Oh no doubt about that. It's just sad for the whole planet that they've chosen the path they've chosen (genocide, etc.) inb4 "but the U.S." .
Given that, I just don't think it makes much sense to engage with China unless the calculation is strictly that it benefits the U.S. (and the west in general). Like, if U.S. companies don't get access to the Chinese market then that means Chinese companies don't get access to the U.S. market, for example. To put it another way, from my current understanding I would say we should maintain U.S. hegemony at all costs short of nuclear war (or anything atrocious like that). Despite recent setbacks and general anxiety about U.S. actions over the last however many years, The U.S. has proven since WWII that it's a trustable world leader.
Although I'd certainly counter your claim that a "rise" is inevitable. Being large doesn't necessarily translate into anything. I think it's only a matter of time before the U.S. global reach is diminished, and China will certainly fill that void, but it won't solely be filled by China, especially in the Pacific.
Countries in Europe will also have to make tough choices. Is NATO still viable? Is it outdated? Should the U.S. pull out? For now those are easy decisions, but when push comes to shove the U.S. is strong-willed enough to do something like back out of NATO if they insist on integrating with Chinese systems. I don't think there will be a lot of having your cake and eating it too for the continent. Yet another disappointment.
From a tech perspective this will have quite the impact. China will eventually develop viable operating systems, but will you buy a laptop with one? Some are concerned about the NSA, but at least I can sort of fight the system. What if I'm from Cambodia? Do I want the Chinese spying on me instead or do I have more faith in the Americans?
Lots of questions and uncertainty here, in my view, except that the U.S. needs to pick up its toys and go home when it's being put at a disadvantage.