I would not like China being in charge, precisely because China would be very good at looking out for China. When China does something on the world stage, they tend to perform actions that create a political or economic return to China.
Meanwhile, the US does actions that cost the US loads of money and lives, but which do not provide any return to the US economy. The problem with selfless altruism is that, if carried too far, you eventually run out of funds. Visualize a woman who spends all her days running a charity for Africa but neglects her own home and children.
I would have been happier if, after we eliminated Saddam, we decided to make Iraq pay the cost of the operation in oil.
I agree that we need people that value strategy and policy over throwing money at any problem thinking it will make it all better. This applies at all levels.
Where is the balance point that will allow maximum effect with minimum expenditure of energy or money?
Things don’t always work out after making a move. We also need leaders that are not afraid to make moves.
The terrorist flypaper we made in Iraq, dropping a freedom based government in the middle of a bunch of repressive Oligarchies and theocracies was brilliant IMO. Staying too long and fighting a war with politically correct rules of engagement, not so brilliant.