蒋斌称，中方始终倡导共同、综合、合作、可持续的安全观，反对霸权主义丛林法则。我们愿与各国一 道维护以联合国为核心的国际体系，以国际法为基础的国际秩序，维护世界和地区的和平稳定。 【环球时报-环球网报道 记者 郭媛丹】29日，在国防部例行记者会上，有记者提问称，继美军突击行动 带走委内瑞拉总统马杜罗之后，美军目前又在中东地区集结进行军演，持续对伊朗施压。对于美军在全 球多地的行动，中国国防部如何评论？ 国防部新闻发言人蒋斌对此表示，美方近期一系列的做派把基于武力的国际秩序和强权即公理的霸道逻 辑演绎得淋漓尽致。历史一再证明，军事霸权无法取得真正的安全，不仅反噬自身，更危害世界。 ...

Core Viewpoint - Deutsche Bank indicates that the U.S. involvement in Venezuela's oil is not merely about energy but is fundamentally a covert war for dollar hegemony [1][10]. Group 1: Energy and Economic Control - Controlling the world's largest oil reserves enhances the U.S.'s influence over global oil prices, but the deeper strategic goal is to maintain the dollar's status as the global reserve currency [1][10]. - The U.S. relies on oil and gas for over 70% of its energy consumption, necessitating a stable and low-cost supply to maintain global competitiveness [12]. - Venezuela's oil reserves are six times larger than those of the U.S., creating a "perfect complement" despite Venezuela's low production capacity [12]. Group 2: Military and Dollar Dominance - The military's reliance on oil is crucial, as the U.S. Department of Defense is the largest oil consumer, with 75% of federal energy consumption coming from defense [13][15]. - Historical evidence suggests that a country's probability of winning conflicts influences its currency's stability, making military dominance a key factor in the dollar's reserve status [15]. - The U.S. aims to secure control over oil reserves to enhance its military success probability, thereby supporting the dollar's position [15]. Group 3: Shift from Demand to Supply Control - The traditional leverage of maintaining dollar pricing through demand is weakened as the U.S. is no longer the largest oil importer [17]. - The new strategy involves becoming one of the largest oil suppliers to enforce dollar settlements from the supply side, particularly by controlling Venezuelan oil reserves [17][19]. - If the U.S. can control Venezuela's oil sales channels, it can ensure that trade remains dollar-denominated, thus maintaining global demand for the dollar [19].

Core Viewpoint - The involvement of the United States in Venezuela's oil sector is not merely about energy but is fundamentally a covert war for maintaining the dollar's hegemony in the global financial system [1][2]. Group 1: U.S. Strategic Interests - Controlling Venezuela's vast oil reserves, which are six times larger than those of the U.S., is seen as a strategic move to enhance U.S. influence over global oil prices and maintain the dollar's status as the world's reserve currency [2][6]. - The U.S. aims to transition from being the largest oil importer to a dominant oil supplier, thereby ensuring that oil continues to be priced in dollars [1][6]. Group 2: Historical Context of Energy Dominance - Historical analysis indicates that nations controlling key energy resources gain significant economic, industrial, and military advantages, which solidify their global dominance [2]. - The U.S. has relied heavily on oil and gas, with over 70% of its energy consumption coming from these sources, making access to low-cost oil essential for maintaining global competitiveness [2]. Group 3: Military and Economic Interdependence - The military's reliance on oil underscores its critical role in maintaining the dollar's status; the U.S. Department of Defense is the largest consumer of oil, with 75% of government energy consumption attributed to military use [3][5]. - Historical precedents show that control over oil supplies has been pivotal in military conflicts, influencing the stability and value of currencies [5]. Group 4: Shift in Pricing Power - The traditional leverage of the U.S. as the largest oil buyer to enforce dollar-denominated transactions is diminishing, necessitating a shift to controlling oil supply to maintain pricing power [6][8]. - By controlling Venezuela's oil sales, the U.S. could ensure that transactions remain dollar-based, even if the oil does not flow directly to the U.S., thereby reinforcing the dollar's position in global trade [8].

Group 1 - The core argument is that the continuous technological innovation and strong stock market performance in a specific region are not solely due to the capabilities of local companies, but rather due to a systemic-level moat that supports these advancements [1] - The underlying factors include dominance in finance, technology, and military, which create a synergistic effect that attracts talent, fosters innovation, and develops the economy, thereby reinforcing its global leadership position [4] Group 2 - This region possesses a unique moat that allows it to continuously attract top global talent, as its talent pool is not limited to the local population but encompasses nearly 8 billion people worldwide, selecting the "smartest individuals" globally [5] - The influx of intelligent individuals is driven by the presence of top universities, a robust research system, a comprehensive entrepreneurial ecosystem, ample venture capital, mature equity incentive systems, high tolerance for failure, and a deep capital market, enabling the conversion of intelligence into tangible results and rapid capitalization [5]

Group 1 - The core issue of US-China relations revolves around the struggle for economic dominance, with the US seeking to maintain its hegemony while China aims for greater autonomy and technological advancement [2][4] - The trade war initiated by the US in 2018, characterized by tariffs on Chinese goods, reflects a strategic competition where the US perceives China's economic success as a threat to its own interests [4][5] - The US has targeted Chinese tech companies like Huawei and ZTE, imposing restrictions on semiconductor access, indicating a fear of losing technological supremacy to China [5][7] Group 2 - The US has formed alliances, such as the AUKUS agreement, to counter China's influence, particularly in the South China Sea, highlighting the military dimension of the rivalry [7][8] - Human rights issues have been used by the US as a pretext to impose sanctions on China, which China argues is a cover for economic dominance [8][10] - China's long-term strategy involves leveraging the US dollar system for technological acquisition while simultaneously building self-sufficiency in key industries, indicating a dual approach to economic development [10]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the concept of "dollar hegemony" and how the United States has maintained its dominance in the global economy through strategic monetary policies and military power over the past 80 years [1][10]. Group 1: Historical Context - After World War II, the U.S. emerged as the largest economic power, establishing a system where the dollar was pegged to gold, making it the center of global currency [3][5]. - In 1971, President Nixon decoupled the dollar from gold, transforming it into a fiat currency, yet the demand for dollars continued to grow due to strategic agreements [3][5]. Group 2: Oil Dollar System - The U.S. established a secret agreement with Middle Eastern oil producers, particularly Saudi Arabia, to sell oil exclusively in dollars, creating the "petrodollar" system [5][10]. - This system ensured that countries needed to acquire dollars to purchase oil, thereby increasing global demand for the currency [5][10]. Group 3: Military and Financial Power - The U.S. maintains unparalleled military strength, with numerous military bases worldwide, which reinforces the use of the dollar in international transactions [7][10]. - The influence over the SWIFT financial system allows the U.S. to impose sanctions and restrict access to global trade for non-compliant countries, further solidifying the dollar's dominance [7][10]. Group 4: Path Dependency - The long-standing use of the dollar in international trade and finance has created a "path dependency," making it inconvenient for countries to switch to alternative currencies [7][10]. - Central banks and corporations hold significant dollar reserves, which perpetuates the dollar's status as the primary currency for global transactions [7][10]. Group 5: Economic Implications - The U.S. can print dollars to acquire goods and services globally, effectively using "paper" to obtain real wealth from other nations [10]. - However, the U.S. must balance the amount of money printed to avoid rapid devaluation and global inflation, maintaining its economic credibility [10].

Group 1 - Brazilian President Lula's strong response to the U.S. tariffs, particularly the 50% tariff on copper imports, highlights the escalating tensions between the U.S. and Brazil as part of a broader challenge to U.S. hegemony [1] - China's immediate reaction to the U.S. tariffs indicates a united front among BRICS nations, emphasizing the collective resistance against U.S. pressure [1][2] - The U.S. tariffs are seen as an attempt to reshape its domestic copper industry, but this strategy may face significant opposition from countries like China, Russia, and Brazil [1] Group 2 - China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterated its stance against the broadening of national security concepts and emphasized that trade wars yield no winners, signaling a potential strong counteraction to U.S. tariff policies [2] - In the context of Southeast Asia, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi positioned China as a reliable partner for ASEAN countries, proposing cooperation and stability amidst U.S. actions [4] - Wang Yi's commitment to sign the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty underscores China's dedication to regional peace and serves as a challenge to U.S. nuclear policies [4] Group 3 - The collective response from countries like Brazil and China against U.S. tariffs reflects a growing sentiment among nations facing U.S. pressure, suggesting a potential shift in global alliances [5]