For decades, the United States’ biggest edge over China was its web of allies and partners. Coordinating export controls and sanctions with Europe and Asia made them harder for Beijing to evade. That advantage is now fraying, the CNBC report argues, as the Trump administration’s tariffs, NATO clashes, and threats to reduce troop deployments push allies away. The Lowy Institute’s 2025 scores still show a wide gap—81.4 for U.S. defense networks versus 18.9 for China—but experts say Beijing doesn’t need allies to switch sides, only to become less willing to move with Washington.
Public confidence in the U.S. has fallen sharply. In Canada, the share calling Washington a reliable partner dropped from 83% in 2022 to 35% this year, per Pew Research. In Germany, the share saying the U.S. considers other countries’ interests fell from 60% to 23%. As one analyst put it, when democratic publics don’t support alignment, leaders face higher costs for cooperating with the U.S. and lower costs for defying it. Canada’s move to become the EU’s first “associate member” underscores the shift toward deeper ties outside the U.S. orbit.
China has responded not by asking countries to choose Beijing over Washington, but by making the choice less binary. India is a case in point: it remains a U.S. security partner and a strategic competitor of China, with troops still facing off along the disputed Himalayan border. Yet Xi visited India this month for the first time in seven years, and bilateral trade hit a record $155.6 billion in 2025. The two sides agreed to strengthen business and transport links despite unresolved security disputes.
The report’s sources agree that the U.S. approach is self-defeating: by attacking allies rather than forming a common front, Washington gives Beijing openings it doesn’t have to create itself. The uncertainty over Trump’s policy toward China, combined with strains in U.S.-India relations, gives countries like India another reason to keep ties with Beijing on steadier ground—a tactical détente that could reshape the strategic environment even without any formal realignment. The article offers no countervailing view from administration officials, so the analysis is one-sided but consistent across the experts quoted.