【编者按】 约翰·奎尔奇是美国资深学者和教授，在全球高等教育领域有丰富的经验。毕业于英国牛津大学的奎尔 奇是美国艺术与科学院院士、哈佛大学荣休教授，曾在哈佛大学任教30余年。1981年，他首次访问中 国。此后44年里，奎尔奇始终对中国保持浓厚兴趣，多次访问中国，亲眼见证了中国的高速发展。 奇 本文图片均为受访者供图 约翰·奎尔 作为一名教育界人士，奎尔奇亲自参与和推动了中国与国际教育界的合作项目。2011年至2013年，奎尔 奇在上海担任中欧国际工商学院副院长。2013 年至 2017 年间，他还曾任哈佛费尔班克中国研究中心研 究助理、哈佛中国基金会研究员及哈佛中国咨询委员会成员。 2024年1月1日起，奎尔奇担任昆山杜克大学常务副校长。这也是他时隔十年之后再度回到中国。在采访 中他提到，尽管面对很多困难，但目前昆山杜克大学约有11%的本科生来自美国，约20%的教师是美国 人，校方也在尽力与美国保持联系，尽量将美国政府的一些负面政策的影响降到最低。 今年1月特朗普重返白宫后，很快向包括中国在内的世界各国重新举起了"关税大棒"。经历了数轮交锋 后，如今中美关系处于新的起点之上。10月中美元首在韩国釜山举行会晤， ...

这个世界上，最大的四个政治体是：美国、中国、俄罗斯和欧洲。日本在这个格局中并不占据重要地位，它充其量只是美国的附庸。说白了，今天的世界是 由这四大政治体之间的激烈博弈构成的。12月5日，美国公布了《新版国家安全战略》，美国《国会山报》和英国《金融时报》都对此进行了报道。这份报 告显示，美国的战略重心已经转向西半球，欧洲的地位有所下降，而中国则不再是过去那样被特别针对的对象。 在这份报告中，特朗普政府明确指出，美国的战略重心将转向西半球，也就是美洲地区。为什么会有这样的转变？在美国看来，过去美国在全球范围内布置 军事力量，结果消耗巨大。然而，家门口的美洲大陆却出现了许多问题，毒品泛滥、非法移民问题严峻，这些问题对美国造成了很大影响。同时，像巴西这 样的国家已经开始投向中俄一方，委内瑞拉与中国也有紧密合作，甚至连巴拿马运河的运营都被中国企业掌控。放任这些情况发展下去，美国的后院可能会 变得越来越动荡。因此，特朗普等人认为，掌控美洲，维护好西半球的基本稳定，才是美国当务之急。从这个角度看，美国的全球战略防线可能会收缩，它 不再承担世界警察的责任。俄乌战争表明，尽管欧洲各国积极支持乌克兰，但特朗普上台后并不愿意提供太 ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint is that the American public is beginning to see China as a friend rather than an enemy, highlighted by the recent agreement to suspend 24% tariffs and cancel a previous 10% tariff [1] - Trump's attitude towards China has shifted dramatically, indicating a change in strategy as the initial goals of the trade war were not achieved [2][4] - The trade war was intended to serve as a scapegoat for internal issues in the U.S., but it has led to rising prices and a decline in living standards, resulting in increased support for better relations with China among Americans [6] Group 2 - One of the initial goals of the trade war was to suppress China and restore American national faith, which has been eroded by economic disparities and social unrest [4][6] - The second goal was to pressure the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates to alleviate U.S. debt, which currently stands at $38 trillion, with annual interest payments exceeding $1.5 trillion [8][9] - The third goal was to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. by making foreign goods more expensive through tariffs, but this has proven difficult due to higher labor costs and a lack of a complete supply chain in the U.S. [12]

Core Insights - The trade dispute between China and the U.S. has largely concluded, while the tariff conflict between India and the U.S. continues, with India facing higher tariffs than China [1][3] - The U.S. emphasizes the importance of U.S.-India relations but is unwilling to compromise on key terms, leaving India at a disadvantage compared to China in trade negotiations [4][5] - India's economic relationship with the U.S. is characterized by a lack of dependency, making it difficult for India to gain leverage in negotiations [4][5] Trade Relations - The U.S. and India are engaged in a tariff battle, with India suffering unilateral impacts and lacking effective countermeasures [3][5] - U.S. companies that shifted production to India to avoid U.S.-China tariffs are now facing higher costs due to increased tariffs in India [4] - India's hope to negotiate favorable terms with the U.S. has been complicated by the U.S. combining punitive tariffs with other trade discussions [5] Strategic Relations - The strategic relationship between the U.S. and India is tense, influenced by issues such as the India-Pakistan dispute and U.S. relations with Pakistan [9] - India's criticism of U.S. tariffs as unfair has not led to any substantial resolution of the trade issues [7][9] - The Modi government faces pressure domestically regarding its handling of U.S. relations, particularly in light of Trump's policies [10] Economic Positioning - India's role in the Indo-Pacific strategy has been to counterbalance China, but it has not secured the expected preferential treatment from the U.S. [7][10] - The U.S. has shifted its approach to treat all countries equally in terms of tariffs, which has caught India off guard [7][10] - The lack of effective negotiation power for India may lead to increased pressure from the U.S. in future discussions [10]

Core Points - The article discusses the controversial announcement by former President Trump to build a $200 million ballroom at the White House amid a government shutdown and rising national debt, which has reached a record $38 trillion [1][6][11] - It highlights the growing skepticism regarding Trump's ability to lead the U.S. back to greatness, as his policies have led to increased national debt and a decline in global influence [3][9][22] - The article emphasizes the severe implications of the national debt, including the burden on every American citizen and the unsustainable fiscal policies that have resulted in a widening gap between government revenue and expenditure [11][13][14] Summary by Sections Trump's Announcement and Public Reaction - Trump's announcement of the ballroom construction during a government shutdown has sparked significant public backlash, with critics arguing that the White House should not be treated as a personal property [6][8] - Trump's claim of self-funding the project is viewed as a facade, with suspicions of political donations from business associates to support his initiatives [6][9] National Debt Crisis - The U.S. national debt has surged to $38 trillion, translating to a per capita debt of $111,000 for every American, including newborns [11] - The debt increased by $2 trillion in just two months, highlighting a rapid growth rate that outpaces average income growth [11][13] - The government's fiscal situation is dire, with mandatory spending on Social Security and Medicare expected to consume over one-third of the federal budget in the near future [11][14] Fiscal Policies and Economic Implications - Trump's tax cuts have resulted in a projected $4.5 trillion reduction in government revenue over the next decade, exacerbating the fiscal deficit [16][18] - Increased defense spending alongside reduced revenue has led to an unsustainable fiscal path, likened to a household maintaining luxury spending while losing income [18] - The Federal Reserve's shift towards accommodating fiscal policies to manage debt interest payments has created long-term risks for the economy [20] Global Influence and Trade Relations - Trump's "America First" policy has led to a decline in U.S. global influence, with withdrawal from international agreements and trade wars that have backfired, particularly in the context of U.S.-China relations [22][23] - The article suggests that the concept of a G2 world order, where the U.S. and China share global leadership, is becoming a reality due to a series of U.S. policy missteps [23]