Source: wechat official account: Bu Yidao has been authorized to reprint
Pen / Sword smile
The United States is planning to copy the tactics of severe sanctions against Russia to China.
A new report in the New York Times quoted us officials as saying that the Biden administration intends to use the “experience” of banning the export of advanced technology and equipment to Russia to expand export controls to China and more specifically “target” China’s military and scientific and technological progress.
The opportunity for US officials to show their strength to China this time is quite worth pondering.
Just tomorrow, Chinese State Councilor and foreign minister Wangyi will meet with US Secretary of state Antony Blinken during the G20 foreign ministers’ meeting in Bali. This will continue the rhythm of “frequent” high-level interaction between China and the United States since last month. At the same time, the US media widely predicted that Biden would announce a plan to cut some tariffs on China this month.
Why did the US government suddenly release smoke bombs through the media at this time? Can the “rehearsal” of export sanctions against Russia really be applied to China? How should China respond?
01
In the report of the New York Times on the 5th, the “former and current officials” of the United States who disclosed information tried to give more “new ideas” to these “under consideration” export control measures against China.
Obviously, they are aware that export controls against China have already existed, and they emphasize that the new measures will be an “upgraded and expanded” version.
Expand, including relaxing the scope of application of export controls on China, and strive for more allies and partners to participate; It is also necessary to “redefine” which technologies will be considered sensitive or critical, and may be used by the military and security agencies.
It is said that the reference standard for judgment and definition has also been updated: it no longer only focuses on the use of relevant technologies in the traditional military field, but also considers the role of Chinese enterprises in the construction of national security infrastructure and the so-called “forced labor” in Xinjiang and other places.
In fact, it is still the rhetoric of “national security”, “human rights” and other interventions to suppress other countries.
Compared with Russia, China’s export control will be more “accurate” in addition to expansion.
Instead of casting a net all over the sky, they are more targeted to “restrict China’s access to technologies that help promote its own military and scientific and technological progress”. US officials said that their goal was originally “not to weaken the broader Chinese economy”. They have repeatedly provoked trade wars and technological wars against China, but they have suffered serious self defeats, which makes them more and more willing to fight for themselves in advance.
In the expanded and precise export control to China, quantum computing, cutting-edge chips and artificial intelligence may be included in the control.
In fact, it is not surprising to copy the “experience of curbing Russia” to China. Some senior US officials have expressed similar ideas recently.
At a policy meeting in Washington last week, U.S. Commerce Secretary ramondo said that export controls “are at the core of the best protection of American democracy”.
She said that under the severe sanctions, the semiconductor exports from many other countries to Russia have been sharply reduced by 90%, and the operating capacity of Russia’s domestic commercial fleet will also be seriously reduced. While claiming that export controls “have a great impact on Russia”, ramondo did not forget to bring China, saying that China was paying close attention to these response means of the United States.
Earlier, Alan Estevez, who is in charge of the Bureau of industry and security (BIS) of the US Department of Commerce, even directly targeted the contradiction at China.
At an event of the new American security center, an American think tank, in June, the director said publicly that “managing relations with China through export controls has become more important”. He also made no secret of the purpose of doing so, which is to ensure that the United States maintains its technological advantage and does not allow China to “build the ability to deal with us or our neighbors in any type of conflict”.
No matter whether it was publicized in advance or being “studied”, it is not new for the United States to implement export controls on China: on June 28, the U.S. Department of defense just listed five Chinese enterprises on the trade blacklist on the grounds of “suspected support for Russia’s military and defense industries”.
A Bloomberg News yesterday gave a “supplement” to the reporter of the New York Times, saying that according to sources, the U.S. government is prepared to further restrict the exports of Dutch semiconductor manufacturing equipment giant ASML to China.
Prior to this, ASMA has been unable to provide the most advanced EUV lithography machine to China due to the US ban. Now Washington wants to expand the ban to older DUV lithography machines to further dim the prospects for the development of China’s chip industry.
According to the latest report of the New York Times, in fact, before that, the Biden administration had followed the practice of the previous administration, taking export control as a means to deal with Chinese enterprises, and had made greater efforts to “double” directly.
Military use and “human rights violations” have long been used as excuses.
02
The timing of the news that the United States plans to expand export controls on China is “very interesting”.
Originally, the most concerned point in the current Biden administration’s China policy agenda is when and how to reduce tariffs imposed on China. US media politico reported that Biden will announce the plan to cancel tariffs on some Chinese products exported to the United States this month, but the specific time has not been finalized.
On the morning of the 5th, Chinese Vice Premier Liu He made a video call with US Treasury Secretary Yellen at request, which immediately triggered speculation in international public opinion that “the news of the tariff issue is approaching”.
Then, during the G20 foreign ministers’ meeting held in Bali, Indonesia, starting on the 7th, Chinese State Councilor and foreign minister Wangyi will meet with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
In addition, Yang Jiechi, director of the office of the Central Foreign Affairs Working Committee of China, just met with Sullivan, the national security adviser of the United States, in Luxembourg in the middle of last month. The three high-level interactions in a short time gave the impression of “frequent” exchanges between China and the United States.
Why is it that at this time, the familiar drama of “anonymous officials show their strength to China through the media” is staged in the United States?
According to the analysis of an American scholar, of course, there is the factor of “increasing negotiation chips”, which is a common diplomatic trick of the United States, but the internal differences of the Biden administration on China policy, especially the abolition of tariffs on China, are also a major reason.
Serious inflation has become the “top priority” in Biden’s words. The faction represented by Yellen and ramondo, including the president himself, hopes that the United States will adjust tariffs on China as soon as possible, and the scope and scale can be slightly larger, so as to ease the downward pressure on the U.S. economy. But the other faction, the hardliners led by Dai Qi, believes that in no case can we relax the containment of China.
News from the US government and public showed that Biden had decided to reduce some tariffs on China, but he did not want and “did not dare” to relax the containment and pressure on China, and wanted to make up for it and appease the hardliners against China and the voters behind it. After all, the mid-term election is coming soon.
It is not surprising that there is such an operation as “letting the wind show its strength to China”.
03
But the question is, even if the United States expands its export control over China based on its “experience” with Russia, will it work?
A scholar at the center for International Strategic Studies (CSIS), an American think tank, wrote in an article in March that the continued implementation of “extraterritorial controls” by the United States has exacerbated discord with China over regulatory issues, which will bring more anxiety to the already volatile business environment.
The reporter of the New York Times quoted this statement, warning that the United States may be countered by China tit for tat.
There are also many people in the US business community opposed to increasing export controls to China.
Many high-ranking officials of U.S. enterprises have issued similar warnings to Washington that doing so may seriously disrupt international trade exchanges, prompting China to regulate some key products exported to the United States, including specific mineral products that are also crucial to the United States.
In the long run, the extensive use of export controls will also erode the technological and market leadership of the United States, because foreign customers may be forced to find other alternative sources of goods.
Moreover, the “rehearsal” of export sanctions against Russia is difficult to “reproduce” and implement in China.
Myron Briant, executive vice president of the American Chamber of Commerce, admitted in the report that the US business community “firmly supports sanctions against Russia”, but its view of China is “more complex and subtle”. The two major economies of the United States and China are so closely integrated, he said, “promoting broad decoupling or sanctions against China will bring greater turbulence”.
Martin jozepa, a researcher from the Peterson Institute for international economics, pointed out another whimsical point of the US “plan”:
Many countries with deep economic and trade ties with China will refuse to impose wider export controls on China. Therefore, “you will not see the degree of consistency in the sanctions against Russia”, but may lead to the “division” of the U.S. alliance.
An international economic scholar said that there is still some room for the United States to insist on increasing export controls on China.
For example, the “unverified list” currently developed by the U.S. Department of commerce only lists some Chinese enterprises as “observation objects” of export control, which leaves some room for not involving sensitive technologies and may not be limited in the end. However, if Washington is determined to further decouple from China, it may “achieve the goal in one step” and ban exports of Chinese enterprises in this list.
We should remain vigilant and respond effectively to this possibility.
But to be honest, the last two administrations of the United States have engaged in rounds of trade war and technology war, and all kinds of “necks” against China. Although it is really uncomfortable for us, it has not been able to stop China’s economic, scientific and technological development.
On the contrary, the United States has “lost 800 of its own” and has been hurt by itself.
Although the Biden administration has from time to time released various soft and hard tentative signals, sometimes claimed to maintain communication with China, to install a “fence” on bilateral relations, and sometimes showed its strength to China, the Chinese people have long seen through these smoke bombs. It is the so-called “soldiers will block the water and cover the earth”. We will not be brought to the rhythm by it, but will continue to do our own things well and steadily advance our goals.