I believe that at the moment China is a growing economic power and not yet the global power.

Michael Beckley tries to go beyond the usual factors that determine the power of a country, like
the GDP, which is the strongest argument when it comes to the rise of China. He talks about the
structural power of a country which comprises innovation, military capabilities and wealth.
These are all important features in which China remains far behind USA. Moreover, will China
be able to become a country to set agendas and give a frame for world order, bringing an added
value to already the existing ones like open market, freedom, democracy etc.? So far, both
countries have their flaws, which in long term can affect them hugely; USA had an enormous
budget debt, is still recovering from the recession and spends more than it can on military, while
China has internal political difficulties together with a growing middle class and an aging
population (one of its main source of its success). The countries coexist in a continuingly
interdependent world, which could make them aware of their actions.
China in history has not really been an expansionist country and it doesnt seem to show any
global ambitions or an interest in positioning itself antagonistically to USA at the present. On the
diplomatic level, countries rather display no visible contrarieties. USA recognizes China as a
growing power and is keen in inviting it to a global concert of power (although created and run
by USA). China maintains a rather low profile, still becoming a member of WTO and UN
council. But there could be a strive in becoming the regional great power, where it could clash
with USA. This could become the scenario of a compromise. If China keep growing into a
regional power, USA could review its policy in the Pacific Asia. The question is could USA
allow a regional power to emerge and are there further dangers to USAs interests?
China so far, besides keeping a low profile, has not stated clearly its intentions or view of the
future world order. I believe that today being a great power does not mean only being
economically strong, but also having structural power, being able to set agendas, having a vision
and being able to market such a vision. Could China in the future envision such a world strategy
and market it?
The Economists graph from October 2014 shows that China was the biggest economy in PPP
for much of the history; the same graph though shows that it was never the great power, instead
the empires with much smaller economies ruled the world. Could that be an argument to what
defines a great power?