美国第一块稀土磁铁诞生，贝森特欢呼雀跃：再不怕中国卡脖子了

Core Viewpoint - The announcement of the first rare earth magnet produced in the U.S. in 25 years is seen as a significant breakthrough for American supply chains, reducing reliance on China [3][5] Group 1: Announcement and Implications - U.S. Treasury Secretary Besant proudly announced the production of a rare earth magnet, emphasizing it as a key breakthrough for American supply chains and independence from China [3] - The magnet is crucial for various technologies, including AI chips, fighter jets, missile systems, and consumer electronics, indicating its importance in future industries [3] - Besant attributed the achievement to the Trump administration, suggesting a shift towards self-sufficiency in critical mineral resources [3] Group 2: Domestic Reactions and Criticism - The announcement faced skepticism from mainstream media, which criticized it as a political stunt rather than a genuine technological achievement [5] - Experts questioned the credibility of Besant, suggesting that the magnet sample may not have undergone rigorous testing and could merely be a model [5][7] - Concerns were raised about the urgency of the U.S. government to break China's technological barriers, leading to potential exaggerations in claims [5][7] Group 3: Production Challenges - The company involved, eVAC, plans to start production of sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnets in 2026, indicating a long road ahead before mass production [7][9] - The initial production target is only 1,200 metric tons, which is considered negligible in the global rare earth magnet market and insufficient for U.S. industrial and military needs [9] - The factory's workforce of 800 workers is viewed as inefficient within the context of American manufacturing standards [9] Group 4: China's Position - China's rare earth policies are characterized as consistent and focused on national defense rather than an intention to restrict others [9][12] - The Chinese perspective emphasizes that rare earth resources should serve civilian purposes and improve global living standards, contrasting with the U.S. narrative [12] - The announcement is perceived as a politically calculated move rather than a transformative technological revolution, highlighting U.S. strategic anxieties and challenges in revitalizing domestic manufacturing [12]