（来源：工人日报） 美国近日再次声称要"得到"丹麦的自治领地格陵兰岛，丹麦对此极为不满，要求美国尊重其主权和领土 完整，欧洲多国也声援丹麦。有分析人士指出，美国对格陵兰岛觊觎已久，其种种动作背后，暗藏土 地、资源、航道和战略竞争等多方面意图，同时也希望加强对这些国家和地区的影响。 格陵兰岛位于北美洲东北部，是世界第一大岛，面积大约211平方公里。该岛是丹麦自治领地，有高度 自治权，国防和外交事务由丹麦政府掌管。格陵兰岛大部分地区位于北极圈内，不仅有丰富的石油天然 气资源，还蕴藏着包括稀土在内的大量矿产资源。 早在今年年初特朗普正式就任总统之前，他就曾表示出于"经济安全需要"考虑，不排除美国通过"军事 或经济胁迫"手段夺取格陵兰岛控制权的可能性。美方的举动遭到丹麦和格陵兰岛明确反对。丹麦政府 当时表示，计划增加在格陵兰岛的军事投入。 今年3月，美国副总统万斯率代表团访问位于格陵兰岛北部的美国皮图菲克太空基地。万斯表示，格陵 兰岛对美国至关重要。他指责丹麦对格陵兰岛的安全、防务等方面"投资不足"，宣称格陵兰岛"在美国 安全保护伞下比在丹麦安全保护伞下会好得多"。丹麦方面对万斯的说法不满，丹麦首相弗雷泽里克森 强调 ...

Core Insights - The article discusses the evolving perceptions of China in Western countries, highlighting a trend of more nuanced and diversified understanding, alongside increasing polarization in opinions about China [1][2][9]. Group 1: Perceptions in France - In France, there is a growing dichotomy in perceptions of China, with more people viewing China positively due to its advanced technology and services, while simultaneously, a significant number of individuals express concerns about a "China threat" [2]. - The number of French citizens holding both positive and negative views about China is increasing, indicating a more pronounced division in public opinion [2]. Group 2: Perceptions in the United States - Polling data shows that from 2023 to 2025, the percentage of Americans with negative views of China remains high, with 81% and 77% expressing dislike in 2024 and 2025, respectively [3]. - Despite government narratives promoting "decoupling" from China, over half of Americans (53%) believe in the importance of friendly cooperation with China, reflecting a complex relationship between public sentiment and political discourse [3]. Group 3: Research Trends in the U.S. - The study of China in the U.S. is shifting from "engagement" to "strategic competition," with a focus on national security issues and a reliance on open-source intelligence for research [5]. - Young scholars are increasingly moving towards policy-oriented roles rather than traditional academic paths, indicating a shift in career trajectories within the field of China studies [6]. Group 4: Australia’s Understanding of China - A recent report from an Australian think tank critiques the misinterpretation of China's actions in the South China Sea, highlighting a polarized debate within Australia regarding its relationship with China [7]. - The report emphasizes the need for Australia to develop independent knowledge about China to balance security and diplomatic relations [8]. Group 5: Recommendations for Improved Understanding - Scholars suggest that both Europe and China should take steps to enhance mutual understanding, such as increasing educational exchanges and promoting cultural cooperation [13]. - The article advocates for using personal experiences to counteract macro-level narratives about China, emphasizing the importance of non-political connections and grassroots exchanges [12].

Core Viewpoint - The discussion revolves around the perception of China's military strength and its peaceful rise as a global economic power, emphasizing that military capability does not necessarily equate to military aggression [1][2]. Group 1: China's Military and Economic Position - China has not engaged in any wars since 1979, maintaining over 40 years of peace, which has contributed to its rise as the world's second-largest economy [1][2]. - The recent military parade in Tiananmen Square showcased China's military capabilities, but it is argued that this is part of a transparency effort rather than a signal of imminent aggression [1][4]. - China's defense spending is three times that of Russia, and it possesses the largest military force globally, yet it has not engaged in direct military conflict [5][10]. Group 2: U.S.-China Relations - The relationship between the U.S. and China is characterized as a mix of competition and cooperation, with China initially advocating for collaboration [4][12]. - The Taiwan issue is highlighted as a potential flashpoint for conflict, with comparisons drawn to the U.S. stance on Russia in the Ukraine conflict [5][7]. - There is a call for increased dialogue between the U.S. and China to avoid direct conflict, emphasizing the importance of communication in addressing mutual concerns [12][13]. Group 3: Global Influence and Strategy - China is positioned as a superpower, with its influence recognized even by Western leaders, indicating a shift in global power dynamics [2][4]. - The concept of "influence" is distinguished from "sphere of influence," suggesting that China does not seek to establish a hegemonic presence like the U.S. [11]. - China's global initiatives, such as the Belt and Road Initiative, are seen as significant investments aimed at fostering development and cooperation rather than military expansion [9][10].

三年前，中美在巴厘岛的见面，标志着这两个大国重新开始了有序的交流。从那之后，中美的交流和沟通，按照话题，可以分成三个不同的类 别： 1. 经济交流 而从时间上，因为美国的大选，可以分成拜登政府和特朗普政府。 当我们做完这样的划分之后，我们可以明确观察到一个有趣的现象。在拜登政府时期，战略交流的次数和优先级都高于经济交流，而到目前为 止，特朗普政府和中国的经济交流次数远高于战略交流。 如果说在一年前，拜登政府中最经常和中国洽谈的官员，是布林肯和沙利文；与此同时，耶伦和中国的交流更多像是锦上添花，经常是战略交 流之后耶伦访华。而在今年，我们已经看到了贝森特多次和中国谈判对手交流，而无论是卢比奥还是鲁比奥，都没有太多戏份。 在后面我们会探讨这个区别的可能原因。但在那之前，有一点是没有疑问的，就是在巴厘岛中美协商出的交流方法到今天还在被沿用： 这就是当前，世界上最大的两个国家管理分歧的方法。这也是大家在期待今年11月份会有高层峰会的原因。因为这个方法被证明是有效的，中 美擦枪走火的概率在巴厘岛之后迅速走低，双方开始了新的竞争，虽然激烈，但正如美国战争部部长说的，双方依然尊重彼此的底线问题。某 种意义上来说，拜登政府时 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration is considering a significant shift in U.S. policy towards Myanmar, focusing on its rare earth resources to undermine China's dominance in the global rare earth supply chain [1][6]. Group 1: U.S. Policy Shift - The Trump administration is discussing strategies to engage with Myanmar's military government or the Kachin Independence Army (KIA) to secure rare earth exports [1][5]. - Proposed strategies include negotiating a peace agreement between the military government and the KIA or directly collaborating with the KIA [1][5]. - The U.S. may consider reducing tariffs on Myanmar and lifting sanctions on the military government to facilitate rare earth exports [1][5]. Group 2: Rare Earth Market Dynamics - Rare earth elements, essential for advanced technologies, are predominantly controlled by China, which holds nearly 90% of global processing capacity [2]. - Myanmar's rare earth production has surged from 200 tons in 2014 to 31,000 tons in 2020, positioning it among the top three producers globally [2]. - China is projected to import approximately 77,300 tons of rare earths in 2024, with 44,000 tons (57%) expected to come from Myanmar [2]. Group 3: Challenges and Considerations - Experts highlight significant logistical challenges in establishing a new rare earth supply chain from Kachin State to India for export [7]. - The ongoing civil conflict in Myanmar complicates the situation, as the KIA controls many rare earth mining areas [7]. - The feasibility of transporting rare earths from Kachin to India is considered extremely low due to geographical and infrastructural limitations [7].

Core Viewpoint - The Chinese government has summarized the past seven years of Sino-U.S. economic relations into four key statements, reflecting on the ups and downs of the relationship and emphasizing the importance of cooperation despite challenges [3][9]. Summary by Relevant Sections Economic Relationship Overview - The Sino-U.S. economic relationship has been described as "turbulent," with both countries remaining important economic partners despite the challenges posed by U.S. unilateralism and protectionism since 2018 [3][9]. - Despite the trade tensions, there has been considerable growth in both goods and services trade compared to seven years ago, indicating resilience in the economic interactions [3][9]. Key Statements from China 1. **Mutual Importance**: The first statement emphasizes that Sino-U.S. economic relations have weathered storms, and both countries are still significant economic partners [3][5]. 2. **Cooperation is Essential**: The second statement reiterates that the essence of Sino-U.S. economic relations is mutual benefit and cooperation, highlighting that attempts at unilateral advantage will lead to losses for both sides [5][9]. 3. **Dialogue as a Solution**: The third statement advocates for dialogue and negotiation as the best means to resolve issues, acknowledging that differences and frictions are inevitable in any cooperative relationship [6][9]. 4. **Commitment to Principles**: The final statement asserts China's commitment to defending its national interests and international fairness, indicating that cooperation is possible but must be based on mutual respect and principles [8][9]. Future Implications - The four statements serve as a significant summary of the current state of Sino-U.S. economic relations and are expected to remain relevant in the longer historical context, largely due to China's stable policy towards the U.S. [9][10]. - The U.S. may need to reassess its approach to Sino-U.S. relations, especially in light of past misjudgments regarding tariffs and trade policies [10][12].