When will Biden show his cards to China? When the western supply chain reorganization is completed

Recently, it was reported that the White House led by Biden reorganized the domestic supply chain in the United States. At the request of the United States, TSMC has successively set up branches in Arizona and Japan to disperse the chip production capacity in Taiwan Province Province and resist possible political risks in the future. At the end of May, South Korean President Moon Jae in will visit Washington, D.C., and will also focus on discussing with the United States the issue of joining the four-nation system of the United States, Japan, India and Australia and restructuring the global supply chain. These supply chain restructuring actions have only one goal-decoupling from China and completing the supply chain restructuring.

Figure 1 the supply chain in the United States has been reorganized greatly.

First, economic and trade relations are no longer the ballast stone of Sino-US relations.

Before 20 17, a popular saying describing Sino-US relations was that "economic and trade relations are the ballast stone of Sino-US relations". At that time, China and the United States were already each other's largest trading partners, and the benefits from economic and trade relations far outweighed the losses. After Trump declared that China and the United States were strategic competitors, many scholars still believed that Wall Street, American business circles and many congressmen would not really choose to quarrel with China. Because we must consider the Sino-US economic and trade relations that will affect the people's livelihood in the United States, as long as economic and trade relations exist, Sino-US relations will not be too bad. However, since 20 17, the Trump rogue group launched a trade war with tariffs as a weapon, and the relationship between the two governments achieved a 180 degree turn, which can be said to have seriously hit the faces of these domestic scholars. At the beginning of Sino-US confrontation, many people realized that Sino-US relations were the ballast stone of economic and trade relations, not the other way around. The American government can do whatever it wants regardless of economic interests. What the United States and China want is far from economic interests, but political interests. They are desperate to turn you into a thousand-year-old penis!

In fact, anyone who knows the internal operating mechanism of American politics knows that it is very normal for Trump's White House to make such a decision, because American politicians are far less interested in economic interests than political interests. The university majors of successive American presidents and important officials are mainly political science, law and military science. Their basic characteristics are rigid minds and serious rigid thoughts. They shout for social justice and share cakes every day, but they are never good at making cakes bigger. Although there are super-class economists in the United States, they mainly work in official think tanks or big commercial companies, and they also appear in the White House as staff officers, and their influence on political decision-making is extremely limited, and Trump's dog head team is no exception. When they saw that China was going to overtake the United States, the first consideration was not the economic interests of the United States, but the loss of its political advantage in the world, so they quickly made a "trade war" strategy that harmed others and did not benefit themselves. On the other hand, in China, scholars and officials mostly come from scientific, engineering and economic backgrounds. Guided by the idea of establishing a market economy for a long time, they have a strong interest in cutting-edge technology and economic development. What they think most is GDP, employment and scientific and technological development. They naturally attach great importance to Sino-US economic and trade relations. The difference in this mode of thinking between the two sides also caused the misjudgment of the situation that year.

Figure 2 Biden will not be more pro-China than Trump.

Biden also failed to jump out of this circle. His undergraduate major was political science and history, and his doctorate was law. His first job was as a lawyer, and then he entered politics as a senator from Delaware. These experiences have not given the American president an economic mind, but political science, historical thinking and ideological prejudice. Therefore, it is unlikely that he will be softer than Trump in relations with China. Sure enough, once Biden came to power, the first solution was not to abolish Trump's trade war and come back together with China to save the American economy, but to directly form an alliance with various allies to jointly put pressure on China and continue to promote "decoupling" and national supply chain restructuring. At this point, we can see that although Sino-US economic and trade relations are still very important and the amount is still very large, it is probably a matter of time before China and the United States decouple and reorganize the global supply chain, and once the US supply chain reorganization is completed, it is likely to be the day to start work on China!

Second, the two camps will be ready.

The reason why the United States reorganized its supply chain is not only to suppress China and exclude China from the developed country system, but also to resist new global risks. Especially in the COVID-19 epidemic, the United States suddenly found that, as the largest country in the world, even its most capital medical supplies and equipment had to be imported from China in large quantities, and then the global supply of chips was tight, which directly affected the strategic rhythm of the development of American "internet plus" industry. To be fair, this is caused by the hollowing out of American industry for many years, not China's. However, as the world power structure has irreversibly changed to multipolarization, it is necessary for western countries to re-form camps and reorganize reliable supply chains. However, as a result of this, the United States will inevitably re-emerge two camps in the world like the Cold War.

On May 2 1, the European Parliament decided to freeze the China-EU comprehensive investment agreement, which means that Europe, like the United States, also regards ideology as an additional condition for economic cooperation and formulates new China policies. Among the countries in Europe, France has made it clear that it is a competitor with China, and Sino-British relations have been deteriorating since 20 19, and it is unlikely to recover. This time, the European Parliament made a collective decision.

Coincidentally, in April, China and Iran signed a 25-year cooperation agreement, decided to strengthen their comprehensive economic and trade relations, and directly declared the US sanctions against Iran invalid. Coupled with the special relations between Iran and Russia, and between China and Russia, an oriental camp with the Sino-Russian-Iranian consortium as the core has emerged. Of course, the potential members of this consortium are far more than these three countries. It also includes North Korea, five Central Asian countries, Syria and Belarus. Generally speaking, Eurasia has formed a new camp that can compete with the western camp. From an economic point of view, in this camp, China is a supplier of high-end manufacturing and information technology, and other countries are suppliers of raw materials, which can form an internal cycle.

Figure 3 The two camps will reappear.

The emergence of these two camps does not mean that the world will re-enter the Cold War, because China has not shown its foreign territorial ambitions or exported its revolution. Its relations with many western countries are quite good, and there are extremely important economic and trade relations, such as Germany, which means that the relationship between the two camps will be mainly competition rather than confrontation. This kind of competition will not only be economic, but also spread to science and technology, system, ideology and other levels.

As the leader of the western camp, the United States knows that once the economic and trade relations between the eastern camp and the western camp weaken, the confrontation between the two sides will become more intense, and Western European allies will stand on the side of the United States more firmly. Therefore, it is the grand strategy of the United States to decouple the two camps, and only in this way can we bring our allies together, launch a group fight against China, stifle the development momentum of China, and continue to maintain its position as the world's largest country. After all, China cannot be solved by the United States alone.

Third, when and where to start work?

As mentioned earlier, the day when China and the western countries blurted out was probably the day when the United States attacked China. So when and where will the United States attack China? My guess should be 10 years or so. First, it takes time for the United States to reorganize the global industrial chain, which cannot be completed in just a few years. Although it is often seen in the news that a large number of American companies have left China, according to the data, most of them are low-end industrial companies, and the transfer areas are often Southeast Asia rather than the western camp countries expected by the United States. Most American companies don't want to leave, and decoupling is difficult to achieve in the short term; Second, decoupling the grand strategy of attacking China can no longer experience the turmoil of political elections. As far as the current situation is concerned, because of Trump's nonsense, * * * and the party may not succeed in the election within 12 years. From Biden to Harris, the Democratic Party will usher in a very long ruling period, and the United States has enough time and patience; Third, as the most sensitive issue between China and the United States, the Taiwan Province Province issue is expected to usher in a solution opportunity around 2030, and the United States must make preparations before that. On March 10, Davidson, commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command, made a similar speculation.

Fig.4 The United States may launch a military strike against China.

According to the planning of some American think tanks, there are two options for the location of China. One is the Taiwan Province Strait and the South China Sea. The main way may be military conflict or military blockade. But it is obvious that if the United States does this, other countries in the eastern camp may make trouble in other directions, making it difficult for western countries to attack from all sides and win; Second, in the Middle East and the Indian Ocean, the western camp can weaken the geographical advantage of using force around China. First, kill Iran and Central Asian countries, occupy the Middle East, break the weakest link in the Eastern camp, weaken China's resource supply, cooperate with the blockade of maritime transport lines, and force China and Russia to yield.

In view of this sinister intention of the United States, what China should do is: first, continue to maintain strong economic and trade relations with American allies, use products and costs to counter the political pressure of the United States, force these allies to avoid military conflicts with China, and weaken the influence of the United States in the Western camp; The second is to solve the problem of Taiwan Province Province as soon as possible, break the blockade of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region, and crush the confidence of Asia-Pacific countries to follow the United States against China. With the help of various economic regional cooperation strategies, East Asia will be unified, the United States will be excluded, and the absolute security around China will be ensured. Even if we can't win in the Middle East, it won't have much impact on China.