Western commentators often view the emergence of a modernizing Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) through the theoretical lens of Alfred Thayer Mahan, an influential 19th century American naval theorist who advocated an imperialistic brand of sea power modeled on the British example. This approach, however, risks painting a misleading picture of China's naval ambitions because it is based on a hegemonic theory of naval power that most regional powers cannot realistically follow. Instead, this article turns to the writings of Alfred von Tirpitz, the architect of the short‐lived German battle fleet that unsuccessfully challenged British naval dominance during World War I. Applying his ideas about naval power and hegemony to East Asia's strategic context is a useful heuristic device for revealing key logics behind three facets of US–Chinese naval rivalry: (i) China's anxieties over access to markets; (ii) the importance of alliance value; and (iii) the fiscal, operational, and technological dynamics that shape naval arms races between a hegemon and its weaker regional contender. In all three cases, the application of non‐hegemonic naval theory raises important questions about the sustainability and justice of current US naval strategy in the Western Pacific while simultaneously laying bare the major pitfalls of China's current trajectory.