Operational Control versus Systemic Connectivity
The Emerging Structure of U.S.–China Competition under Networked Warfare
- Wu, Shaoyuan
Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0660-8232
Description
This policy brief examines the emerging structure of U.S.–China competition under networked warfare. It argues that competition is becoming functional as well as geographic: the United States and China can shape the same cross-theater conflict environment without acting as opposing belligerents in the same war. The brief distinguishes two forms of functional centrality. The United States operates primarily as an operational-control center, organizing high-end military action through alliances, intelligence, bases, logistics, targeting networks, and cross-theater allocation. China functions increasingly as a systemic-connectivity node, shaping how production, trade, energy, logistics, and diplomatic access adjust to disruption across actors that do not form a coherent bloc. The brief concludes that long-war advantage will depend on the ability to combine high-end operational control with sustainable production, repair, rerouting, recovery, and systemic adaptability.
Abstract
U.S.–China strategic competition is commonly framed through the Indo-Pacific or through bilateral comparisons of military platforms, technology, and economic scale. That framing is increasingly incomplete. The Russia–Ukraine war, the U.S.–Israel–Iran conflict, Red Sea instability, Caspian insecurity, and Indo-Pacific deterrence remain distinct, but they increasingly draw on overlapping stocks, tanker and surveillance fleets, transport networks, industrial inputs, energy routes, and political attention. This brief argues that the emerging structure is best understood through two different forms of functional centrality. The United States operates primarily as an operational-control center: it organizes high-end military action through alliances, intelligence, bases, logistics, targeting networks, and cross-theater allocation. China functions increasingly as a systemic-connectivity node: it affects how production, trade, energy, logistics, and diplomatic access adjust to disruption across actors that do not form a coherent bloc. The long-war question is which actor or coalition can more effectively combine both forms of power. The United States must make operational control more sustainable through production, repair, allied capacity, and cross-theater allocation discipline. China must convert systemic connectivity into credible but bounded influence without assuming security obligations it cannot enforce. Middle powers exposed to both systems should reduce concentrated vulnerabilities through diversified suppliers, routes, repair capacity, and clearly defined alignment thresholds.
Files
Mobile browsers may not display embedded PDF previews reliably. Open the PDF directly for the best reading experience.
Open PDF Download PDF| Name | Type | |
|---|---|---|
| Operational Control versus Systemic Connectivity The Emerging Structure of U.S.–China Competition under Networked Warfare.pdf Full-text PDF of the policy brief | application/pdf | Download |
Keywords
- U.S.–China competition
- networked warfare
- networked wartime system
- operational control
- systemic connectivity
- operational-control center
- systemic-connectivity node
- cross-theater allocation
- long-war competition
- industrial base
- defense production
- munition stockpiles
- Patriot missiles
- PAC-3
- missile defense
- shipbuilding
- systemic warfare
- route substitutability
- supplier density
- cross-alignment access
- adjustment capacity
- enforcement deficit
- managed differentiation
- competitive stabilization
- adversarial system alignment
- middle powers
- strategic autonomy
- EPINOVA
Subjects
- International security
- Strategic competition
- U.S.–China relations
- Networked warfare
- Military logistics
- Defense industrial base
- Supply-chain resilience
- Geoeconomics
- Alliance management
- Crisis management
- Middle East security
- Eurasian connectivity
- Public policy
Recommended citation
Wu, Shaoyuan (2026), Operational Control versus Systemic Connectivity: The Emerging Structure of U.S.–China Competition under Networked Warfare, Policy Brief No. EPINOVA–2026–PB–65, Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.67037/epinova.pb.2026.065
APA citation
Wu, S. (2026). Operational control versus systemic connectivity: The emerging structure of U.S.–China competition under networked warfare. EPINOVA Policy Brief Series, EPINOVA-PB-2026-065. Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.67037/epinova.pb.2026.065.
Alternate identifiers
| Scheme | Identifier | Description |
|---|---|---|
| URL | https://epinova.org/policy-brief-1 | Official EPINOVA publication page |
| EPINOVA policy brief number | EPINOVA–2026–PB–65 | Policy brief number printed in the PDF |
| File name | Operational Control versus Systemic Connectivity The Emerging Structure of U.S.–China Competition under Networked Warfare.pdf | Source PDF file name |
| Short title | Operational Control versus Systemic Connectivity | Short form of the policy brief title |
| Analytical concept | Operational-control center | An actor capable of organizing military action across an integrated security network through command, access, intelligence, targeting, logistics, alliance coordination, and cross-theater allocation |
| Analytical concept | Systemic-connectivity node | An actor whose industrial, commercial, logistical, and diplomatic position materially affects how a wider system absorbs and adjusts to disruption |
| Analytical concept | Networked wartime system | A cross-theater structure in which military operations, industrial capacity, logistics, energy, information, and diplomatic access become mutually constraining even without unified command or common war aims |
Related works
| Relation | Identifier | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| IsPartOf | https://epinova.org/policy-brief-1 | Publication series | EPINOVA Policy Brief Series |
| IsSupplementedBy | https://github.com/EPINOVALLC/EPINOVA-Research | Repository | Supplementary repository and structural archive |
| References | Wu, S. (2026a). From separate wars to linked battlefields | Policy brief | Referenced for continentalized conflict and advanced cross-theater coupling |
| References | Wu, S. (2026b). Industrial war and network war | Working paper | Referenced for operational logics and long-war competition |
| References | Wu, S. (2026c). A preliminary assessment of eastward and northward logistics alternatives under Hormuz pressure | Policy brief | Referenced for China–Russia–Central Asia–Caspian logistics alternatives |
| References | Wu, S. (2026d). Systemic warfare in the networked age | Working paper | Referenced for systemic warfare and networked wartime systems |
References
- Funaiole, M. P. (2026, July 22). Charting a new course: Countering China’s dominance in global shipbuilding. Center for Strategic and International Studies. https://www.csis.org/analysis/charting-new-course-countering-chinas-dominance-global-shipbuilding
- Jones, S. G., & Palmer, A. (2024, March 6). China outpacing U.S. defense industrial base. Center for Strategic and International Studies. https://www.csis.org/analysis/china-outpacing-us-defense-industrial-base
- McGinn, J., & Dilts, A. J. (2026, July 6). Is the industrial base on a wartime footing? A progress report. Center for Strategic and International Studies. https://www.csis.org/analysis/industrial-base-wartime-footing-progress-report
- National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2026, July 17). Industrial production operation in June 2026. https://www.stats.gov.cn/english/PressRelease/202607/t20260717_1964159.html
- Reuters. (2026a, July 30). Can China restrain Iran? Gulf states test Beijing’s influence. https://www.reuters.com/world/china/can-china-restrain-iran-gulf-states-test-beijings-influence-2026-07-30/
- Reuters. (2026b, July 28). China in touch with Yemen’s Houthis to allow ships to sail through Red Sea, sources say. https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-touch-with-yemens-houthis-allow-ships-sail-through-red-sea-sources-say-2026-07-28/
- Reuters. (2026c, July 26). Iran says it will halt strikes as long as US bombing pause holds. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/iran-will-halt-attacks-long-us-maintains-pause-iranian-source-says-after-trump-2026-07-26/
- Reuters. (2026d, July 27). US-Iran pause, fast fashion and Rohingya schools [Audio podcast episode]. https://www.reuters.com/podcasts/us-iran-pause-fast-fashion-rohingya-schools-2026-07-27/
- Reuters. (2026e, July 30). US military says latest strikes on Iran last two hours, hitting dozens of targets. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-carries-out-fresh-iran-strikes-centcom-says-2026-07-30/
- Reuters. (2026f, July 7). US plans PAC-3 missile maintenance facility in Europe. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-talks-europe-missile-co-production-source-says-2026-07-07/
- Reuters. (2026g, July 29). US strikes $58.6 billion Patriot missile deal amid rising stockpile concerns. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/army-awards-lockheed-martin-586-billion-largest-ever-pac-3-patriot-missile-deal-2026-07-29/
- U.S. Department of Defense. (2025, July). Defense budget overview: Fiscal year 2026 budget request. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller). https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/FY2026/FY2026_Budget_Request_Overview_Book.pdf
- Wu, S. (2026a). From separate wars to linked battlefields: The emerging risk of continentalized conflict (EPINOVA Policy Brief No. EPINOVA–2026–PB–64). Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.67037/epinova.pb.2026.064
- Wu, S. (2026b). Industrial war and network war: Operational logics in the Russia–Ukraine war and the U.S.–Israel–Iran conflict (EPINOVA Working Paper No. EPINOVA–WP–F–2026–06). Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18972327
- Wu, S. (2026c). A preliminary assessment of eastward and northward logistics alternatives under Hormuz pressure: The China–Russia–Central Asia–Caspian network (EPINOVA Policy Brief No. EPINOVA–2026–PB–63). Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.67037/epinova.pb.2026.063
- Wu, S. (2026d). Systemic warfare in the networked age: Operational systems, information competition, and cumulative pressure (EPINOVA Working Paper No. EPINOVA–WP–F–2026–07). Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19078936