China-US G2 positioning landed, 4 major hard nuclear logic rewriting the global pattern, a shift in the global order reconstructed by power!
Yesterday, Trump rarely used the G2 term to define Sino-US relations. This change in positioning that seems to be reviving the old rhetoric of the United States is actually an inevitable choice under multiple realistic pressures. Behind a series of policy adjustments such as the elimination of 50% export control penetration measures related to rare earths, the elimination of additional port fees, and the reduction of tariffs on China is the United States 're-understanding of the global power landscape. The past unilateral pressure on China has failed. Only by facing up to China's strength and position and responding to changes with an equal attitude is the rational way back.
In the field of science and technology, the hopeful technological blockade of the United States has not reached expectations, China's independent breakthrough in high-end manufacturing, digital economy and other fields, so that the "card neck" strategy becomes an empty talk; and China's super-large-scale exports, so that the dependence on US exports drops to less than 10%, but China's exports still grow rapidly.
What makes the United States even more uneasy is that it has been "stuck in a key link" by China. Rare earths are the "vitamins" of modern industries, and China controls 70% of the world's supply capacity. While the United States, from F-35 fighter jets, aircraft carriers, automobiles, iPhone phones, and chips, almost all high-end manufacturing and defense equipment are inseparable from rare earths. According to analysis, an F-35 alone requires 410 kilograms of rare earth materials, and 27.3 tons of rare earth materials are consumed to build a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. The stability of supply chains such as daily necessities and pharmaceutical raw materials is more directly related to the survival of American companies and the cost of living of people. This structural dependence
Let "decoupling and breaking the chain" become a self-harming behavior. In addition to strategic resources, U.S. agriculture and people's livelihood are also highly dependent on China. The huge gap in soybean exports needs to be filled by the China market. Otherwise, the dissatisfaction of domestic agricultural states will trigger political turmoil.
Military deterrence and international siege also failed, further consolidating the basis of G2 positioning.In the Western Pacific region, the modernization of China's national defense forces, so that the military advantages of the United States are continuously diluted, so-called "absolute security" no longer exists, and the US-Japan-Korea alliance can not dry up China.
At the international level, cracks have already appeared in the containment alliance led by the United States. The Western camp is well aware of the importance of key resources such as rare earths to its own industry, and no one wants to fall into a crisis of supply cut-off by following the United States. This binding of interests makes the attempt to isolate China go up in smoke. When military pressure fails to work and the alliance system is distracted, the United States has to admit that China's international influence can no longer be dispelled through confrontation.
The painful lesson of the tariff war has also made the Trump group recognize the shortcomings of lack of preparation.In the years of trade friction, China has demonstrated strong resistance to pressure due to its stable institutional advantages and policy resilience, while the United States has fallen into a situation where high inflation and manufacturing reflow are hindered.
In contrast, harvesting allies has become a more "cost-effective" option, oppressing Japan, South Korea and Europe to increase military spending, and coercing Japan, South Korea and the Gulf countries to expand investment in the United States. This old zero-sum game routine is far more profitable than hard-working with China. It is this realistic consideration that urges the United States to put down its stance and send signals of cooperation with practical actions such as tariff reductions and exemptions.
It is worth noting that the positioning of the G2 is not the Obama-era "China-America co-government" and the U.S. leader's resumption, but the fact that Trump's "power supremacy" logic is acknowledged. this "must co-govern" is a rational choice in the context of globalization, China-U.S. as the world's two largest economies, its relations have long exceeded the "confrontation or cooperation" binary opposition, forming a dynamic balance of "inter-constraining and interdependent".
The U.S. landing on the position of the G2 means that the global order is transforming from “single-polar dominance” to “double-nuclear coordination”.It is not the transfer of hegemony, but the return of power; this positioning shift by power re-forming will finally tell the world that the core of the international order is never who’s voice is big, but who’s strength is hard, who’s cooperation is more valuable.
“American imperialism is very arrogant; where there is no reason, there must be no reason; if there is no reason, it must be forced.”