Neither Russia nor China have anywhere near the sort of global military presence that the Americans do... The Russians have a base in Syria, there might be one in Eastern Africa (Djibouti?) and are all over Belarus including staging tactical nuclear weapons on its territory... China would be in a similar position, I would think... The Americans have hundreds of bases all over world in allied countries, in neutral countries, even in enemy countries
The Americans push a self serving rules based international order whereas the Russians and Chinese, on its face granted, seek a return to international law and institutions
The Americans have pushed the notion of the US as the indispensable nation globally (Madeleine Albright) whereas the Russians and Chinese have quite tactfully pushed a multipolar world
The Americans have recently (see Marco Rubio) decried the growing process of de-dollarisation because it creates a concurrent global economy and financial structures which will mean that the US won't be able to use economic sanctions anymore in the near future
China has not been to war with another country since 1979(?) with Vietnam and Russia's wars since the end of the USSR have been internal (Chechnya), on its borders (Georgia, Ukraine), or by invite (Syria)... The US, on the other hand, have waged wars in the Middle East, the subcontinent, the Balkans, Africa etc. far from their own territory making it far harder to argue self defence
The US have deliberately attacked civilian infrastructure of not only enemies (eg. there was a pipeline in the USSR that the CIA proudly sabotaged in the Reagan years) but also of an ally with Germany and Nordstream which fundamentally undermines Europe's future prosperity by ensuring that Europe will have to spend 3-4x times for liquified natural gas via boat... And this is consistent US foreign policy to oppose economic and energy integration between Russia and Europe for decades regardless of whether it's a Democrat or Republican in the White House
The US remains the only country to have used nuclear weapons and Biden has walked back a pledge to adopt a "no first strike'" policy... Which then begs the question what is the difference between America's "vital interests" and Russia's "existential threats" justifying the use of nuclear weapons
The president, who pledged during the campaign to use nuclear weapons only in response to a similar attack, declined to set that as U.S. policy.
www.defenseone.com
Through the machinery of NATO, the US is able to influence and shape foreign policy of a huge block of 31(?) nations whereas Russia and China have again tactfully pushed a "partnership" only between the countries only and rejected Cold War era bloc politics
Etc.