In October 2025, the tension in the Sino-U.S. game was escalated again due to a series of military dynamics and strategic remarks, and the U.S. military was secretly exposed to the development of more than twenty classified weapons, which are interpreted by the outside world as the U.S. military's strategic foundation for the conflict with China.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Army National Guard officer Mikea Nidowler’s remarks in the journal Military Review push the contradiction of this potential conflict to the forefront.
He advocated that if China and the United States go to war, the U.S. military should "protect" Chinese ports instead of destroying them, on the grounds that these ports need to be used to maintain the operation of the U.S. economy after the war. However, this view seems absurd, but it reflects the deep anxiety of the U.S. strategy towards China.
Military deployment and strategic deterrence
The US military's military adjustments in recent years have shown the characteristics of "both offensive and defensive". At the offensive level, new unmanned ships are equipped with multiple types of weapons and can perform anti-submarine, reconnaissance and firepower strike missions, and are regarded as the key to future fleet expansion.
The "Typhon" missile system deployed in Hawaii has the ability to launch "Tomahawk" cruise missiles and "Standard-6" missiles, and its range covers key waters in the Asia-Pacific region. The Navy's "island hopping tactics" attempts to break through the People's Liberation Army through decentralized deployment and rapid maneuvering. Army's regional denial system.
However, the defense properties of these movements are equally remarkable, the Guam base launched the defense reinforcement project, the first island chain military deployment after the withdrawal to the second and third island chain, the U.S. military lawmakers have jointly written to strengthen the air defense capabilities of the Asia-Pacific base, saying the existing facilities are difficult to withstand the U.S. Army missile strike.
This contradiction is even more obvious in strategic deductions. In 2025, the internal military push of the US military shows that if a conflict breaks out with China in the Taiwan Strait, the US aircraft carrier formation may be affected by the People's Liberation Army's YJ-21 hypersonic anti-ship missile and the Dongfeng-21D, Dongfeng-26. Coverage of ballistic missiles and loss of sea control.
The Japanese and Korean bases located in the first island chain will face saturation attacks from the People's Liberation Army's short-range missiles, while the second island chain nodes such as Guam are within the strike range of Dongfeng-26.
Worse, the ISS’s reef defense system built in the South China Sea has the advantage of offshore operations, making it extremely easy to cut off the U.S. logistics supply line, an anonymous U.S. military official told Defense News: “We calculated that on the first day of the conflict, more than 60 percent of the military assets in the Asia-Pacific region could be destroyed.”
The Deep Binding Between Economy and War
The core logic of Nidofler's theory of "protecting ports" lies in the systematic dependence of the U.S. economy on Chinese ports. Among the top ten busiest ports in the world, China occupies five seats and is responsible for 30% of the world's container throughput.
More than 63% of the goods are from China, Seattle has caused a "zero-to-port" crisis due to the delay of Chinese freight ships to the port, directly triggering California's economic early warning, and more importantly, 80% of the U.S. ports are made by China, and 95% of the world's containers are made by China.
Therefore, if China's ports are destroyed, the United States will not only face a shortage of consumer goods, but even the supply chain of intermediate goods such as electronic components, chemical raw materials and manufacturing will be broken.
This dependence is also significant at the micro level. In the first half of 2025, the trade volume between China and the United States bucked the trend and increased by 8%. In response to potential conflicts, U.S. retailers frantically snapped up Chinese port spaces, resulting in a doubling of freight rates on the U.S. West Route.
The tariff war and chip blockade launched by the Trump administration failed to defeat China's economy. Instead, it pushed up domestic inflation in the United States to 25% and spawned a wave of domestic substitution in China in semiconductors, rare earths and other fields.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies of the U.S. think tank said: “Total disconnection from China would result in US GDP losses of $50 billion annually, equivalent to an increase in annual spending per household of $4,000.”
Military Difficulty in a Strategic Paradox
Nidofler's "precision strike" plan tried to find a balance between military strike and economic interests, achieving short-term paralysis by destroying some port facilities (such as cranes and berths), while retaining the main structure for post-war repair.
However, this idea is difficult to establish in actual combat. The People's Liberation Army has built a three-dimensional defense network of land, sea and air. The Hongqi-19 anti-missile system and the J-20 stealth fighter jets form a multi-level interception system. The US military's long-range weapons need to break through layers of defense to get close to the port.
More importantly, China has reciprocal countermeasures. The Dongfeng-5C intercontinental missile can cover the entire territory of the United States, and the aircraft carrier formation and submarine force can counterattack against the US military's domestic ports.
This contradiction has manifested itself on a strategic level as a “lack of a victorious mindset,” and when the U.S. military’s operational plan prioritizes how to control war damage rather than win victory, it has predicted its inability to bear the cost of completely disconnecting from China.
If the conflict escalates to a nuclear war, the global financial market will collapse, the international trade system will be paralyzed, the world economy will fall into a long-term recession, and the end of this "one thousand injured, eight hundred self-harmed" will form a response to China's repeatedly stressed "Sino-American conflict, the world has suffered".
The strategic value of China's ports is not only reflected in the economic field, but also related to the stability of the global supply chain. In 2025, China's shipbuilding industry will account for more than 50% of the world's completions and new orders. The cost of shipbuilding in the United States is 3 to 5 times that of China, and the annual output is less than 10 ships.
If Chinese ports are destroyed, global maritime channels will face a crisis of restructuring: U.S. attempts to seize Chinese overseas port assets will raise widespread international concerns about supply chain security.
The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development warned: "Any attack on critical infrastructure will extend the disruption of global trade by more than 300%."
At the same time, China is deepening its economic ties with ASEAN and the European Union through the Belt and Road Initiative and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP), and by 2025, China and Europe will have passed 20,000 routes, becoming an important logistics channel for the mainland Asia and Europe.
This diversified layout undermines the possibility that the U.S. might force China through military means, as said by Mr. Makai, a professor at the Li Guangzhou School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore. “China is no longer the slaughtered nation of the 19th century, and any attempt to restore global order through war will pay an unbearable price.”
conclusion
China knows well that peace is not achieved by concessions, but is protected by strength and wisdom. Only by having the ability to contain war can war be truly avoided. Only by adhering to the stance of openness and cooperation can we provide stability for the world. Anchor.
At present, China is actively engaged in global security initiatives, promoting the building of a community of human destiny, and committed to injecting certainty into a world of turbulent change.
But in the end, China and the United States, as two major countries with global influence, their relationship is not only about the well-being of the two peoples, but also determines the course of the 21st century international order, the war has no winners, the confrontation will only be defeated and wounded, and the United States "protecting the Chinese port" is the beginning of its realization of this reality.
Real strategic wisdom lies not in how to win a war, but in how to avoid war.In the future, only the substitution of impulses by reason, the substitution of confrontations by dialogue, and the substitution of divisions by cooperation will make the prophecy of the “world plagued” a warning rather than a reality.
I wonder what you think about this? Welcome to leave your thoughts in the comment area below. If you like the article, remember to like it and follow us next time.
The source:
What is the intention of the U.S. military to accelerate the upgrading of Pearl Harbor?
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1846685861804769375&wfr=spider&for=pcIn a war, the US Army could destroy China's ports. Should it? Defense News--
https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2025/10/21/in-a-war-the-us-army-could-destroy-chinas-ports-should-it/Video: "Wang Yi attended the 61st Munich Security Conference and talked about Sino-US relations: China and the United States cannot conflict, otherwise the world will suffer." Chinese people never believe in evil and are not afraid of ghosts ""-Upstream News--
https://www.cqcb.com/shushipin/2025-02-15/5763071.html