Considering the CIA's loss of double-agents, I'd say China maybe winning the HUMINT arms race at the moment.
There's too much to lose with direct military engagement (nuclear MAD), so competition will be limited to proxy wars, "sharp-elbow" island capture and overflights, trade wars and cyber attacks. The question becomes at what point does hard proof of attacks in these other domains necessitate an escalation of limited hostilities in the conventional dimensions (ie military).
And also - "There is no Thucydides trap' - an essay/review of Graham Allison's book by Chinese history scholar Arthur Waldron - "In this book review, he argues persuasively against a concept that has become a pillar of establishment thinking on China." 
War is inevitable. It's tragic that still sounds like a reasonable statement thus far into the 21st Century.
there might be war, or there might not be. china isn't about to start shit when they could be making money hand over fist with anyone and everyone. they're not about to be bullied, either.
One group of people don't voluntarily give up dominance over land (and other finite resources) to other group of people. Wars don't happen because people get bored, wars happen because people want what someone else has.
If we can keep from killing ourselves for long enough, maybe this trend can lead us to a place where violence is just one more chapter in the history books.