Group 1 - The U.S. is attempting to reduce its reliance on Chinese rare earths, with the first new rare earth mine set to produce in July 2023, valued at $37 billion [1] - Australia, despite having the fifth-largest rare earth reserves, lacks the production capacity and technology to replace China in the rare earth supply chain [3] - Japan is trying to strengthen its rare earth supply chain cooperation with the U.S. but is caught in a dilemma due to its past experiences with China [3] Group 2 - India claims it will replace China in the rare earth sector within five years, but its production capacity is less than one-tenth of China's [3] - The U.S. Treasury Secretary expressed urgency as China's exports of rare earth magnets to the U.S. have not returned to pre-April levels after tariffs were imposed [3][5] - China's dominance in rare earth refining technology poses a significant challenge for the U.S. and its allies in finding alternative suppliers [5] Group 3 - The EU has faced backlash from China over rare earth issues, leading to significant disruptions in supply chains for companies like Volkswagen and Safran [5] - The U.S. and its allies' attempts to form a rare earth alliance to counter China have resulted in concessions to China instead [7] - The interconnectedness of global supply chains suggests that unilateral actions and protectionism will ultimately harm the initiators [8]

日本在谈判中的底线非常明确：农业是国家基础，不会在谈判中牺牲。内阁官房长官林芳正多次强调，日本政府在谈判中没有牺牲农业的打算。这一立场 得到国内农业行业的强烈支持，此前日本政府考虑扩大美国农产品进口的消息曾引发农产行业的激烈反对。与此同时，日本汽车产业也面临巨大压力。美 国对进口汽车加征25%关税的政策若持续，将严重冲击日本汽车出口，进而影响国内经济。日本首相石破茂明确表示，无法接受美国的高关税政策，将以 坚定不移的决心应对。 据中国新闻网援引路透社报道，美国总统特朗普在社交媒体上威胁对日本加征新关税，理由是日本拒绝接受美国大米出口。这一表态让持续数月的日美关 税谈判再次陷入僵局，也引发外界对美日同盟关系的重新审视。 日美贸易摩擦的核心矛盾集中在汽车关税和农产品市场准入上。日本汽车产业对美依赖度极高，2024年输美汽车约137万辆，包括零部件在内的出口额达 7.2万亿日元，占日本对美出口总额的34%。美国则要求日本开放农产品市场，尤其是大米进口。不过特朗普的指责与事实存在出入，数据显示日本去年 从美国购买了价值2.98亿美元的大米，今年前四个月又进口了1.14亿美元。但日本对大米进口实行严格配额管理，每年仅允 ...

Core Viewpoint - The BRICS nations, representing major emerging market countries and developing nations, have significant cooperation potential, with China emphasizing the importance of deepening practical economic and trade cooperation with other BRICS members [1] Group 1: Economic Cooperation - The BRICS economic cooperation mechanism has been continuously improved through collective efforts, strengthening economic ties among member countries [1] - In May, during the 15th BRICS Economic Ministers' Meeting in Brazil, China actively promoted consensus on enhancing multilateral trade systems, data economy governance, and trade with sustainable development [1] Group 2: Trade Challenges - In light of current trade tensions, BRICS members unanimously agreed to jointly uphold the multilateral trade system, resist unilateralism and trade protectionism, and protect the legitimate rights and interests of developing members [1] Group 3: Future Cooperation - China expresses willingness to work with other BRICS members to implement the consensus reached during leaders' meetings and promote high-quality development of "Big BRICS economic cooperation" to reach new heights [1]

Core Viewpoint - The G7's recent agreement to exempt large U.S. multinational corporations from the OECD and G20's proposed 15% minimum corporate tax is seen as a blatant violation of global tax fairness and international rules, highlighting the manipulation of global economic governance by developed countries, particularly the U.S. [1][3][4] Group 1: Tax Policy Implications - The 15% global minimum corporate tax rate was established in 2021 to prevent multinational companies from evading taxes through profit shifting and tax havens, ensuring fairness and stability in national revenues [3]. - The G7's exemption for U.S. companies undermines this global consensus, creating a privileged system that favors American interests over international cooperation [3][4]. - The exemption is expected to exacerbate fiscal losses for developing countries, leading to increased economic inequality and a widening gap between rich and poor [3][6]. Group 2: Global Economic Power Dynamics - The ongoing struggle over minimum corporate tax reflects a redistribution of global economic power, with the U.S. leveraging the G7 to create rules that serve its multinational corporations [6][9]. - The U.S. government's push for this exemption, alongside the removal of protective measures against retaliatory tax actions from other countries, showcases a bullying approach to global tax sovereignty [4][6]. - The G7's actions are viewed as a significant setback for global tax justice and a threat to inclusive development efforts, particularly for developing nations [6][7]. Group 3: Call for Action - There is a strong call for developing countries, especially China, to remain vigilant against G7's hegemonic maneuvers and to actively participate in international tax governance to ensure fair rules [6][9]. - The need for a new international economic order that counters the dominance of developed nations is emphasized, advocating for a fair and just global tax system [9].

Group 1 - The EU has tentatively agreed to a 10% universal tariff proposed by the US, contingent on concessions from the US in key sectors such as pharmaceuticals and semiconductors [1] - The focus of negotiations is on reducing existing tariffs on automobiles and metals, with the EU pushing for a decrease in the current 25% tariff on automobiles and a 50% tariff on steel and aluminum [1][2] - If an agreement is not reached by July 9, tariffs on EU exports to the US could rise to 50%, significantly impacting EU exports valued at €52.8 billion (approximately $62.2 billion) for automobiles and €24 billion for steel and aluminum [2] Group 2 - The negotiation process is advancing on multiple fronts, with the EU Trade Commissioner leading discussions in the US to address tariff reductions, non-tariff barriers, and strategic procurement cooperation [3] - The US proposal includes three main areas: tariff systems, non-tariff barriers, and strategic cooperation, although specific rates have not been disclosed to EU member states [6] - The outcome of the negotiations could lead to one of four scenarios: a modest reciprocal agreement, unilateral concessions, postponed talks, or a trade war, which would trigger retaliatory tariffs on US products [6] Group 3 - The negotiations reflect deeper economic tensions, with the Trump administration expanding tariffs to boost domestic manufacturing, while the EU seeks to balance multilateral trade systems against unilateralism [7] - As the deadline approaches, both parties are engaged in final negotiations over key terms such as tariff reduction levels, industry exemptions, and future tariff commitments, which will significantly influence transatlantic trade dynamics [7]

欧盟（资料图） 值得玩味的是，欧盟的态度曾出现微妙摇摆。6月中旬，为配合与美谈判，欧盟一度取消中欧高层经济对话。但美国在七国集团峰会上的背弃 （特朗普提前离场并再度发出关税威胁），彻底浇灭了欧盟的幻想。塞伯特透露，欧盟甚至准备了针对美国服务业的反制"组合拳"——从数字 服务税到限制公共采购合同，直击美国科技巨头的核心利益。 据国际在线消息，7月9日的钟声正滴答作响——美国"对等关税"90天暂停期的最后期限步步紧逼，一场牵动全球贸易神经的摊牌时刻即将来 临。在这场由美国单方面掀起的贸易风暴中，中国商务部于6月底向世界发出清晰信号：任何国家若以牺牲中国利益为代价换取美国关税豁免， 必将面临中方的坚决反制。这不是空洞威胁，而是对公平贸易规则的捍卫宣言。 美国的关税大棒挥舞得毫无章法，其"对等关税"政策被中方斥为赤裸裸的单边霸凌，严重冲击多边贸易体制根基。更令人警觉的是，美方在谈 判中竟要求贸易伙伴主动限制对华贸易，以此作为豁免关税的筹码。这种试图分裂全球产业链的霸道行径，让国际社会看清了华盛顿的算盘： 既想遏制中国，又想独吞中国市场红利。 贸易（资料图） 硝烟味最浓烈的战线横跨大西洋。面对美国反复无常的极限施压—— ...

特朗普的推文：一场国际能源市场的"即兴表演" 在如此动荡的背景下，特朗普的推文无疑是火上浇油。有人解读为其向伊朗释放外交信号，暗示可能在石油制裁上有所松动，以此换取伊朗在核问题上的让 步；也有人认为，他对中国的表态，是另一种意味深长的外交试探。 这则推文，成为了国际舆论的焦点，其影响力远超其字面意思。 国际能源市场，风云变幻，而特朗普总统的一条推文，却如同投入池塘的一颗石子，激起层层涟漪。6月24日，以色列和伊朗宣布停火，结束持续十余日的 激烈冲突，全球本应稍作喘息，然而，特朗普却在社交媒体上"安排"了中国与伊朗的石油贸易，将局势推向新的高度。这并非简单的"安排"，而是充满了其 标志性的自吹自擂，引来白宫紧急"灭火"，解释其本意并非鼓励中国购买伊朗石油，而是希望中国增加美国石油的进口量。 特朗普的推文，在国际社会掀起轩然大波。在此之前，美国高调宣称成功打击伊朗关键核设施，令市场紧张如同绷紧的琴弦；霍尔木兹海峡，这条中东石油 运输的咽喉要道，一旦被封锁，全球能源市场将面临毁灭性打击。布伦特原油期货价格应声上涨18%，创下近五个月新高。然而，伊朗石油部迅速辟谣，称 一、特朗普推文的国际影响：能源市场的震荡源头 关 ...

Group 1 - The Canadian government has ordered Hikvision to cease operations in Canada, citing national security concerns, and has prohibited government departments from purchasing or using Hikvision products [1] - China expresses strong dissatisfaction and opposition to Canada's actions, viewing them as a violation of the legitimate rights of Chinese enterprises and detrimental to bilateral economic cooperation [1] - The Chinese government emphasizes the importance of a transparent and fair process in national security reviews and urges Canada to correct its actions to support trade and investment liberalization [1] Group 2 - The current global economic order is facing significant challenges from unilateralism and protectionism, which impacts international business operations [1] - China calls for an open, fair, and non-discriminatory environment for all enterprises, including Chinese companies, to invest and operate in Canada [1] - The Chinese government indicates that it will take necessary measures to protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises in response to Canada's actions [1]

商务部新闻发言人强调， 中国政府一贯鼓励企业按照市场原则开展国际业务，并要求企业严格遵守驻在国法律法规。加方所 谓"国家安全审查"过程不透明、结果不确定。加方做法是典型的泛化国家安全行为，不但损害中国企业合法权益，影响两国企 业合作信心，也会对中加正常经贸合作带来干扰破坏。 当前，全球经济秩序正遭受单边主义和保护主义严重冲击。中方敦促加方立即纠正错误做法，以实际行动支持贸易投资自由化 便利化，停止将经贸问题政治化、泛安全化，为包括中国企业在内的各国企业在加投资经营提供开放、公平、公正和非歧视的 环境。中方将采取必要措施，坚决维护中国企业正当合法权益。 商务部新闻发言人就加拿大政府关闭海康威视在加业务事答记者问。 据商务部网站消息，有记者问：近期有媒体报道 ，加拿大高级官员6月27日在社交媒体表示，加政府在进行国家安全审查后， 认为海康威视在加继续运营将损害加国家安全，已命令其停止在加运营并关闭在加业务，并称加政府还禁止政府部门购买或使 用海康威视产品。请问商务部对此有何评论？ 商务部新闻发言人表示：" 我们注意到有关情况。加方以'国家安全 ' 为由，强行关闭海康威视在加业务，并禁止加政府部门购买 或使用海康威 ...

Group 1 - The article highlights the negative impact of the U.S. unilateral actions, including trade wars and military interventions, on global economic order and international relations [1][2] - It emphasizes that the U.S. has abandoned the principles of international law and multilateralism, leading to increased geopolitical risks and economic uncertainty [1][3] - The article notes a significant decline in the global perception of the U.S., with net favorability ratings dropping to negative figures in various countries [2][3] Group 2 - The U.S. is described as increasingly resorting to aggressive tactics, such as tariffs and military actions, in a desperate attempt to maintain its hegemony [3] - The article points out that the world is moving towards a multipolar order, and the U.S. is struggling to adapt to this shift, which undermines its previous leadership role [3] - It suggests that the U.S. actions are leading to a growing backlash from the international community, further isolating the country [2][3]