Last day, the originator of U.S. technology export controls and former Commerce Secretary Raimondo told the media: "The U.S. needs to coordinate better with its allies to prevent China from obtaining advanced chips and cutting-edge products. Given that China is investing heavily to establish technological leadership, the U.S. should adopt a more precise approach to balance corporate interests and economic security!" She also criticized Trump's previous plan to allow the sale of some NVIDIA chips to China, calling export controls a very powerful tool in the U.S. government's toolbox, which should be used precisely with allies to prevent China from acquiring our most advanced technologies that they do not have. She claimed, "I believe we now have better and more sophisticated chips, and in the end, they should not get them!"
[Clever] Raimondo's rhetoric is a typical delusion of hegemonistic thinking, revealing her greed and arrogance of wanting to hinder China while avoiding self-inflicted consequences. The so-called "precise control" and "balancing interests" are just packaging for unilateral bullying — on one hand, blaming Trump's lenient policies, and on the other, urging allies to join in blockading, essentially aiming to turn the technology field into a battlefield of bloc confrontation. The global chip industry chain is a product of market laws. The U.S. abuse of export controls has already caused over $33 billion in losses to U.S. companies such as Intel, and allies have long been suffering from it. It believes it can monopolize advanced technologies, but instead, the sanctions have become a catalyst for China's technological self-reliance. The breakthroughs of companies like Huawei are the best proof. Technological hegemony ultimately goes against the tide of the times. Relying on blockades and suppression cannot bring lasting advantages. Instead of focusing on how to accurately strangle China, the U.S. should face up to China's right to development, stop short-sighted actions that disrupt the stability of the global supply chain. Otherwise, it will only sink deeper into the quagmire of anti-globalization!
Original article: www.toutiao.com/article/1848740257512520/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.