This is just as misleading as people talking about China being the largest carbon emitter. In a per capita sense China emits much less than many countries.

Stiglitz was probably right when he attributed China's lack of eagerness to proclaim itself No 1 as China understands full well the US' "psychological preoccupation with being No 1", and is worried about what the US reaction will be.

The paranoia that the US might be replaced here and there by China on the world stage is indeed evident for anyone living in the US, especially in Washington.

Stiglitz was sharp in criticizing the US for making two critical mistakes since World War II. First, it inferred that its triumph meant a triumph for everything it stood for. But in much of the Third World, concerns about poverty - and the economic rights that had long been advocated by the left - remained paramount.

The second mistake was to use the short period of its unilateral dominance to pursue its own narrow economic interests - or, more accurately, the economic interests of its multinationals, including its big banks - rather than to create a new, stable world order.

To Stiglitz, the Chinese economy is complementary to that of the US, so the US should not see the global economy as a zero-sum game. He pointed out that the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is aimed at cutting China out of the Asia supply chain. The US has also been trying to block China from playing a leading role in the region, including its efforts to create the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

It is not just Stiglitz criticizing the US. Many Americans, such as former US Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman, have also criticized the US attitude toward the infrastructure bank.

Stiglitz did not name the US rebalance to Asia Pacific strategy, but he advised that the US should "pivot" its foreign policy away from containment.

If it were the Chinese who made such arguments, the US might say it was just Chinese overreacting. But words from a well-respected American economist carry a different weight. Hopefully they will help those in the White House and Pentagon to have a clearer head in dealing with China from 2015 on.

The author, based in Washington, is deputy editor of China Daily USA. [email protected]