2021年早春，在东京一场精心策划的发布会上，拜登总统满面春风地推出了"印太经济框架"（IPEF）。十四国代表围坐一堂，越南和印度的席位被刻意安排 在焦点位置。该框架旨在协调跨境贸易、整合产业链、推动绿色能源转型及规范经济治理规则。 然而，装备到位后，随之而来的却是操作的窘境：维修人员面对全英文的技术手册束手无策，地勤团队需要依赖翻译软件才能完成基础维护。因操作规范理 解偏差导致的装备损毁事故频发，军费消耗的速度甚至比喜马拉雅山的积雪融化还要快。 反向操作：弃"真身"寻"替身"？美国剑指中国周边双雄的七年"脱钩"迷局 美国耗费七年光阴，倾注巨额战略资源，精心编织对华关税壁垒，同时向其地区盟友源源不断地输送军事援助。然而，事与愿违，中国的制造引擎不仅未曾 停歇，反而将印度和越南这两个新兴经济体纳入了这场全球贸易的博弈版图。正当各方摩拳擦掌准备迎接新一轮的较量时，这些"新晋选手"却率先暴露了资 源储备难以支撑长期高强度竞争的窘境。 "迂回战术"下的关税失效 追溯至2018年夏日，华盛顿对价值五百亿美元的中国商品祭出高达四分之一的关税重拳。美国贸易监管部门曾天真地预估，面对陡增的运营成本，制造业企 业必将加速撤离中 ...

Group 1 - The growth rate of Chinese enterprises over the past decade is more than six times that of South Korean enterprises, with the number of Chinese companies in the "Global 2000" increasing from 180 to 275, a growth of 52.7%, while South Korean companies decreased from 66 to 62, a decline of 6.1% [1][2] - In terms of revenue, South Korean "Global 2000" companies saw a modest increase of 15%, from $1.5 trillion to $1.7 trillion, while Chinese companies experienced a dramatic 95% increase, rising from $4 trillion to $7.8 trillion, indicating that the revenue growth rate of Chinese companies is 6.3 times that of South Korean companies [2][3] - The report highlights that the leading industries driving growth differ significantly between countries, with China and the US primarily relying on information technology and artificial intelligence, while South Korea's growth is mainly from manufacturing and finance sectors [2][3] Group 2 - The report suggests that the South Korean government has been insufficient in supporting its enterprises, with only 0.04% of small businesses growing into medium-sized enterprises and 1% to 2% of medium-sized enterprises becoming large ones, indicating a need for policy adjustments to foster disruptive startups [3] - China's growth is attributed to its focus on emerging industries such as electric vehicles, batteries, semiconductors, and artificial intelligence, which has led to the emergence of world-class companies and a robust enterprise ecosystem [3][4] - The stark contrast in growth between China and South Korea is rooted in differences in market size and industrial policies, with China benefiting from the largest single consumer market and strong strategic support for key industries, leading to significant competitive advantages [4]