大摩闭门会：全球 AI 与中国两会的新看点 260302_原文 2026 年 03 月 02 日 12:50 发言人 00:05 543。各位投资者朋友大家上午好，欢迎来到大摩宏观策略城，我是新泽强 Robin。马年开年这是第二期 了，但是开年以来，全球的宏观形势一波未平一波又起。上一期我们刚讲到了一些关税等等，风起大漠， 那这个周末美国对伊朗的军事行动，导致了全球的地缘政治的博弈形式升级。而且最近一个多月，对于 AI 对全球各个行业的影响造就的长期的博弈也有很大的变化。国内的政策方面，这个礼拜会召开两会，作为 十五规划开局的两会，也会定下很多产业政策、科技政策的基调。所以这一期我们会围绕着地缘政治的冲 击，中国的两会的前瞻，以及全球 AI 叙事变化带来的一些投资机会这三个主题和我们的首席策略是 loa。 我们的经济学家郑宁，建立科技硬件方面的亚洲科技策略师和存储行业的分析师刘端，和硬件分析师安迪 一起来分析相关的主题。 发言人 01:20 首先我抛砖引玉，从地缘政治的冲击讲起。我想美伊的军事行动，这是当下大家最关注的焦点。当然是关 注这次冲突对全球原油市场和风险偏好的影响。现在看起来对原油市场的影响是一次对 ...

在半导体界，能让美、日、德、中四大经济体竞相掏钱"倒贴"的企业，唯有台积电。据中央社的统 计，台积电在2024、2025两年合计取得各国政府补助 1514.22亿元新台币，其中2025年为 762.58亿 元，较2024年的 751.64亿元小幅增加。在先进制程与先进封装高度资本密集的年代，各国都在用真 金白银，购买确定性产能和供应链安全感。 公众号记得加星标⭐️，第一时间看推送不会错过。 2026年马年开春，台积电不仅在财务数据上刷新了历史——2025年全年营收冲破3.8万亿新 台币（约合人民币8500亿+），更在全球版图上开启了马力全开的建厂潮。这不只是一家企 业的扩张，而是一场关乎地缘政治、AI算力霸权与技术极限的全球博弈。 | 地区 | 站点/厂别 | 制程/节点 | 状态/时间点 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 美国 | 亚利桑那 Fab21厂(第1期) | 4nm | | | | 亚利桑那 Fab21厂(第2期) | 3nm | 2024年Q4量产 2026年进机;预计2027年下半年量产 | | | 亚利桑那 Fab21厂(第3期) | 预计2nm和/或更先进制程 | ...

南华宏观热点 —— 美伊以热战突袭：谁在博弈？市场何去何从？ 周骥 （投资咨询证号：Z0017101） 联系邮件：zhouji@nawaa.com 投资咨询业务资格：证监许可【2011】1290号 2026年3月1日 1.伊核协议的终结与核扩散担忧：2015年签署的伊核协议为期十年，2025年10月正式终止，该协议曾 限制伊朗铀浓缩活动以换取国际制裁解除。伊朗快速推进核开发进程，其铀浓缩纯度远超民用核燃料标准， 逼近武器级门槛； 2.伊朗国内的政治经济动荡：受长期国际制裁与地区冲突影响，伊朗本币里亚尔持续贬值、通胀高企， 民生压力显著加剧。2025年底至2026年初，德黑兰等地爆发民生相关抗议活动，抗议升级后，伊朗政府的处 . .. 置举措进一步激化国内矛盾，美国方面将伊朗国内局势视为对伊施压的战略机遇期； 正文 2026年2月28日，美国与以色列联合对伊朗发动代号分别为"史诗愤怒行动"与"狮吼行动"的军事打 击，伊朗随即以导弹反击，中东局势骤然升级为直接热战。截至3月1日12时25分，战事迎来决定性转折：伊 朗媒体报道称，最高领袖哈梅内伊在空袭中身亡。消息一出，伊朗官方迅速释放极端强硬立场，明确将对美 以发 ...

Core Viewpoint - The South Korean stock market (KOSPI index) has surged to over 6000 points, marking a significant increase of over 40% in 2026, attributed to a combination of political reforms under President Lee Jae-myung, the AI hardware boom, and a strategic shift in foreign policy towards balancing relations with both the US and China [1][10][11]. Group 1: Political Reforms - President Lee Jae-myung, who has a history of losses in the stock market, has initiated reforms aimed at holding conglomerates accountable to all shareholders, including retail investors [1][2]. - Key reforms include amending commercial laws to enhance shareholder rights, reforming dividend taxes to encourage payouts from conglomerates, and establishing a committee to promote the KOSPI index to 5000 points [1][2]. - Lee has also committed to personally investing in ETFs, with a reported return of 26.4% on his investments as of February 2026 [3]. Group 2: AI Hardware Boom - The primary driver of the stock market surge is the booming AI hardware sector, with companies like Samsung and SK Hynix benefiting from the global demand for data centers and AI model training [10]. - The semiconductor industry, particularly the production of high-bandwidth memory (HBM3E), has seen significant price increases, contributing to the market's overall growth [10]. - Samsung and SK Hynix have become the top two companies in the KOSPI index, accounting for nearly 50% of its increase [10]. Group 3: Geopolitical Strategy - Under Lee's leadership, South Korea has shifted its foreign policy from a pro-US stance to a more balanced approach towards both the US and China, recognizing the importance of maintaining economic ties with both nations [11][12]. - This strategic pivot has allowed South Korea to position itself as a critical player in the supply chains of both countries, enhancing its economic stability and growth prospects [11][12]. - The geopolitical environment has remained stable, allowing the stock market to thrive amidst global tensions [12].

Core Insights - The ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict has significantly impacted daily life in both countries, with residents facing severe disruptions in services and economic conditions [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Group 1: Impact on Russia - The Russian economy has been severely affected by Western sanctions and the exit of numerous companies, leading to widespread price increases for goods [2][3] - Residents in cities like St. Petersburg and Moscow report difficulties in travel due to high visa costs and internet restrictions, which have disrupted daily communication [2][3] - Airports in Russia frequently experience flight delays and cancellations due to drone attacks, causing significant inconvenience for travelers [3][4] Group 2: Impact on Ukraine - In Ukraine, particularly in Kyiv, residents face daily power outages and heating shortages, with many families receiving only a few hours of electricity each day [5][6][7] - The ongoing conflict has led to severe disruptions in education and healthcare services, with schools closing due to lack of heating and medical services being hindered [6][7] - Humanitarian workers and volunteers have witnessed the harsh realities of war, including the struggles of families to cope with the lack of basic necessities [6][7] Group 3: Diplomatic Efforts and Challenges - Diplomatic negotiations between Russia, Ukraine, and the U.S. have been ongoing but remain fraught with challenges, as key issues related to territorial disputes and geopolitical interests complicate discussions [8][9][10] - The upcoming U.S. midterm elections are influencing the urgency of achieving a peace agreement, with political leaders seeking to demonstrate progress to their constituents [9][10] - The exclusion of European allies from recent negotiations has raised concerns about their role in the broader security landscape of Europe, despite their critical interest in the conflict [9][10]

Core Viewpoint - Europe's geopolitical strategy has relied on three pillars: security through the US nuclear umbrella, economic benefits from the Chinese market, and cheap energy from Russia. However, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict has shattered this illusion, leaving Europe in a precarious position facing pressures from both the US and China [1][2]. Group 1: Geopolitical Context - The US has shifted from multilateralism to an "America First" approach, raising doubts about its commitment to European security [1][4]. - Europe is caught between an unreliable ally in the West and a formidable adversary in the East, with the ongoing war in Ukraine draining resources and exposing its lack of defense autonomy [4][10]. - The EU's decision-making process is slow and inefficient, hindering its ability to respond to rapid geopolitical changes [4][12]. Group 2: Economic and Strategic Challenges - Europe's economic interdependence with China has become a potential leverage point, complicating its strategic autonomy [2][4]. - The EU must transform its economic scale into strategic capabilities, with Germany advocating for a banking and capital market union to facilitate free capital movement across member states [5][26]. - Military spending needs to shift from mere consumption to innovation, focusing on developing key technologies like digital tech and AI to regain competitive advantage [7][10]. Group 3: Internal Divisions and Identity Crisis - The EU faces significant internal divisions, with member states holding differing views on defense and economic policies, complicating unified action [11][12]. - There is an ongoing identity crisis within Europe regarding its role as an economic community versus a political entity, which hampers its ability to present a unified front [13][14]. - The lack of clarity in self-identification leads to weakened influence in key technology standards and global competitiveness [16][20]. Group 4: Urgency for Action - Europe must act swiftly to unify its capital markets, integrate defense industries, and rebuild critical supply chains to avoid being sidelined in global competition [24][28]. - The current geopolitical landscape demands a shift in mindset from conflict avoidance to competitive engagement, prioritizing collective European interests over individual national concerns [28]. - The economic potential of the EU, valued at €18 trillion, should be harnessed to create a robust strategic force rather than remaining passive [26][28].

Core Insights - The global energy trade landscape is undergoing significant changes, with European institutions that previously criticized others for purchasing energy now remaining silent [1] - Russian export data indicates that by 2025, over 50% of liquefied natural gas (LNG) will be sold to the Asia-Pacific region, totaling more than 16 million tons, while Europe still accounts for 44% of total sales with imports reaching 13.6 million tons [1] - The hypocrisy of European nations is highlighted as they continue to import energy while publicly condemning others for similar actions [1] Group 1 - Burkina Faso's foreign minister publicly questioned the double standards in energy trade, noting that France paid over $2.5 billion to Russia for gas in a year while European countries continue to engage in trade with Russia despite sanctions [3] - This behavior undermines international moral standards and reveals the political motivations behind energy trade [3] - The U.S. is attempting to use energy exports as a geopolitical tool, offering high-priced gas orders to entice other countries, but allies struggling with energy dependence lack bargaining power [3] Group 2 - Some nations that claim to have a strong stance on energy sanctions are actually purchasing gas in quantities comparable to major energy producers, raising questions about the industrial needs for this gas [5] - The rigid energy strategy of Germany has led to a significant decline in industrial output and a sharp rise in living costs, ultimately impacting ordinary citizens [5] - The lack of strategic flexibility is causing traditional European industrial powers to lose competitiveness in the energy market [5] Group 3 - The value-based criticisms from Western countries are merely a smokescreen to mask their own self-interest in the energy trade [7]

Core Viewpoint - Hungary and Slovakia have suspended diesel exports to Ukraine until Ukraine resumes oil deliveries to them, following Ukraine's cut-off of the Friendship Pipeline used by Russia to transport oil [1][3] Group 1: Strategic Implications - Ukraine's actions aim to weaken Russia's war potential by disrupting its energy supply, criticizing Western countries for continuing to import Russian energy, which funds Russia's war efforts [5] - The closure of the pipeline coincides with Hungary's elections, suggesting Ukraine is using energy supply as a political tool to pressure Hungary into supporting Ukraine's EU membership [5][3] Group 2: EU Internal Divisions - The situation highlights deep divisions within the EU, as Western countries can easily import LNG from the US, while Eastern European countries remain heavily reliant on Russian energy [7] - Countries like Hungary and the Czech Republic are increasingly reluctant to provide financial support to Ukraine, reflecting a growing divergence in EU energy policies and assistance to Ukraine [7] Group 3: Geopolitical Context - Russia is exploiting these divisions within the EU, supporting Hungary's stance and viewing Ukraine's actions as a pretext to undermine Hungary's political position [9] - The Friendship Pipeline, once a stable cooperation link between the EU and Russia, has become a casualty of geopolitical maneuvering, revealing the vulnerability of energy security in modern conflicts [9][12] Group 4: Energy as a Modern Warfare Tool - Energy has emerged as a core weapon in modern warfare, with the strategic value of civilian infrastructure surpassing previous norms [12] - Europe's energy security framework established post-World War II is inadequate to address the complexities of the current geopolitical landscape, leaving Europe vulnerable to both Russian and American pressures [12]

Group 1 - The core message of the news is that the U.S. government, under President Trump, has issued an ultimatum to countries and companies supplying critical minerals, particularly targeting China, to renegotiate supply chain agreements within 180 days or face tariffs [2][4]. - The U.S. is heavily reliant on China for rare earth elements, with 70% of its rare earth compounds and metals imported from China, which controls over 90% of global refining capacity [2][4][17]. - The U.S. Geological Survey indicates that the U.S. is 100% dependent on imports for 12 critical minerals and over 50% dependent for 29 others, highlighting a significant national security threat [4][6]. Group 2 - To address this dependency, the Trump administration has initiated substantial funding for U.S. rare earth companies, including nearly $1.6 billion to enhance domestic production and supply chain capabilities [8]. - A strategic reserve project named the "Treasury Plan" has been launched with an initial funding of $12 billion to procure and store critical minerals for U.S. manufacturers [8]. - The U.S. is also attempting to form alliances with G7 countries and others to establish a price floor for rare earth minerals, aiming to create barriers for Chinese exports [8][10]. Group 3 - Despite efforts to build alliances, many European representatives have shown reluctance to sign agreements with the U.S., citing concerns over unequal terms [12][13]. - South Korea has announced plans to establish communication with China regarding critical mineral supply chains, indicating a potential shift in alliances [13]. - Japan has reported a significant discovery of rare earths but faces challenges in commercial viability due to high extraction costs compared to Chinese prices [15]. Group 4 - China maintains a strong competitive advantage in the rare earth sector, controlling about 40% of global resources and nearly 70% of production, along with a complete supply chain from refining to high-end processing [17]. - The U.S. defense and high-tech industries are critically dependent on Chinese rare earth supplies, with potential risks to production if supply is disrupted [18]. - U.S. officials have acknowledged the impracticality of completely decoupling from China in critical resource sectors, emphasizing the importance of dialogue [18].

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Vice President announced a significant decision to establish a "critical mineral price floor" and impose "adjustment tariffs" in collaboration with allies, aiming to challenge China's dominance in the global mineral market [3][5][6]. Group 1: Meeting Overview - The "critical minerals ministerial meeting" was convened in Washington, attended by representatives from 55 countries, including Germany, Brazil, India, and Japan, indicating a united front against China's market monopoly [3][5]. - The meeting focused on creating a new "critical mineral trade alliance" to ensure that mineral market prices are not controlled by a single country but managed collectively by alliance members [3][5]. Group 2: Strategic Implications - The U.S. government's policy shift reflects a strategic change from the previous administration's "America First" approach to a multilateral strategy in response to China's stronghold in the mineral sector [6][10]. - The establishment of a price floor aims to stabilize mineral prices, which is crucial for the U.S. economy and national security, particularly for industries like high-tech weapons, semiconductors, and electric vehicles [8][14]. Group 3: Japan's Role - Japan plays a critical role in this alliance due to its significant demand for essential minerals like rare earths and lithium, and it has expressed a strong commitment to countering China's influence [10][12]. - The collaboration between the U.S. and Japan in the mineral supply chain has been ongoing since 2025, focusing on joint resource development and risk-sharing [12]. Group 4: Challenges and Responses - The proposed alliance aims to reshape the global supply chain and ensure supply security for the U.S. and its allies, while also providing private financing support for member countries [14][16]. - China's response emphasizes its constructive role in maintaining global supply chain stability, despite facing increased external pressure from the U.S. and its allies [16][19].