【文/观察者网 熊超然】当地时间10月10日，美国人工智能军工企业安杜里尔工业公司（Anduril Industries）的创始人帕尔默·勒基（Palmer Luckey），在接受彭博电视台采访时抱怨，美国国防制造业 的供应链过于依赖中国。 "我们必须摆脱中国供应链，"勒基声称："我们需要重新工业化，我们需要拥有自己的稀土供应，并生 产自己的芯片和计算机，中国拥有很大的影响力。" 他宣称，安杜里尔在与中国"脱钩"方面取得了不少 进展，但又转而炒作："我担心的并非是安杜里尔。" 与此同时，随着中美经贸博弈持续，安杜里尔的首席技术官夏姆·桑卡尔（Shyam Sankar）渲染称，两 国之间的冲突"酝酿了近50年"。另一边，安杜里尔的首席执行官布赖恩·施姆夫（Brian Schimpf）则宣 称，当前关税交锋将是美国与中国之间的"长期冲突"，"我们必须为此做好准备"。 2025年6月17日，一架安杜里尔工业公司自主飞行器 (AAV) 在第55届巴黎航展上展出。 资料图 据彭博社介绍，安杜里尔工业公司是美国众多国防科技初创企业中规模最大的一家，这些企业旨在利用 人工智能和自主软件来指挥无人机、战斗机、潜艇和其他载具， ...

然而，特朗普此次面临的难题并不仅仅是政府停摆，更在于美国对华政策与现实情况的矛盾。中美之间的经济博弈已 经持续了很长时间，两国关系紧张，而特朗普政府却一边出台极为严苛的对华政策，一边又在国内出现严重的政治纷 争，内部分歧不断。美国政府在推动对华遏制政策的同时，也面临着内部的政治极化和妥协缺失，民众对政治争斗的 厌倦情绪也日益加重。正如央视新闻所指出的，频繁的政府停摆暴露了美国政治的严重分裂和妥协能力的缺失。 特朗普近期宣布了一系列新的出口管制措施，试图通过这些措施对中国施加更大的压力。不过，在美国国内面临严重 政治危机的情况下，特朗普能否成功执行这些计划，依然是个大问号。 在新一轮中美经贸会谈之前，美国商务部宣布，将进一步加强对中国企业的出口管制，特别是对那些在美国"实体清 单"上的企业以及其持股超过50%的子公司。这意味着，这些企业可能面临更加严厉的出口限制，预计会波及到数千家 中国企业。中国方面立即表态，坚决捍卫中国企业的合法权益，并表示会采取必要的反制措施。 然而，在中国还没有正式采取反制措施时，美国国内的局势却发生了变化。根据央视新闻的报道，美国政府将在9月 30日午夜耗尽资金，而共和党与民主党未能就 ...

在中美谈判尚未开始之前，美国财长贝森特却提前透露了一些信息。他公开表示，中美之间即将迎来"重大突破"。10月2日，贝森特在接受CNBC采访时透 露，双方最高领导人将在本月下旬的APEC会议期间进行非正式会晤，而他本人也将参与中美的第五轮贸易谈判。贝森特信心十足地表示，这一轮谈判将带 来"相当大的突破"，其中农产品采购是讨论的一个重要议题。 回顾过往，特朗普亲自操盘的重大战略往往缺乏全盘考量，导致致命缺陷，而他挑选的团队也只会无条件执行，缺少独立判断。这让特朗普没能预见到中国 反制措施的威力。更糟糕的是，他低估了美国自身在某些领域的脆弱性，像大豆这样的农作物，美国同样高度依赖中国的市场。然而，特朗普却一意孤行地 提高关税，导致美国大豆因中国的反制措施而比阿根廷和巴西的大豆更贵，最终打破了美国农民的希望。 可以说，特朗普这场贸易战是一次典型的"搬起石头砸自己的脚"的教训。这也解释了为何他如此急于与中国高层进行面对面沟通。特朗普希望通过"元首外 交"来化解当前的困境，尤其是在大豆问题上，试图用一些积极的消息缓解国内的压力，并稳定金融市场，避免"特朗普奇迹"这个泡沫被戳破。 然而，特朗普是否能实现这一目标，最终取决于 ...

眼下的中美关系，能用"山雨欲来风满楼"来形容。当地时间9月17日，美联储宣布降息25个基点，这是2025年以来的首次降息动作，消息传出后全球市场立 刻炸了锅。 几乎在同一时间，关于特朗普10月底可能访华的消息也在持续发酵。这两个重磅消息碰到一起，绝不是简单的巧合。 回顾2025年以来的中美经贸较量，用"激烈"二字都不足以形容。 从2月份特朗普以芬太尼问题为由对中国商品加征10%关税开始，到3月份关税翻倍至20%，再到4月份飙升至145%的高位，双方已经进行了四轮正式谈判。 每一次交锋，都伴随着全球股市的剧烈震荡。5月份的日内瓦会谈虽然让关税暂时回落至30%和10%，但90天的缓冲期眼看就要到期。 4月中旬开始，中方的反制措施让美国企业切实感受到了疼痛。 中国民航局要求国内航空公司暂停接收波音飞机，并停止采购相关设备零部件。根据波音公司的计划，本应在2025年向中国客户交付约50架飞机，这些订单 占波音积压订单的约10%。 波音CEO奥特伯格在4月23日公开证实，已有至少三架完成定制的飞机被中国客户拒收，两架已经飞回美国。结果就是波音2025年二季度净亏损6.12亿美 元，虽然比去年同期的14.39亿美元有所收 ...

9月12日，中国商务部发布的一则简短声明在国际社会引发强烈反响。当记者询问美国财政部长贝森特是否即将在西班牙与中国国务院副总理何立 峰举行会晤时，商务部给出了明确答复：经中美双方协商一致，何立峰副总理将率代表团于9月14日至17日赴西班牙马德里，与美国代表举行面对 面会谈。 这场备受瞩目的会谈将聚焦哪些关键议题？深入分析发现，三大核心问题直指中美经贸关系中最敏感的领域：美国单方面加征的惩罚性关税、过度 使用的出口管制措施，以及备受争议的TikTok运营问题。这绝非一次例行公事的会面，而是两大经济体在经贸领域的又一次重要博弈。 为何此次会谈如此关键？从时机来看，2024年美国大选临近，拜登政府在对华政策上需要平衡国内强硬派与商业界的双重压力；而中国正稳步推进 高水平对外开放，同时加快关键技术自主创新步伐，在保持开放合作的同时坚决维护自身发展权益。 这场会谈既不是中美经贸博弈的起点，也不会是终点，而是两国长期经济角力中的又一重要节点。虽然会谈结果可能不会立即显现，但每一次这样 的对话与交锋，都在重塑着未来国际经济秩序的规则框架。 在世界经济格局深刻调整的当下，贸易对抗没有赢家。但历史经验表明，最终能够主导规则制定 ...

中美第四轮关税谈判的突然启动引发广泛关注，这场备受瞩目的经贸磋商在毫无预兆的情况下公布了具体时间和地点。值得注意的是，美方领导人特朗普正 迫切希望中方能在某些关键问题上提供协助，但中方对此并未给予积极回应。与以往不同的是，此次中方主动将谈判的核心议题提前向外界披露，这一策略 性举动充分表明，相较于前几轮谈判的被动应对，中国此次已做好充分准备，将以更加积极主动的姿态参与这场经贸博弈。 据中国商务部9月12日新闻发布会透露，中方代表团将于9月14日启程前往西班牙，展开为期三天的中美第四轮经贸磋商。值得关注的是，中方此次罕见地提 前公布了三个亟待解决的核心议题：首先是悬而未决的美对华24%暂缓关税是否取消的问题；其次是美方能否停止对中国企业的出口管制；而最引人瞩目的 是，此次谈判新增了关于TikTok可能被强制收购的议题。这种开诚布公的做法与以往谈判前保持神秘的态度形成鲜明对比，显示出中方在策略上的重大调 整。 第四轮谈判的突然性尤其引人注目，因为在7月底的第三轮谈判中，双方仅进行了不到48小时的磋商就宣告破裂。当时美方代表贝森特在会后声称谈判取得 建设性成果的外交辞令，实际上暗示了谈判的失败。双方围绕俄罗斯石油问 ...

Group 1 - The core argument revolves around the ongoing economic and technological competition between the US and China, with Trump's claims of having stronger leverage over China being juxtaposed with China's proactive approach to engage in trade negotiations [1][8] - Trump's "killer cards" include imposing a 200% tariff on Chinese rare earths and threatening to cut off Boeing parts supply, but these measures may backfire on the US economy rather than significantly harm China [1][2] - The US heavily relies on China for rare earth processing, with over 90% of its rare earth imports coming from China, making any tariff increase potentially detrimental to the US economy, especially in terms of inflation [2][4] Group 2 - China's domestic production of key components for aircraft, such as the C919, has reached about 70% self-sufficiency, indicating a shift in dependency from Boeing [4][5] - Despite the US's threats, China has diversified its market by expanding exports to ASEAN and the Middle East, which have already surpassed exports to the US, showcasing resilience against potential market losses [5][8] - The ongoing negotiations are framed by China as a demonstration of its responsible global role rather than a sign of weakness, emphasizing its strategic positioning in the global supply chain [5][7] Group 3 - The competition between the US and China transcends simple tariff or supply cut strategies, revealing the US's vulnerabilities in its dependence on Chinese rare earths and market access [8] - China's advancements in technology and international cooperation, particularly in critical sectors like aviation and semiconductors, highlight its growing self-reliance and strategic depth [7][8] - Trump's rhetoric is seen as a domestic political maneuver to project strength ahead of elections, while China remains steadfast in its negotiation stance [8]

Group 1: Global Economic Outlook - The global economy is evolving primarily through the restructuring of globalization rules by the U.S. and China's ongoing efforts to catch up, with both economies accounting for over 40% of global GDP[11] - Since 2015, China's share of global GDP increased by 3.6 percentage points to 18.5% in 2021, while the U.S. share rose to 26.2% in 2024, up 2.1 percentage points from 2021[11] - The competition among major economies is reflected in actual economic growth rates, inflation, and exchange rates, indicating a complex interplay of supply-demand cycles and financial system adjustments[12] Group 2: U.S. Economic Policies and Trends - The U.S. retail sales maintained a high growth rate, with a 3.9% year-on-year increase in July, and an average growth of 4.3% from March to July 2024, despite tariff uncertainties[18] - The "Big and Beautiful Act" is expected to increase fiscal deficits by $3.4 trillion over the next decade, with significant tax cuts for both residents and businesses, potentially stabilizing consumer demand[28] - The Federal Reserve's interest rate cuts may be limited due to rising core inflation, which reached 3.0% in July, indicating persistent inflationary pressures[25] Group 3: China's Economic Challenges and Strategies - China's exports have shown resilience, driven by technological advantages and competitive pricing, but may face pressure in 2026 due to rising tariffs and a high base effect from 2025[61] - The real estate market and household debt cycles are undergoing adjustments, with a need for increased consumer subsidies to stimulate demand[67] - The core CPI in China is stabilizing, influenced by rising gold prices and efforts to counteract local government inefficiencies[67]

Core Viewpoint - The joint statement from the China-U.S. Stockholm economic talks indicates a shift towards more constructive and pragmatic negotiations, with both sides agreeing to maintain a stable framework for trade discussions and a temporary pause on additional tariffs [1][3][12]. Summary by Sections Trade Negotiation Framework - China is currently the only country effectively countering U.S. pressure and transitioning the U.S.-China trade discussions from a highly politicized atmosphere to functional and pragmatic negotiations [2]. - The established negotiation mechanism has allowed for a return to a relatively stable communication and dialogue framework reminiscent of the pre-2018 trade environment [2]. - The framework includes clear delineation of issues of concern for both sides, facilitating ongoing high-level discussions [2]. Outcomes of the Stockholm Talks - The Stockholm joint statement introduced a "constructive" tone, reflecting an increase in satisfaction with the outcomes of the talks [3]. - The consensus reached emphasizes that certainty in trade relations is preferable to uncertainty, aiming to control the trade conflict at an acceptable level [5][6]. - The talks have resulted in a mutual understanding that unilateral pressure tactics from the U.S. are counterproductive, as they could lead to significant economic repercussions for the U.S. [6][8]. Future Implications - The joint statement signifies a continuation of the previous 90-day pause in tariff increases, maintaining the status quo in U.S.-China trade relations [12]. - There is an emphasis on the importance of maintaining a stable policy environment, with both sides agreeing to reciprocal actions regarding tariffs [12][13]. - The ongoing negotiations are expected to adhere to market economic principles, despite the U.S. government's various policy challenges [14]. Strategic Positioning - The current state of U.S.-China relations is characterized as a "strategic stability," indicating a recognition from both sides of the need for ongoing dialogue and negotiation [11]. - The ability of China to withstand U.S. strategic pressure and compel the U.S. to return to the negotiation table is seen as a significant achievement [11][9]. - The framework established through these negotiations is viewed as a foundation for future discussions, with the potential for more substantive agreements as both sides continue to engage [14].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article highlights the ongoing tensions and negotiations between the US and China regarding trade, with recent meetings indicating a continuation of tariff suspensions while also revealing strong demands from the US side [1][3] - The US has linked trade negotiations to geopolitical issues, with demands for China to increase purchases of US agricultural products and energy, and to cease imports from Russia and Iran, threatening significant sanctions if not complied with [3][4] - China's response to US demands reflects a balance of principles and strategies, maintaining its core interests while diversifying energy imports away from the US, indicating a shift in procurement strategies [4][9] Group 2 - Domestic divisions within the US regarding trade policy towards China are evident, with differing opinions among lawmakers about the approach to technology exports and national security, which may weaken the US negotiating position [6][7] - Economic pressures in the US, such as rising unemployment and declining exports to China, are pushing for a need to secure trade agreements, with the Trump administration seeking to replicate past successes to alleviate voter concerns [7][9] - The international community is increasingly critical of the US's politicization of trade issues, which is perceived as undermining global supply chains and promoting a self-serving agenda, while China is strengthening its resolve to pursue independent technological development [9]