——这个消息是北美东部时间9月30日，美国贸易代表格里尔（Jamieson Greer）在参加纽约经济俱乐部 （the Economic Club of New York）时发言的内容，有许多现场目击者，所以消息内容本身是可靠的， 关键是这些消息所包含的美国政府和特朗普（Donald Trump）真正用意是什么。 格里尔原话是"如果你去问总统'我们和中国达成协议了么'，他会说'是的，这就是我们的协议。我们对 中国征收55%关税，这就是协议内容。'所以这就是一个良好的现状'，此外他还说了一些希望能够继续 与中方官员进行定期磋商，努力实现更加平衡的贸易关系，双方都能扩大"非敏感商品"的贸易，比如美 国的农产品和中国的消费品等诸如此类的话。 消息称美国不准备降低对华关税税率，是否可靠？ 很显然，美方试图将原本无端提出的20%"芬太尼关税"常态化和固定化，借以长期维持比中方对美产品 关税率低20%的美方对华关税率，同时继续维持在对华进出口、技术封锁等方面长期以来的双标。而中 方博弈的关键，则是力图在继打破"特朗普第三原则"之后，再打破其第一、第二原则，即破解其"极限 施压"和"漫天要价，就地还钱"的手法。 具体到策略 ...

重塑全球格局：中美贸易战下的战略博弈与未来隐忧 这场旷日持久的关税战，早已超越了单纯的经济摩擦范畴。它正在塑造着未来全球秩序的形态。美国试图通过"去风险化"来边缘化中国，而中国则通过自身 的稳定发展和不断成长，证明其作为全球经济网络中轴线的价值。双方都在争夺时间，比拼谁能让对方更早感到疲惫，谁就将在博弈中占据更多主动权。 一场姗姗来迟的会晤，在美国总统特朗普宣布将在亚太经济合作组织（APEC）峰会上与中国领导人会面之际，全球市场仿佛被按下暂停键，屏息以待。这 场本不该只关乎关税的谈判，实则承载着对中美关系能否维系一丝缓冲的深切期盼。 八个月的僵持，贸易额的锐减，制造业的疲态，无不以最直接的方式宣告着——"脱钩"已不再是遥远的设想，而是触手可及的现实。八月，中国对美出口同 比骤降33.1%，这犹如十年间最陡峭的下跌曲线，无声地诉说着贸易链条的断裂。码头上，集装箱的流转减缓；农场里，堆积如山的美国大豆无人问津。这 代价，正以通胀居高不下（CPI仍超过4%）和中国企业在全球寻找新买家的辛劳，在两国之间蔓延。 令人玩味的是，在这场"谁都没赢"的拉锯战中，美国却展现出一种"宁可咬牙承受代价，也要试探能否撑起一个没有中国 ...

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing trade tensions between the US and China, characterized by tariffs and export controls, have not hindered the growth of trade between the two nations, with China's exports to the US increasing by 22.7% in the first eight months of the year [1][2]. Group 1: Trade Dynamics - Despite tariffs, China's exports to the US have shown resilience, with a reported growth of 30.3% in the first eight months of the year for certain sectors [2]. - Since the imposition of tariffs in July 2018, the overall trade volume between the US and China has generally been on an upward trend, with a notable increase of 8.8% in 2020 [2][11]. - The demand for "Made in China" products remains strong in the US, as evidenced by consumer experiences during the pandemic [4][5]. Group 2: Economic Interdependence - The economic structures of the US and China are highly complementary, with significant mutual benefits derived from trade [6][8]. - In 2020, Chinese goods accounted for 19% of total US imports, with a substantial portion of essential medical supplies sourced from China [6][8]. - The cost advantages of Chinese manufacturing, including lower labor costs and efficient supply chains, continue to attract US companies [7][10]. Group 3: Investment Trends - Despite a decline in US investment in China in certain sectors, there is a growing interest among US companies to expand their operations in China, with 85% of surveyed companies indicating no plans to relocate manufacturing outside of China [13][20]. - The influx of foreign investment into China has been robust, with significant increases from European and ASEAN countries, highlighting China's appeal as a market [13][14]. - The Chinese market's size and growth potential are key factors driving multinational companies to establish or expand their presence in the country [15][16]. Group 4: Innovation and Technology - China's commitment to technological self-reliance and innovation is evident, with increasing investments in research and development [21][23]. - The country is transitioning from a technology follower to a leader in several high-tech fields, demonstrating resilience against external pressures [24][29]. - Collaboration in technology and innovation remains crucial, as both nations benefit from shared advancements and market opportunities [26][30].

Group 1 - The core argument is that the notion of China "neglecting" American businesses is fundamentally flawed, as American companies have become increasingly intertwined with the Chinese market and supply chain [1][5][6] - The U.S. government's attempts to "decouple" from China, such as the implementation of the CHIPS Act and other restrictions, have not effectively reduced American companies' reliance on Chinese goods and services [2][3] - Reports indicate that a significant portion of products labeled as "manufactured in Vietnam" or "manufactured in Mexico" still rely heavily on Chinese components, demonstrating the deep-rooted connections in the supply chain [2][3] Group 2 - Major American companies, including Tesla and Boeing, have established significant operations in China, highlighting the importance of the Chinese market for their growth and production capabilities [4] - A survey by the American Chamber of Commerce revealed that 83% of U.S. companies in China do not plan to leave, citing the high costs and loss of market access as primary reasons [4] - The ongoing collaboration between U.S. and Chinese businesses is framed as a mutually beneficial relationship, with both sides needing each other for continued success and competitiveness [5][6]

Group 1 - The article discusses the diminishing effectiveness of Trump's trade policies, particularly regarding tariffs on China, suggesting that his recent actions indicate a lack of confidence [1][3] - The U.S.-China trade war has resulted in significant financial burdens on American importers and consumers, with an estimated additional cost of $156 billion due to tariffs by 2023 [3] - Trump's initial strategy to use tariffs as leverage in the upcoming elections appears to be faltering, as he faces potential backlash from American businesses affected by high import costs [3][8] Group 2 - Brazil and India are shifting their trade strategies, with Brazil's president criticizing U.S. trade dominance and India increasing imports from China to $101 billion in 2023, indicating a move towards closer economic ties with China [4] - The European Union is experiencing economic stagnation, with the IMF predicting a growth rate of only 0.9% for the Eurozone in 2024, complicating the U.S.'s ability to rely on European support [6] - Japan and South Korea are also looking to strengthen economic ties with China, despite their political alliances with the U.S., highlighting a trend of regional countries balancing their economic interests [6] Group 3 - The ongoing U.S.-China tensions are characterized as a prolonged struggle rather than a decisive conflict, with both sides unlikely to make significant concessions [9] - The article suggests that the U.S. may be pushing its allies further away as it attempts to rally support against China, potentially leading to a new geopolitical landscape where countries like the EU, Japan, and India seek greater autonomy [11] - There is speculation that future tariff threats from Trump may be disregarded by the market, as the reality of economic interdependence becomes more apparent [11]

Core Viewpoint - The discussion emphasizes the increasing complexity and politicization of global supply chains, driven by geopolitical tensions, technological changes, and other challenges, necessitating a focus on supply chain resilience and stability [4][7]. Group 1: Current Situation - The structure of global industries and supply chains has become more complex and politicized due to factors such as great power strategic competition, geopolitical conflicts, technological changes, global pandemics, and climate change [4]. - Countries have implemented various national policies and trade measures aimed at enhancing the resilience and security of their supply chains [4]. Group 2: Types of Measures - **Unilateral and inward-looking measures**: Some countries impose trade and investment restrictions on specific foreign goods, provide subsidies to domestic industries, and conduct security reviews of their supply chains, which often violate multilateral rules and increase economic costs [5]. - **Regional and "small multilateral" arrangements**: Countries establish closer ties with a limited number of partners through bilateral or multilateral mechanisms, which can create new barriers for non-participants and lack clear rules [6]. - **Multilateral mechanisms for rule coordination**: Some nations attempt to use platforms like the WTO and G20 to promote trade openness and cooperation in supply chain resilience, although these initiatives often remain conceptual without binding agreements [6]. Group 3: Importance of Multilateralism - The need for responsible nations to engage in multilateral discussions is highlighted, as unilateral measures can lead to a cycle of trade distortions and further disruptions in global supply chains [7]. - Strengthening multilateral mechanisms and promoting rule-based arrangements for supply chain security and stability is seen as a constructive way forward [7]. Group 4: Suggestions for Moving Forward - A call for like-minded WTO members to take a proactive role in initiating informal working groups or "small multilateral" initiatives to enhance focus on supply chain issues [8]. - Suggested elements for a global arrangement include reforming WTO rules, opposing decoupling measures, clarifying conditions for supply chain stability measures, and establishing supply assurance obligations for dominant countries in key supply chains [9][10].

Core Viewpoint - The China-U.S. economic and trade relationship remains significant despite challenges, with both countries being important trade partners for each other [1] Group 1: Economic Relations - Since 2018, unilateralism and protectionism from the U.S. have led to increased trade frictions, disrupting normal economic cooperation between China and the U.S. [1] - Although the share of China-U.S. trade in each country's total trade has decreased, the overall bilateral trade has remained stable [1] Group 2: Trade Projections - In 2024, the projected trade volume for goods between China and the U.S. is expected to reach $688.3 billion, while the service trade scale is anticipated to be $155.8 billion, representing increases of 18% and 34.7% respectively compared to 2017 [1] - The economic and public support for China-U.S. economic cooperation is solid, indicating that a forced "decoupling" is not feasible [1]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint is that American businesses have a strong willingness to engage in the Chinese market despite ongoing discussions about "decoupling" between the US and China, with minimal actual progress in this area [1] - The US-China economic ties remain close, indicating a resilient relationship between the two economies [1] - A high-level business delegation from the US is visiting China this week, organized by the US-China Business Council, highlighting ongoing interest in collaboration [1]

Group 1: Global Trade Dynamics - The ongoing trade war, primarily driven by the U.S. under President Trump, is creating significant global economic implications, with the EU seeking to navigate its interests amidst U.S.-China tensions [1] - Trump's tiered tariff strategy, which includes a baseline 15% tariff, disproportionately impacts specific industries, such as a potential €26 billion loss for the German automotive sector and pressures on French brandy producers from Chinese anti-dumping investigations [3] - The EU's recent negotiations with China faced strong resistance, particularly regarding requests to lift rare earth export controls and halt energy trade with Russia, highlighting the complexities of international trade relations [4] Group 2: Economic Cooperation Amidst Tensions - Despite the political tensions, there are signs of pragmatic economic cooperation, such as the resumption of negotiations on electric vehicle anti-subsidy agreements and commitments from China to facilitate compliance applications for rare earth exports [6] - The logistics sector is feeling the strain from tariffs, with UPS announcing a workforce reduction of 20,000 and shipping costs rising by 20%, indicating the broader impact of trade policies on operational costs [8] - The deep interconnections in the global economy are evident, with significant trade flows continuing between the EU and China, including a notable increase in Chinese investments in the Eurozone despite rising tensions [8]

Sino-US Trade Relations - The Ministry of Commerce of China states that despite challenges, China and the US remain important trade partners [1] - The Ministry of Commerce of China suggests that Sino-US economic and trade cooperation has a solid economic and public foundation, and artificial "decoupling" is not feasible [1]