Yellow Peril, Hegemonic Fear, and the Rise of China: An Analytical Assessment

In today’s world, reality is largely constructed through images. What societies accept as true or false is often determined by narratives produced and circulated by the media. Films, television series, and news content are not merely tools of entertainment; they also function as ideological apparatuses that shape collective ways of thinking. Particularly in times of crisis, propaganda becomes more visible, and in such periods, the first casualty is often truth itself.

The nineteenth and twentieth centuries stand out as eras in which both scientific progress and propaganda mechanisms intensified. During these centuries, the concept of the “Other” was systematically produced alongside the rise of nation-states and became a fundamental component of political order. Nation-states, in constructing their identities, often required an opposing figure—a rival or enemy. Arabs were presented as the “Other” to Turks, Turks to Arabs, and Arabs to Jews; and such perceptions strengthened the social foundations of regional conflicts.

Today, a similar mechanism of othering appears to be reproduced through China. Historically, China’s position in the Western world has been problematic; and the rivalry between the United States and China has further hardened this perception. While the United States openly expresses its anti-China policies, China, within its own historical memory, positions the West as a “traumatic enemy.” For this reason, contemporary US-China relations represent not merely an economic competition, but also a clash of mutual propaganda and historical narratives.

The Concept of Yellow Peril and Western Fear of China

The concept of “Yellow Peril,” which emerged in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in the Western world, represents an ideological expression of fear toward Asian societies. This notion was based primarily on the belief that countries such as China and Japan would eventually pose a threat to the West. According to dominant Western perceptions, Asians would seize labor markets through cheap labor, undermine Western prosperity, and disrupt the so-called “civilizational order.”

This discourse was not limited to economic anxieties; it also reflected deep cultural and racial fears. The negative image of China in the West has been significantly shaped by such historical propaganda. Although this perception has taken different forms in the modern era, its fundamental concern remains unchanged: the rise of China threatens the future of Western hegemony.

China’s Historical Memory: The “Century of Humiliation”

From China’s perspective, the West symbolizes a traumatic era referred to as the “Century of Humiliation.” This historical narrative encompasses a period beginning with the Opium Wars, during which China was weakened through foreign interventions and exploited economically and politically. According to China’s viewpoint, the West deliberately introduced opium into Chinese society, poisoned the population, fragmented the country, and consciously obstructed the development of an ancient civilization.

Thus, while the Western imagination is shaped by the “Yellow Peril” narrative, China’s collective memory is defined by the aggressive and colonial face of the West. These two historical narratives are now being revived, pushing both states into a more explicit rivalry—perhaps even toward a future in which they may increasingly view each other as potential enemies.

At this point, a crucial question arises: Could the competition between the United States and China eventually evolve into direct conflict or even war?

The United States’ Post–Cold War Hegemonic Strategy

Throughout the Cold War, the United States engaged in a global power struggle against the Soviet Union. The world was divided into a bipolar order, where capitalism and communism entered into an ideological confrontation. The Soviet Union, encompassing fifteen different republics across a vast geography, eventually collapsed and fragmented into independent states.

With the end of the Cold War, the United States seized a historic opportunity and positioned itself as the sole superpower. In this period, American foreign policy began to revolve around a new central objective: preventing the emergence of any rival superpower that could challenge US dominance.

America’s military and economic interventions can therefore be explained not only through security concerns but also through the desire to preserve its hegemonic order. As the United States attempted to weaken or overthrow states that challenged its authority, it became entangled in long-term conflicts across multiple regions.

Due to its centrality in global energy resources and trade routes, the Middle East became one of America’s key strategic priorities. However, the region has never been a geography easily controlled by external powers. The United States managed to maintain its claim to global leadership for approximately two to three decades, yet today this position is increasingly questioned.

America’s loss of power is directly connected to the growing instability of the international order. Furthermore, the ineffectiveness of international institutions has made this decline more visible. As the United Nations and similar structures have failed to constrain the policies of major powers, the world has gradually begun to lose its mechanisms of justice.

One of the most striking consequences of this reality is that certain states can commit severe human rights violations without facing meaningful sanctions. Large-scale massacres, pogroms, and even genocides can unfold before the eyes of the world, while the global system remains unable to generate sufficient willpower to stop them.

China’s Rise and America’s “Hegemonic Fear”

For decades, China functioned as the world’s “cheap production hub.” Yet as China deepened its economic transformation and shifted toward higher-quality, technologically advanced production, it began to be perceived as a threat to the West. China’s massive labor force, vast industrial capacity, and rapidly expanding technological investments have allowed it to surpass the United States in certain strategic sectors.

However, China’s economic structure differs significantly from that of the United States. While the American economy is largely consumption-driven, China has maintained a growth model centered on investment and export. Per capita income in China remains relatively low compared to Western countries. This demonstrates that China’s rise is not merely a process of “becoming wealthier,” but rather an ascent based on state capacity and production power.

Nevertheless, China’s rise challenges America’s hegemonic order. For this reason, US policies such as increasing tariffs and restricting Chinese exports should be interpreted not only as economic measures, but also as strategic maneuvers.

The primary goal of the United States is to slow China’s growth momentum and limit its ambitions for global leadership. In this context, economic competition today may also be understood as a sign of a new geopolitical polarization.

Debates on a New World Order

Today, the direction in which the global order will evolve remains uncertain. Will the world once again be divided into spheres of influence? Will new blocs emerge as they did in the past? To what extent will norms and rules governing interstate relations remain valid?

As the international order weakens, the legitimacy foundations of states become increasingly important. For a state to assert a claim, carry out an action, or intervene in another region, it must produce justification through international law and institutions. Yet as the United Nations and similar organizations lose influence, such justifications become weaker, and the world drifts toward a more power-centered order.

Whether this new order will be just remains unclear. Throughout history, humanity has struggled to resolve even seemingly simple problems. For instance, succession disputes in monarchies triggered centuries of war and destruction. Today, the world faces a far more complex system, and reconstructing such a system may take decades.

At this point, the fundamental question for humanity becomes: Will we merely attempt to survive the present, invest in the future, or will we need to radically transform the existing system altogether?

Ozan Dur