Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of learning from historical experiences of high-risk small and medium-sized banks both domestically and internationally, particularly in the context of China's ongoing efforts to mitigate financial risks since 2018 [1] Group 1: International Lessons from High-Risk Small and Medium-Sized Banks - The historical lessons from international banking crises highlight that market-driven risk resolution is essential, but the approach differs for banks compared to general enterprises [2][3] - The U.S. experienced three major waves of bank failures, with the first occurring during the Great Depression, leading to the closure of approximately 9,500 banks due to stock market investments [2] - The second wave from 1980 to 1994 was driven by the savings and loan crisis, where regulatory relaxations led to significant failures, with 35%-40% of banks involved in financial crimes [4][6] - The third wave from 2008 to 2013 was marked by the subprime mortgage crisis, resulting in the collapse of major banks and necessitating extensive government intervention [7][8] Group 2: Key Insights from Historical Experiences - Government intervention is crucial in managing bank failures to prevent widespread financial contagion and economic costs [3][6] - The need for a differentiated approach in risk management between small and medium-sized banks and large financial institutions is highlighted, as the latter poses systemic risks [9] - The recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank illustrates the rapid spread of risk due to asset-liability mismatches and the impact of social media on depositor behavior [10][11] Group 3: China's Historical Experience and Current Strategies - China's approach to managing risks in small and medium-sized banks has evolved through three stages, focusing on governance and regulatory frameworks [14][15] - The current phase emphasizes the need for precise risk identification and timely intervention to prevent systemic risks, especially in light of economic uncertainties [19][20] - The importance of maintaining a balance between market-driven solutions and regulatory oversight is underscored, particularly in preventing moral hazards and ensuring accountability [21][22]