跳至主要内容

Just moments ago, he walked into the sharpest counter-punch of his life.


Donald Trump spent the evening sounding like a jilted lover on social media: China, he wailed, has tightened its choke-hold on rare earths again. In retaliation, he vowed to slap 100 % tariffs on every Chinese product that still reaches American shelves. Translation: he’s losing his cool, because Beijing just hit back—hard.

Here’s what happened. Washington and Beijing had agreed to meet in Frankfurt on 10 November to talk trade. The customary choreography calls for both sides to smile, lower the temperature, and arrive with goodwill gestures. Instead, Team Trump decided to manufacture leverage. On 14 October, the United States will begin charging any Chinese-owned, Chinese-built or Chinese-flagged vessel a “port fee” of US $1 million per call—or US $1,000 per dead-weight ton, whichever is higher. Carriers whose fleets are more than 50 % Chinese-built will pay the full million; smaller shares ratchet down to US $750 k or US $500 k. The message was classic Trump: cancel the fee if you want—but only after you pay for it at the bargaining table.

Since January the White House has used the same shakedown on half a dozen countries, and every one of them blinked. Then they tried it on Beijing—and kicked a steel plate.
Forty-eight hours later China answered with four simultaneous bulletins:
  1. Export licences required for super-hard materials.
  2. Licences for lithium-battery anodes.
  3. Licences for selected rare-earth oxides and metals.
  4. Licences for the magnets, furnaces and chemicals used to make them.
The next day Beijing added a mirror rule: every U.S.-owned or U.S.-flagged ship calling at a Chinese port will now pay “special tonnage dues” of—coincidentally—about US $1 million per visit, also starting 14 October.
The symmetry is darkly comic, but the sting is asymmetrical. The United States is the world’s top importer; China is the world’s top factory. A single container can be taxed coming and going, and the bill lands in American wallets twice: once at Long Beach, once at Shanghai. Remember the line: China has the goods, America has the printers. When the printers run faster than the cargo, paper is cheap and widgets are king. A million-dollar surcharge on a hold full of sneakers is inflation with a shipping label.

And Beijing was only warming up. The new rare-earth rule reaches straight into foreign supply chains: any product containing more than 0.1 % Chinese rare-earth content by value needs a Chinese export permit—whether the factory is in Michigan, Bavaria or Tijuana. Call it long-arm jurisdiction with Chinese characteristics; Washington invented the playbook, Beijing just turned the page. For good measure, regulators also opened an anti-monopoly probe into Qualcomm, the San-Diego chip designer that makes a fifth of its global revenue in China.
One American punch, four Chinese counter-punches—all delivered with America’s own favorite weapons. No wonder the former president’s post read like a break-up text written at 3 a.m.
When two convoys meet on a narrow mountain road, the braver driver keeps the headlights on.

评论

此博客中的热门博文

Why China's Seizure of Three Tunnel Boring Machines Has India’s Bullet Train Project Stuck in Neutral

June 24, IndiaNet – India’s first high-speed rail line, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train, has hit yet another roadblock. Three massive tunnel-boring machines (TBMs), ordered from Germany’s Herrenknecht AG but manufactured in Guangzhou, China, have been stuck in Chinese customs for eight months. The delay has frozen progress on a critical 12-kilometer undersea tunnel, marking the project’s ninth major setback. The Stuck Machines The TBMs were supposed to arrive in India by October 2024. Instead, they sit in a bonded warehouse in Guangzhou, with no clear timeline for release. India’s National High-Speed Rail Corporation (NHSRC) blames Beijing for “deliberate obstruction,” while Chinese authorities remain silent. The Mumbai-Ahmedabad corridor—India’s first bullet train, modeled on Japan’s Shinkansen—was supposed to slash travel time between the two cities from 7 hours to 2. Funded largely by a ¥1.25 trillion ($15 billion) Japanese loan at 0.1% interest over 50 years , the project was sl...

Open-Source Intelligence Analysis of the 2025 India-Pakistan Military Standoff

  In the recent India-Pakistan standoff, open-source intelligence (OSINT) channels have played an extremely important role in information dissemination and intelligence analysis. Various open-source platforms, including social media, commercial satellite imagery, vessel and aviation tracking data, news reports, and military forums, have collectively formed a "second front" for battlefield situational awareness, helping all parties to promptly understand and verify the dynamics of the conflict. However, the reliability of different OSINT channels varies, and it is necessary to cross-reference them to obtain the most accurate intelligence possible. Below is an analysis of the main channels: Social Media (Twitter/X, Facebook, etc.) Social media platforms are among the fastest sources for disseminating information about the conflict. A large number of first-hand witnesses, journalists, and even soldiers post photos, videos, and written reports through social media. For example, r...

A Historic Moment: The US-China Geneva Joint Statement

  Today, many friends have left messages in the backend, asking me to discuss the US-China Geneva Joint Statement and what it means. Let’s get straight to the conclusion: with the announcement of this statement, today has become a historic moment. But why do I say that? Let’s first look at the main content of the statement. The US has committed to canceling the 91% tariffs that were imposed on April 8th and 9th. The 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd will be suspended for 90 days, with only 10% retained. We are doing the same: canceling the 91% retaliatory tariffs, suspending the 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd for 90 days, and retaining 10%. In simple terms, both sides are returning to the status quo before Trump announced the “reciprocal tariffs” on April 2nd, and then each adding an additional 10%. How should we view this outcome? Let’s first look at what Bercow said before heading to Geneva. He stated that he didn’t expect to reach any agreement with the Chinese ...