltaic panels, wind power, and energy storage, enabling scalable off-grid and microgrid solutions. This innovation allows energy to reach regions where traditional governments or utilities are ineffective, reducing dependence on state-controlled monopolies. However, while technology expands access and buys critical time, it cannot fully replace institutional frameworks; effective grids, regulatory oversight, and tariff structures remain essential for long-term sustainability and reliable energy provision.
4. Computing Power Revolution: Open-Source AI as a Tool for Cognitive Equalization
The computing power revolution leverages open-source AI to democratize cognitive capabilities across diverse regions. China’s strategy emphasizes low-cost, locally deployable AI models—such as the Qwen series—fine-tuned for multiple languages of the Global South and optimized for edge deployment in areas with limited infrastructure. This approach enhances governance and administrative capacity without imposing ideology, while also challenging the dominance of centralized cloud platforms, sometimes referred to as “cloud colonialism.” Yet, the diffusion of open-source tools is faster than their ability to bind users; local actors can fork or migrate these models, constraining China’s potential for long-term influence despite the immediate utility of these technologies.
5. Firepower Revolution: The Cost Collapse of Precision Violence
The firepower revolution reflects a dramatic decline in the cost of precision weaponry, fundamentally reshaping the dynamics of military power. Historically, high-cost weapons systems preserved monopolies and maintained stable hierarchies of force. Today, drones, loitering munitions, and hypersonic technologies are available at just 1–10% of the traditional Western cost, turning precision strikes into tools of economic attrition rather than exclusive instruments of political dominance. While this expansion of access enhances tactical flexibility, it also carries risks: cheaper precision weaponry can fragment security environments, empower non-state actors with denial capabilities, and contribute to the unpredictable escalation of regional conflicts.
IV. Strategic Context: INF Treaty and Missile Asymmetry
The INF Treaty created a structural asymmetry in missile capabilities by restricting the United States and the Soviet Union from deploying certain land-based missiles, while China was not a party to these limitations. Exploiting this “gap,” China developed regional missile capabilities that enhanced its deterrence without contravening the treaty. In effect, the U.S. constrained its own strategic options, while China expanded its regional influence under a favorable set of rules. However, this advantage may be temporary, as asymmetric constraints do not eliminate the inherent unpredictability of escalation dynamics in regional and global security environments.
V. “Light Infrastructure” vs. “Heavy Institutions”: A New Development Logic
A new development paradigm contrasts “light infrastructure” solutions with traditional reliance on “heavy institutions.” China demonstrates this approach by deploying technical substitutes to bypass entrenched bottlenecks: drone logistics compensate for inadequate roads and rail networks, photovoltaic systems and microgrids replace unreliable electrical grids, AI assistants supplement weak education systems, and low-cost monitoring technologies bolster limited policing capacity. These innovations enable immediate capacity expansion without fully developing conventional institutional frameworks. Yet, this logic carries a caveat: technology alone cannot sustain long-term development. Without solid institutional grounding, such capacity risks stagnation, and the gains may be captured or monopolized by local elites rather than benefiting broader society.
VI. Energy, AI, and the US Infrastructure Bottleneck
The rapid expansion of AI and data-intensive technologies in the United States highlights the limits imposed by existing infrastructure. Large-scale data centers require immense power, yet delays in transformer construction create constraints that can take four to seven years to resolve. In response, U.S. tech giants have turned to private power plants and temporary fixes to sustain operations. This situation underscores a critical insight: even technologically advanced powers remain vulnerable to infrastructure bottlenecks. A cost advantage alone cannot compensate when energy supply, scale, or broader logistical systems fail to keep pace with technological demands.
VII. Exporting “AI-Ready Infrastructure” to the Global South
China is advancing a strategy of exporting “AI-ready infrastructure” to the Global South by bundling clean energy, modular data centers, AI tools, and digital governance platforms. This package enables countries to establish sovereign computing capacity without relying on foreign software-as-a-service providers, potentially reshaping local technological autonomy. However, adoption is not automatic. Political, social, and cultural factors—including fears, identity considerations, and Western framing—may limit uptake, underscoring that technological availability alone cannot guarantee widespread acceptance or long-term influence.
VIII. Strategic Consequences: From Rules-Based Hegemony to Price-Based Power
The rise of China signals a shift in global strategic dynamics from a rules-based model of hegemony to one grounded in price and material leverage. The traditional U.S. approach relied on high barriers to entry, institutional control, and the extraction of rents to maintain influence. In contrast, China emphasizes scale to drive down costs, modularity to enhance resilience, and open-source technologies to facilitate rapid diffusion across borders. While this model increases affordability and accessibility, it does not automatically translate into loyalty or strategic alignment. Even as price collapses reshape the incentives of global actors, recipients may act independently, hedging or resisting influence, underscoring that material leverage alone cannot fully substitute for institutional or ideological authority.
IX. The Firepower Paradox: Deterrence Without Monopoly
The firepower paradox arises as low-cost precision weaponry spreads anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities, reshaping the dynamics of deterrence without relying on monopoly control. As intervention becomes more expensive and risky, global security shifts toward a multipolar equilibrium driven by economic and technological factors rather than ideology. However, this diffusion of cheap precision is not inherently stabilizing. While it constrains traditional power projection, it can also fragment security landscapes, heighten systemic risk, and increase the likelihood of unpredictable regional conflicts.
X. The Ultimate Contest: Who Defines “Development”?
The question of who defines “development” reflects a fundamental contest between competing paradigms. The Western narrative emphasizes institutional convergence and the adoption of imported technologies as the path to progress. In contrast, the Chinese perspective prioritizes the accumulation of capabilities, adaptive technological deployment, and national autonomy. Yet, neither approach guarantees legitimacy on its own. Ultimately, the recognition and sustainability of development depend on political and social acceptance within societies, highlighting that technology and institutions alone cannot determine the trajectory or credibility of progress.
XI. Meta-Failure Analysis: Structural Stress Points
A meta-failure analysis of China’s global strategy highlights key structural stress points that limit the automatic translation of economic and technological capacity into enduring influence. First, price, power, and legitimacy are not equivalent: making goods and technology cheap does not guarantee loyalty or political alignment from recipients. Similarly, technological solutions—“light infrastructure”—cannot fully substitute for robust institutions; modular systems and AI assistants may enhance short-term capacity but cannot replicate the depth of governance required for long-term stability. Low-cost precision weaponry, while expanding deterrence, also carries the risk of destabilizing regions, illustrating that cheap violence does not inherently produce order.
Open-source diffusion presents another paradox: while it spreads capabilities widely, it simultaneously weakens enforceable leverage, as local actors can adapt or migrate tools independently. Scale and production leadership underpin price-based influence, but these advantages are contingent on uninterrupted output and global demand. Finally, development outcomes depend not only on material provision but also on political, social, and cultural acceptance; local elites, civil society, and global narratives may reject solutions that fail to align with domestic priorities. Collectively, these stress points reveal that structural, institutional, and normative factors critically shape whether Chinese innovations translate into durable strategic power.
XII. Strengths and Fragilities of China’s Global Influence Model
China’s emerging model of global influence exhibits distinct strengths that help explain shifting power dynamics. It clarifies why U.S. cost-based hegemony is eroding and why Global South countries now have expanded strategic and technological options. By reframing power around marginal cost control rather than ideology, the model highlights the transition from rules-based dominance to affordability-driven influence. It also captures how technological innovation, modular systems, and scale can reshape access, governance, and market leverage without relying on traditional institutional frameworks.
At the same time, the model has notable fragilities. Price reductions and technological provision alone do not guarantee loyalty, legitimacy, or durable alignment. Technology substitutes are temporary unless anchored by institutions, and low-cost precision weaponry can exacerbate instability rather than ensure security. Open-source diffusion strengthens adoption but limits enforceable influence, while scale and production leadership remain vulnerable to disruption. Ultimately, development outcomes depend on social, political, and cultural acceptance, emphasizing that material capacity and affordability, however impressive, are insufficient to secure long-term strategic power.
XIII. Summary & Implications
China’s global price revolution represents a powerful strategic opening, undermining established hierarchies and creating new opportunities for economic convergence. By driving down costs and expanding access to technology, energy, and logistics, it reshapes global dynamics and broadens the range of options for the Global South. Yet, without strong institutional anchoring, effective security frameworks, mechanisms for shared risk, and deliberate political coalition-building, these gains may be precarious. In the absence of such foundations, the result could be a world that is cheaper, faster, and more capable, but also increasingly fragmented, unstable, and contested.