美财长放话：一旦中国在稀土上“出尔反尔”，美国将随时准备动手

Group 1 - The U.S. Treasury Secretary's strong remarks about potential countermeasures against China regarding rare earth exports indicate a defensive posture, reflecting underlying anxieties about U.S. reliance on Chinese supply chains [1][10][15] - China dominates the global rare earth industry, holding over 70% of the mining and processing market share, and more than 90% in high-purity separation and deep processing, making the U.S. heavily dependent on imports despite having its own rare earth mines [3][5] - The U.S. has been attempting to establish a "rare earth alliance" with countries like Australia and Canada to reduce dependence on China, but has struggled to create a complete supply chain from mining to manufacturing [5][11] Group 2 - The U.S. Treasury Secretary's contradictory statements about not wanting to decouple from China while simultaneously emphasizing risk reduction highlight the complex dynamics of U.S.-China relations [6][8] - Recent agreements between the U.S. and China regarding rare earth exports have been undermined by the U.S. Treasury Secretary's aggressive rhetoric, raising questions about the reliability of U.S. commitments [8][10] - The U.S. economy is facing significant challenges, including high inflation and a struggling manufacturing sector, which contribute to the urgency behind the Treasury Secretary's statements [11][15] Group 3 - The high costs and environmental challenges associated with establishing a rare earth processing industry in the U.S. mean that it will take at least 8 to 10 years to develop a stable industrial system, during which time the U.S. will remain reliant on China [11][13] - The U.S. strategy of "risk reduction" in the rare earth sector is complicated by the high costs of compliance with environmental standards, which have led to project delays even in resource-rich countries like Australia [13][15] - The ongoing U.S.-China competition over rare earths underscores the importance of cooperation in stabilizing the global economy, as threats and confrontations are unlikely to yield beneficial outcomes for either side [15]