Core Viewpoint - The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war raises questions about how China should prepare for potential changes in the geopolitical landscape, regardless of whether Russia ultimately wins or loses the conflict [1][3]. Group 1: Energy Diversification - China should accelerate its energy diversification strategy to mitigate risks associated with potential disruptions in energy supply routes with Russia, even if Russia wins the war [3]. - If Russia wins, its energy export dynamics will change significantly, potentially leading to a shift in its energy cooperation with China and Europe, which could affect the favorable conditions currently enjoyed by China [4][5]. Group 2: Geopolitical Implications - A victorious Russia may leverage its increased autonomy in energy exports to threaten China's energy security, as Russia's international influence would rise, complicating its strategic relationship with China [5][7]. - The possibility of Russia adopting a more aggressive stance towards China, similar to its historical behavior during the Soviet era, cannot be ruled out, especially if Russian interests conflict with those of China [7]. Group 3: Military and Diplomatic Preparedness - China must enhance its military deployments and diplomatic efforts to prepare for uncertainties stemming from Russia's potential rise in energy and international influence [9]. - Strengthening international diplomatic mediation is crucial for China to avoid severe international turmoil that could arise from shifts in alliances and increased geopolitical tensions following the end of the Russia-Ukraine war [11].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the evolving dynamics of international trade relations, particularly focusing on the U.S.-led tariff strategy against China and India, which has faced unexpected resistance from traditional allies like the EU and Japan [1][3][5]. Group 1: U.S. Tariff Strategy - The U.S. is attempting to pressure allies to impose tariffs on Chinese and Indian goods, aiming to frame their trade as support for adversarial nations like Russia [1]. - The U.S. has taken steps such as placing numerous Chinese tech firms on an entity list and threatening bans on platforms like TikTok to assert its position [1]. Group 2: European Response - The EU has rejected U.S. calls for tariffs, emphasizing the importance of its trade relationship with China, which exceeds €800 billion annually [3]. - European leaders are prioritizing their economic interests over U.S. demands, particularly in light of ongoing energy crises [3]. Group 3: Japan's Position - Japan has responded cautiously, citing difficulties in implementing U.S. tariff requests and referencing WTO rules to justify its stance [5]. - The Japanese economy heavily relies on exports to China, with significant contributions from major corporations like Toyota and Sony [5]. Group 4: China and India's Countermeasures - China has strategically responded by launching anti-dumping investigations against U.S. chemical and agricultural products while adjusting its rare earth export policies [5]. - India has criticized U.S. tariffs as contrary to free trade principles while strengthening energy ties with Russia and expanding trade with the Middle East and Africa [5]. Group 5: U.S. Internal Contradictions - Within the U.S., there is significant debate among lawmakers regarding the legal basis for tariffs, with farmers expressing concerns over the impact on soybean exports [7]. - Public sentiment is against the tariffs, with 62% of Americans believing they will lead to higher prices [7]. Group 6: Shifts in International Relations - The article highlights a redefinition of ally relationships, with the EU establishing risk-reduction funds and Japan advancing the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) [9]. - Emerging countries are increasingly adept at utilizing international trade rules, as evidenced by a 40% increase in trade remedy cases initiated by China [9]. Group 7: Global Cooperation - The conclusion of the Madrid talks signifies a return to negotiation despite tensions, underscoring the necessity for countries to collaborate on global challenges like climate change and food security [10]. - The article suggests that the era of unilateral power is waning, with future success belonging to nations that can balance competition with cooperation [10]. Group 8: Multipolarity - The expansion of BRICS, ASEAN's neutrality, and the African Union's inclusion in the G20 indicate a restructuring of the global power landscape [11].