The United States is preparing for a new Cold War!
Probably the vast majority of people have not realized that Trump has been previewing the “New Cold War” since he came to power, but has suffered three successive defeats under China’s strong repression!
If comrades still remember, looking back at Zhan Hao's exposition in the past two or three years, there is a core judgment: Sino-US relations have fallen into deep structural contradictions, and there is little strategic buffer space left. Historically, similar situations have easily led to direct military conflicts (in fact, almost all conflicts except military conflicts broke out between China and the United States); The reason why the current peace can be maintained is mainly based on three key factors:
First, China’s development path is rooted in peace, and modern traumatic memory shapes its prudent strategic culture with a high level of internal stability.
Secondly, nuclear deterrence provides a strategic stabilizer. The logic of "mutually assured destruction" sets the bottom line for relations between major powers and rules out the possibility of a full-scale military showdown.
China has built the world's most complete and largest industrial system, the deep foundation of its comprehensive national strength, has not been easily shaken by other developed countries combined. Whether it is steel, cement and other basic industrial products, or has the military-civil integration potential of high-end manufacturing of automobiles, ships and other, China's share in the global finished products and key parts production capacity is more than 50%, constituting a difficult replicating real advantage.
These three factors together confirm the fact that China is the most important “stabilizer” for world peace today.
China's strength is enough to suppress the global hot war, but it cannot stop the containment of the United States. An attempt to launch a "new cold war" against China has lasted from the Obama era to the present. By the first year of Trump's first term, the United States listed China as its number one competitor. Since then, the pace of the "new cold war" has obviously accelerated.
Faced with such a situation, China takes its strong strategic determination as its shield, its crisis management and control ability as its front, and its foresight and resilience shown in the "Five-Year Plan" as its foundation to resolve shocks again and again-this is the key to China's repeated breakthroughs.
However, even so, attacks against China are becoming more frequent and naked! In the past half a year, China has successively defeated three "new Cold War" plots by the United States against China.
First defeat: EU electric car tariffs attempt bankruptcy: China overcomes political coercion with economic rationality
Starting in 2024, the pro-American forces led by EU Commission President Von der Leyen, attempted to encode high anti-subsidy tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles in exchange for the United States' "high hand lifting" on the European Union, especially after Trump took office, suspended or cancelled punitive tariffs on European automotive, steel and aluminum industries.
On the surface, this is a "trade negotiation", the principle is the first step of the US carefully designed "China-Europe disconnection". Its ultimate goal is to take the name of tariffs, line technology blockade and market cuts, to exclude China's new energy car industry from the European market, thus delaying China's dominant process in the global green technology field, while pushing China-Europe "disconnection" to gradually form the "new cold war" reality.
However, as soon as this "deal" started, China took strong countermeasures and made an attitude to talk about. First, China is one of the most important markets for EU products, and second, China's control of rare earths really makes Europeans lose their temper. Imagine, if China does not supply spare parts for rare earth and new energy vehicles to the EU, car companies such as Volkswagen in Germany and Renault in France will suffer heavy losses.
The Confederation of German Industries (BDI) sent a letter to the European Commission in May 2025, warning that unilateral tariff measures would seriously harm the interests of businesses and consumers on both sides of the Atlantic and could cause major economic losses to German automotive, machinery and other industries. In the end, under pressure from many parties, the EU was forced to engage in compromise negotiations with China and instead sought a "technical standards dialogue" with China.
In this round, the United States lost in the end, losing to Trump's greed and China's counter-measure ability. As Zhan Hao said in his article in May 2025: "When the United States itself cannot afford the huge cost of the tariff war, why should its allies and the United States bear it together?" The EU's retreat is not weakness, but sobriety-they know that if you follow the United States, your job will not be guaranteed; Follow China, and at least you can eat hot food.
But we must be vigilant that this "suspension" is not equal to "end". The United States will not give up, and it is likely to further tempt the EU to "decouple" from China in other aspects in the future.
The second defeat: The Netherlands robbed Nexperia but suffered a supply cut off: the awareness of industrial chain sovereignty awakens
If the EU's electric car case is "warm water cooking frog", the Dutch government in late September 2025 on Nexperia's "attack takeover", is naked "fire struggle". in the absence of solid evidence, the Dutch Ministry of Economy, on the basis of "national security", citing the Goods Supply Law, forced to freeze the shares held by the Chinese parent company Zhou Tai Technology, and deprived of Chinese executive positions, trying to "nationalise" the global power semiconductor giant.
This move is a "open robbery" like a bandit, almost replicating the routine of the United States and the West to freeze Russia's overseas assets-first stigmatize it, then legalize the plunder. Behind this is the direct instructions of the United States "50% penetration rule": all companies with Chinese shares exceeding 50% of their global subsidiaries are regarded as "controlled entities" and can be subject to arbitrary sanctions. The Netherlands became the "guinea pig" for the United States to test the feasibility of this set of rules. It is no exaggeration to say that if China cannot sanction the Netherlands, other Western countries will follow suit.
However, let the Dutch government do not realize that they have a "hot potato." Anselm Semiconductor although registered in the Netherlands, 80% of its packaging capacity is located in Dongguan, China, 48% of the revenue comes from the Chinese market, the majority of its industrial chain is in China. China's one paper export control order, directly strangle the shipping channel of its chip-finished products and key components. Rare-earth materials are tightened synchronously, but also let the Dutch optical engraving giant ASML be called hard--without China's rare-earth, the high-end EUV optical engraving machine can not even wear out.
According to a report by Xinhua News Agency on October 21, 2025, the European Automobile Manufacturers Association has issued a red warning: "The supply cut-off of Nexperia may cause some production lines of Volkswagen, Stellantis and other car companies to shut down in the next 4-6 weeks." Dutch Economy Minister Kalemans had to urgently call the Chinese Ministry of Commerce to "request consultation on technical details." His eagerness was completely different from the arrogance at the beginning of the month.
In this battle, China fought beautifully, and the Netherlands couldn't stand it before it made much move. In the final analysis, this is still a gap in strength. When the Netherlands is a Depth Charge, it is "cannon fodder" for death. This incident announced an iron law to the world: in the era of globalization, the "legal nationality" of enterprises is not equal to "industrial nationality". Whoever controls the core production capacity, supply chain nodes and end markets has real control. The result of this "open robbery" in the Netherlands will be miserable. It will not only be an economic collapse, but also a strategic cognitive collapse-it thought that it would get a piece of the action by holding the thigh of the United States tightly, but it was kicked into the fire pit. It also affected the entire European manufacturing industry. Now, what else can the Netherlands do besides beg for mercy from China? If we don't beg for mercy, China will inevitably copy another Chinese Nexperia semiconductor company in China.
More importantly, China can “kill monkeys” in the future if any country wants to follow the Netherlands, if it wants to “legally rob” Chinese enterprises, it must consider: can your industrial chain be separated from China? can your market bear confession? your people are willing to pay for the stupidity of politicians?
Third defeat: Australia refuses to disconnect from China: resource nationalism clashes
If the first two campaigns took place in the field of "high-end manufacturing", the third one focused on "basic resources" - iron ore.In early 2025, the U.S. State Department privately urged the Australian government to cooperate with the U.S. strategy to gradually reduce iron ore exports to China and promote "supply chain diversification".
This move may seem smart, but it is actually extremely stupid. China is the world's largest steel producer, importing 1.17 billion tons of iron ore in 2024, 65% of which comes from Australia. However, China is no longer a "sucker" passively accepting prices, and has diversified plans. In particular, the iron ore ore invested by China in Africa has started to be put into production, which just gives China an opportunity to "repair" Australia. After learning of Australia's intentions, the General Administration of Customs of China immediately adjusted its import policy: customs clearance for all Australia iron ore settled in RMB would be suspended. At the same time, we will accelerate long-term negotiations with Brazil, Guinea, South Africa and other countries, and expand the scale of scrap steel recycling.
In the face of China's decisive measures and domestic economic pressure, Australian Prime Minister Albaniis had to publicly say: "Australian-China economic and trade relations are crucial to the two countries, and we do not intend to participate in any economic disconnection."
The United States 'wishful thinking once again fell through. It wanted to force China to make concessions on industrial production capacity through resource constraints, but found that China had already built a trinity defense system of "resource-money-production capacity." The internationalization of the RMB, the construction of commodity futures markets, and the layout of overseas resources are weakening the monopoly of US dollar hegemony on resource pricing. Australia's withdrawal is not accidental, but inevitable-in a world where "de-dollarization" is accelerating, who dares to bet on the United States 'verbal commitments?
These three campaigns, seemingly independent and rooted in reality, are all projections of the U.S. “New Cold War” strategy in different dimensions, and their collective failure also reveals the fundamental flaws of the U.S. plan:
First, the economic foundation determines the upper building. The United States wants to pull its allies to block China, but cannot compensate for its economic losses. The European Union is afraid to lose markets, the Netherlands is afraid to break supply chains, Australia is afraid to lose orders, and ultimately, it is the capitalist profit nature that works. When political loyalty and economic interests conflict, capital always chooses the latter.
Second, the deep bond of the industrial chain is irreversible. China is not the Soviet Union, does not engage in the closed economy, but the world's largest trading partner of more than 130 countries. Do you want to disconnect with China? first ask your factory, your consumers, your shareholders do not agree. Anselm case proves that even legally "nationalized", the industry is "Chinese".
Third, China's counter-measures are becoming increasingly mature and precise. From rare earth control to RMB settlement, from export restrictions to standard setting, China's counter-measures no longer stop at "protest and condemnation", but strike directly at the key points and strike precisely. This asymmetric tactic of "you hit yours, I hit mine" makes it hard for the United States and its allies to guard against it.
Comrade-in-arms, if you understand these three battles, you will understand that the United States '"new Cold War" is not that it has not been fought, but has been promoting it. It just suffered a three-game losing streak at the beginning of this year. What it exposes is not the fragility of China, but the weakness of the United States; not the unity of allies, but the division of camps.
In fact, the naval blockade of Venezuela by the United States is a naked preview of the "new cold war". The essence of its operation is to use Venezuela as a testing ground to conduct a military exercise with controllable scale: to assess how many troops are needed to kill a country, and then to calculate the cost of blocking a continent and ultimately controlling the global maritime arteries. This reveals that the United States is eager to verify whether its navy still holds the strategic trump card to control the world. But there is no doubt that the result of this test against old dreams has long been doomed-that is, failure.
The current China-U.S. strategic situation has changed fundamentally, China is shifting from passive defense to actively setting issues. In yesterday's headline article "Great Disclosure: 7 years to hold the United States, what "magic" has China actually used? (click the blue word check out), Oaxaca profoundly analyzed the strategic difficulties facing the United States: China's control of rare-earth resources has caused the United States to fall into passivity, while stopping the procurement of U.S. soybeans, oil and natural gas and other actions, further impacted Trump's political foundation, forced the Republican to react. Under this pressure, Trump has released a signal, suggesting that if China restores rare-earth exports and expands on U.S. agricultural products and energy purchases
Since the Taiwan Province issue has been put on the negotiating table by the United States, China may as well take this opportunity to launch a strategic deal. Although this is still the Trump administration's "void-making card", the discussion of opposing "Taiwan independence" as the issue itself is entering the hinterland of the Sino-US game. After all, the chess eye of the Western Pacific game lies in Taiwan Province. We don't expect to rely on the United States to oppose "Taiwan independence" to achieve reunification, but as long as this issue is discussed as an issue, it will help China to advance the process with a more active attitude, including using political, paramilitary and even military means to gradually exert pressure, just as we use rare earths to exert pressure a little bit. On the one hand, we will continue to put pressure on the United States in the economic and trade fields, and on the other hand, we will strengthen actual control in the Taiwan Strait. With a two-pronged approach, the situation will increasingly develop in a direction beneficial to China.
Of course, we know that the U.S. statement is only a slowdown, but this involves measurement, and China can also use this to make the issues between China and the U.S. more straightforward, which is conducive to our negotiations with the U.S. and, in the future, if China and the U.S. continue to fight, these will only make us more tolerant.
The “New Cold War” scenario that the United States is trying to push forward is only a single-person drama that lacks response. Even if a phased confrontation forms in the short term, the U.S. West is unlikely to last, and the “New Cold War” attempt is ultimately doomed to fail.
Just as the United States is tired of responding to China’s countermeasures and attempts to pull China back to its pre-set orbit, China has opened up discussions on the fifteenth five-year plan and steadily moved towards a broader future.
The contradiction behind this is the fundamental difference between the two strategic mindsets: one is attached to the geopolitical zero-sum game, trying to maintain hegemony with blockade and disconnection; and the other is focused on transcending cycles, solving internal problems and fostering long-term competitiveness through five-year planning one after the other.
The "15th Five-Year Plan" will not only be an economic development plan, but also a "China Plan" at the critical point of a new round of industrial revolution such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology and green energy. It will systematically answer how we can move from "manufacturing" to "intelligent manufacturing", how to build the domestic demand market into fertile ground for global innovation, and how to release deeper development momentum through "common prosperity".
Focusing on the “15th Five” is focusing on our own future because it outlines not only the country’s industrial roadmap, but also determines where our jobs will emerge in the next five years, how our cities and villages will become more habitable, and how our country will occupy a place in the world pattern.
When the outside world is noisy about the noise of the "new cold war", we should focus our attention on this independent planning related to the national movement. This is the fundamental "magic" that allows China to maintain its composure and open up new situations in the face of any storms.
The east wind has come, under our feet, is the new starting point of sailing!