Madrid meeting on trembling international version(hereinafter referred to as TThe game has been preliminarily settled. Some people say that this can be regarded as a concession between China and the United States, but anyone who has known the United States' previous idea of swallowing whales knows that Dongda University was completely saved by grabbing food from the tiger's mouth. Of course, what Lao Luo wants to discuss today is not the old-fashioned topic of who loses hemp and who wins hemp, but something that everyone may not realize.
If you just look at the TT event as a common business game or a cybersecurity dispute, it’s a bit of a mess. In fact, behind this tug-of-war that has lasted for several years is a fundamental dislocation in political logic, strategic intentions and time scales between the two superpowers: one is playing for the next election, and the other is laying out for the next eraThe key to understanding the U.S. attitude toward TT is not “how to solve this problem,” but “how to keep the problem valuable.”
American politics, to some extent, is a performance cycle. Its core driving force is the ballot, and the ballot most relies not on performance, but on emotional mobilization. From this perspective, TT is almost a perfect political scenario: It has so-called "villains" from Dongda University, "vulnerable groups" involved in national security and youth protection, and political heroes who have come forward to "defend the country".Facing such an issue with a clear structure and strong sense of conflict, it is simply the top fuel in electoral politics.
Therefore, we can see that the US strategy towards TT has never been to seek a complete solution, but to repeatedly speculate, hear, postpone and renegotiate. Every media release, every round of congressional questioning, and every seemingly harsh ultimatum is essentially a performance: to show domestic voters that "we are seriously dealing with external threats". If you really want to solve the problem, the solution can be made clear long ago. But the problem is that once the play is finished, the topical value disappears. Maintaining TT as a "unresolved threat" is far more politically valuable than a complete ban or complete release. So the big play must be played until voters get bored, or find the next script.
Some people say that, in fact, from the past experience of negotiations with the United States, we can deal with TT issues more flexibly, such as giving up part of our equity. However, since Trump hyped the incident in his first term, China's toughness was completely unexpected, and even the United States didn't expect that we would put on an uncompromising appearance. Why? Because today's TT is no longer a business case, but a "test case" for the global fate of the big East enterprises.This case requires an answer for other Chinese enterprises that are about to go offshore on a massive scale, or a viable path, that is, a big East enterprise that operates entirely in accordance with international rules, hiring local teams, and accepting local regulation, can get a fair chance to compete in the Western-dominated global market?
If we back down on this case, do you know what it means? It means that the globalization of big East enterprises exists a ceiling set by American politics, under such a ceiling, no matter how compliant your behavior, how localized your operations, but as long as you are from the East, as long as you are still a big East enterprise, you can be sanctioned by the United States at will.This is why a large enterprise is desperately trying to get rid of the identity label of a large East enterprise, emphasizing three and five times that it is the fundamental reason why it is rooted in the global international enterprise of the East. Therefore, the outcome of the negotiations is not just about one company, but also about all the East enterprises that intend to go out. Once the ceiling is confirmed, any enterprise in any field in the future may face similar difficulties.
Are you still deeply impressed by the Alstom incident? As a company that was once a world leader in the field of energy and power, it was finally dismantled by the United States by judicial means, and its core business was acquired by General Electric. wholeThis process was realized through the long-arm jurisdiction of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Alstom was forced to pay huge fines, the management was arrested, and the company was eventually dismantled. For France, what happened to Alstom is not only the disappearance of one enterprise, but the collapse of the industrial pillar of the whole country and the withdrawal of a key industry. After Alstom was acquired, With its technology integration, GE has rapidly expanded its global share in gas turbines, offshore wind power and other fields, which has directly caused other European companies, such as Siemens, to lose most of the market in this field. Since then, France and even Europe have greatly weakened their voice in the field of energy infrastructure, no other company dares to challenge the United States. Do you think it is terrible?
For Dongda, the TT battle is to avoid Alstom's fate. This is not a matter of commercial competition, but whether to allow one country to determine the global survival right of another country's enterprises by virtue of political power. TT is a rare product in Dongda Internet industry that has truly achieved globalization. It is highly international from product design, organizational structure to operational logic, and even its overseas business is independent of Dongda market. In a sense, TT is the benchmark for Dongda enterprises to upgrade their overseas models: it does not rely on low prices and scale to win, nor does it rely on administrative means such as financial subsidies to win, but relies on technological and product innovation and localized operations to succeed. If even such companies that comply with all Western market rules can be sanctioned for no reason, then the road to sea for other Dongda companies will only be more difficult.Either do low-end OEM forever, or it can only be limited to non-sensitive fields. Once it touches the core technology or cultural influence, it may be blocked at any time.
To resolutely protect TT is to send a signal to the global market: Dong Da has the ability and willingness to protect its enterprises to participate in fair competition. We do not accept selective law enforcement, nor accept any political interference in business by any majority, this signal can be said to be crucial to enterprise confidence. Once we understand this level, we can see through the strange impasse of the TT dispute: The United States is playing an "introspective" political performance, which requires a continuous theme heat and election materials; so they are constantly creating conflict, change the rules, delay judgment, let the drama continue to sing. while the Dong Da is conducting an "extroverted" strategic declaration, the object is the world, especially other countries are watching, the Dong Da needs to show a attitude through TT, we will not accept unfair treatment, but will also protect our global enterprisesOne is “process”, one is “result”; one is looking at the mid-term elections next year, a global layout for the next fifty years, and the political narrative on both sides is the same app, but the language, goal and time scale are completely different.
From a broader perspective, the TT incident was a key node in the East Bank’s attempt to end “American-style long-arm jurisdiction.” In recent decades, large corporations in many countries have been subjected to U.S. judicial and political pressure and are eventually forced to succumb. Neither Alston, Siemens nor Toshiba have really managed to get out of this situation. To be honest, negotiations around TT have long been no longer a matter of a company or a business area, but the political struggle of the great powers over the rules of business governance.If we let TT be forced to be deprived or blocked, it would be the default of the old rule of “Power is Truth.” Then in the future, in the fields of chips, new energy, artificial intelligence, the ceiling of the East enterprises will only be lower.
Believe me, although the United States has made concessions this time, as long as TT’s global influence remains, every White House will overturn its old bills, because this issue is essentially used: The U.S. uses it to sustain its domestic political drama, which requires continued conflict and space for performance; the U.S. uses it to declare its destiny in the age of globalization, which requires the victory of principles and the establishment of historical status.Per one day in the future, we’ll find TT gradually out of the headlines, but that doesn’t mean the problem is resolved, more likely the two sides find a new balance: both allowing the American political performance to continue and allowing TT to continue operating under restrictive conditions.
But in any case, in this big business confrontation dominated by political narratives, the East has clearly drawn an insurmountable red line: Dongda enterprises will not easily withdraw from the world stage, and we will not accept the ceiling unilaterally set by others.
This is the show, the real script.