萨克斯多次批评美国的政策愚蠢。2019年，他因公开指责美国在华为问题上的虚伪行为而关闭了自己的推特账号。当时，他指出，美国在华为问题上采用的 霸凌行为，已经让美国的盟友感到不满。2023年，萨克斯在一次访谈中再次表示，美国花费巨资试图围堵中国，最终却只是在自讨苦吃。他强调，中国并不 是威胁，真正的问题是美国的霸权主义。他警告称，亚太地区的军售和导弹部署将引发冲突，核大国的对峙后果将不堪设想。 华为之所以能够捏住美国的"七寸"，是因为美国的供应链高度全球化，很多美国承包商的业务都离不开华为的产品。据统计，华为在全球5G基站市场占据 超过三成的份额，美国军方在海外行动时，几乎绕不开华为的设备。2024年第一季度，华为的净利润暴增了564%，达到了196.5亿元，手机业务也重新夺回 了中国市场的第一的位置。这说明，尽管美国实施了制裁，但华为不仅没有被压垮，反而在自力更生的过程中推出了自主研发的麒麟芯片和鸿蒙操作系统。 如今，美国如果想要完全规避华为，不仅成本极高，还会对作战效率造成很大影响。 杰弗里·萨克斯，这位哥伦比亚大学的教授，早在2018年就公开批评美国对华为的打压。他曾发表文章指出，逮捕孟晚舟并非出于国家安 ...

新华社金边8月24日电 专访：上合组织为维护地区和平、促进世界发展提供务实典范——访柬埔寨皇家 科学院国际关系研究所所长金平 新华社记者吴长伟 柬埔寨皇家科学院国际关系研究所所长金平日前在接受新华社记者专访时表示，上海合作组织成立24年 来在推动全球和平、安全、发展方面发挥着日益重要的作用，有助于推动多极化世界发展和国际公平正 义。 金平表示，上合组织已从一个区域安全机制逐步发展成促进政治、经济和文化合作的多元平台，其发展 历程体现了各成员国在"上海精神"指引下不断完善机制建设并建立信任。"上海精神"主张和倡导互信、 互利、平等、协商、尊重多样文明、谋求共同发展，为各成员国开展建设性对话奠定了基础。 金平说，上合组织倡导相互尊重、主权平等，推动和平安全合作，也有助于构建多极化世界秩序和国际 公平正义。 "越来越多的国家渴望加入上合组织，反映出国际社会渴望在一个非霸权、基于规则的区域秩序中建立 伙伴关系。"金平说。 他说，"上合大家庭"成员不断增加，体现了各国对基于主权平等和政治互信的多边主义合作的强烈支持 和期盼。上合组织合作不附加任何意识形态或政治条件，坚持秉持共识、不干涉内政和尊重各国发展道 路原则，这创 ...

Group 1: US-Russia Relations - The meeting between Presidents Trump and Putin in Alaska marks the first face-to-face discussion since the outbreak of the Ukraine war and since 2018, indicating a significant diplomatic engagement [1][3] - Trump described the meeting as a "perfect score" and announced the suspension of new sanctions against Russia, suggesting a potential thaw in US-Russia relations [1][3] - The discussions lasted nearly three hours, exceeding the planned duration, with Trump claiming substantial agreement was reached, including a ceasefire plan involving territorial exchanges [3][5] Group 2: Economic Implications - Following the summit, the Trump administration extended the tariff buffer period on Chinese goods to November 10, providing temporary relief amid ongoing trade tensions [5][10] - In contrast, punitive tariffs on Indian goods were raised to 50%, reflecting a starkly different approach towards India, which is seen as a challenge to US trade policies [5][7] - Trump's comments on India's economy and trade barriers highlight a growing tension, with India responding by preparing retaliatory tariffs against US agricultural products and medical devices [7][12] Group 3: Geopolitical Dynamics - The meeting is viewed as part of a broader strategy where the US seeks to pivot military resources from the Middle East to the Indo-Pacific region, focusing on countering China [10][12] - India's refusal to compromise on energy security and its continued trade with Russia indicate a complex geopolitical landscape, as India seeks to balance its relationships amid US pressure [9][12] - The summit's outcomes suggest a shift towards a multipolar world, with emerging economies like India and China seeking to assert their influence against traditional powers [14][16]

Core Viewpoint - The dominance of the US dollar is declining, with its share in global reserves falling below 58%, while the Chinese yuan has gained 4% in the past year, indicating a shift towards de-dollarization in the global economy [1][7]. Group 1: US Economic Policy and Dollar Status - The US has lost its AAA credit rating from major rating agencies, with Moody's stating that "the US fiscal situation is in chronic self-destruction" [1]. - In contrast to 2008, when China invested $400 billion in US Treasury bonds to stabilize the US economy, it is now selling off US debt and increasing its gold reserves, which have reached 73.9 million ounces (approximately 2,299 tons) [3][7]. - The Federal Reserve officials are calling for immediate interest rate cuts, with a proposed reduction to 3%, as a means to alleviate the government's interest expenses, which amount to nearly $2 trillion annually [5]. Group 2: China's Strategic Actions - The People's Bank of China has reduced its holdings of US Treasury bonds for three consecutive months, bringing its holdings to the lowest level since 2009 at $756.3 billion, while simultaneously increasing gold reserves at a record pace [7]. - The motivation behind China's gold accumulation is linked to the diminishing real yields on US debt and rising political risks associated with the US, as well as the freezing of foreign reserves of countries like Afghanistan and Russia [7]. - Global central banks are also increasing their gold reserves, with a projected addition of 1,136 tons in 2024 and 256 tons in the first quarter of 2025, indicating a broader trend towards de-dollarization [7]. Group 3: Global Trade Dynamics - The trend of de-dollarization is further emphasized by countries seeking alternative trade and settlement methods, with ASEAN nations increasingly using the yuan for transactions [8]. - The RCEP member countries have seen a 12% increase in trade, while the CPTPP has expanded to include the UK and Switzerland, showcasing a shift towards multilateral trade agreements [8]. - The Chinese CIPS system has connected with 4,000 banks across 138 countries and regions, enhancing the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of cross-border settlements [8].

Group 1 - Brazil's GDP is minimally affected by trade with the U.S., accounting for only 1.7%, indicating resilience without U.S. trade [1] - Trump's imposition of a 50% punitive tariff on Brazil represents a significant increase from the previous 10% tariff, marking a 400% rise [1] - The U.S. has maintained a cumulative trade surplus of $410 billion with Brazil over 15 years, contradicting claims of unsustainable trade deficits [1][3] Group 2 - Lula's response to Trump's threats includes a call for reduced reliance on the U.S. dollar and a push for de-dollarization among BRICS nations [2] - The Brazilian government is prepared to counter U.S. pressure, with Lula's administration emphasizing strong cooperation with countries like China [3] - The BRICS nations are uniting against unilateral tariffs, as evidenced by a joint statement opposing such measures at the recent summit [5] Group 3 - The potential establishment of a BRICS payment system could create an independent clearing network for member countries, reducing reliance on the U.S. SWIFT system [6] - BRICS countries collectively control 44% of global oil, 90% of rare earth resources, and represent a market of 3.5 billion people, highlighting their growing influence [8] - Lula's firm stance reflects a broader shift towards a multipolar world, signaling a significant geopolitical change [8]

Group 1 - The core message of Trump's statement is a display of anxiety regarding the decline of U.S. global hegemony, as he threatens a 10% tariff on countries supporting BRICS policies [1][3] - The rise of BRICS nations is a significant factor contributing to U.S. anxiety, as their achievements are reshaping global governance towards a more equitable direction, challenging U.S. unilateralism [3][5] - Trump's threats are ineffective as they reflect a misunderstanding of global dynamics; the attempt to coerce other nations into severing ties with BRICS is unrealistic and counterproductive [5] Group 2 - The ambiguous definition of "anti-American policies" in Trump's statement primarily targets the challenge to U.S. hegemony posed by the rise of BRICS and countries like China and Russia [3][5] - The actions taken by BRICS nations, such as promoting local currency settlements, represent a trend that the U.S. cannot easily impede, indicating a shift towards a multipolar world [5]

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around Brazil's unprecedented decision to return a tariff threat letter from the Trump administration, citing "factual errors" [3][5] - Brazil's trade surplus with the U.S. amounts to $410 billion over the past 15 years, indicating a strong economic relationship where Brazil purchases more from the U.S. than it sells [5][8] - The trade between the U.S. and Brazil constitutes only 1.7% of Brazil's GDP, suggesting that Brazil can sustain its economy without reliance on U.S. trade [8][12] Group 2 - The political dynamics shifted after Brazil's President Lula rejected Trump's interference in domestic judicial matters regarding former President Bolsonaro, highlighting a significant diplomatic rift [10][12] - Brazil's push for "de-dollarization" and collaboration with countries like China signals a strategic shift away from U.S. economic influence [13][30] - The response from other countries, including Japan and Canada, indicates a growing resistance to U.S. tariff threats, suggesting a potential shift in global trade alliances [17][21] Group 3 - The potential fallout from the tariff threats could lead to increased beef prices in the U.S., as Brazil is a major beef exporter [24][32] - The diplomatic consequences of Brazil's stance may inspire other Latin American countries to reconsider their relationships with the U.S., potentially diminishing U.S. influence in the region [26][28] - The incident may catalyze a new global trade structure, encouraging countries to diversify their trade partnerships and reduce dependency on the U.S. market [28][30]

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around the U.S. imposing a 50% tariff on Brazilian goods, marking a significant escalation in trade tensions, comparable only to the U.S.-China trade conflict earlier in the year [3][4] - The Brazilian real depreciated nearly 3% against the dollar following the announcement, and the stock market experienced volatility, with Embraer’s stock dropping 9% in after-hours trading [3] - The U.S. and Brazil do not have a direct trade conflict, as the U.S. enjoys a trade surplus with Brazil, which exports only 12% of its goods to the U.S., compared to 28% to China [4][6] Group 2 - Trump's actions are interpreted as retaliation against Brazilian President Lula's comments at the BRICS summit, indicating a deeper political motive behind the tariffs [6][9] - The tariffs could pressure Brazil's foreign trade in the short term, but Brazil's exports are heavily reliant on commodities, with 35% being mineral products and 30% agricultural products, suggesting potential for trade diversification [7][10] - The trade relationship between Brazil and the U.S. is characterized more by competition than complementarity, indicating that Brazil may pivot towards China and other markets in response to U.S. actions [7][10] Group 3 - The current geopolitical landscape is shifting towards a multipolar world, with the BRICS nations gaining cohesion in response to U.S. unilateralism, which could enhance China's influence within this framework [9][10] - Brazil's situation serves as a reference for other nations facing similar pressures, potentially expanding the appeal of China's development philosophy of openness and mutual benefit [12]

Core Viewpoint - The European Union (EU) is perceived to be misjudging the geopolitical landscape, potentially leading to negative consequences for itself, especially in the context of its relationship with China and the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict [1][3]. Group 1: EU's Demands on China - The EU has made three demands to China: to cut trade ties with Russia, to address "overcapacity" issues, and to lift export controls on rare earth elements [3]. - These demands are considered unreasonable as they overlook the normal trade relations between China and Russia, which do not target third parties, and reflect the EU's anxiety over its declining industrial competitiveness [3][5]. Group 2: China's Response and Geopolitical Dynamics - China is recognizing the EU's alignment with the United States, viewing the EU as a subordinate entity that cannot act independently without U.S. approval [5]. - The EU's actions are mirrored by Ukraine, which has begun to impose sanctions on Chinese companies and arrest Chinese citizens, indicating a coordinated effort to shift blame onto China [5]. - The ongoing geopolitical tensions suggest that the EU is attempting to leverage the conflict between the U.S. and China for its own benefit, despite the risks involved [5][7]. Group 3: Trade Relations and Market Competition - The trade relationship between China and the U.S. is characterized by mutual complementarity, particularly in agricultural products, while competition between China and the EU is intensifying, especially in the mid-to-high-end manufacturing sector [7]. - If the EU attempts to decouple from China, it may face significant challenges, as China is prepared to respond with equivalent measures, indicating a potential escalation in trade tensions [7].

Group 1 - India has responded decisively to the U.S. tariffs on its auto parts and steel by imposing retaliatory tariffs worth $725 million on specific U.S. goods, citing violations of WTO rules [3] - The Indian government recognizes that its exports to the U.S. account for only about 18% of its total exports, providing a buffer against U.S. pressure [5] - India's domestic market strength is a crucial factor in its strategy, as it seeks to assert its independence and not be seen as an economic subordinate to the U.S. [5] Group 2 - Modi's government is strategically repositioning India on the global stage by actively participating in the BRICS summit, aiming to take on the role of a representative for the Global South [7] - At the BRICS summit, India supported reforms to the International Monetary Fund and challenged the dominance of the U.S. dollar, indicating a significant shift in its foreign policy [9] - The actions taken by India reflect a desire for a multipolar world and a rejection of being a pawn in the geopolitical game dominated by major powers [11]