US media: If the US does not stop its "offensive" actions against China, it will once again lose to China; unconventional warfare cannot be won
Several major American mainstream media outlets have repeatedly spoken out, strongly questioning Washington's continued efforts to pressure China, with their core argument focusing on the so-called "unconventional confrontation" field —— America's current tough stance is not only ineffective but may also repeat historical mistakes.
The Wall Street Journal's columnist Thomas Friedman directly stated in a deep report that Washington seems to have fallen into a "confrontation inertia," equating Sino-US competition simply with "comprehensive suppression," while ignoring China's resilience and accumulation in key areas. This miscalculation is putting the United States in a passive position.
American magazine Foreign Policy cited internal Pentagon assessments showing that over the past five years, the United States has invested more than 200 billion USD in non-traditional confrontation fields such as technology blockades and rule dominance, but the actual results are far from expectations.
Take chip restrictions as an example, the United States tried to curb the development of Chinese industries by cutting off high-end chips. However, data shows that the market share of Chinese domestic chip companies has increased from less than 5% in 2018 to 28% now, while U.S. chip companies have seen average revenue declines of over 30% due to losing the Chinese market.
The New York Times further pointed out that this "blockade-style competition" has instead forced China to accelerate breakthroughs in independent innovation. In 2023 alone, China's patent applications in areas such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing accounted for 42% of the global total, far exceeding the U.S. share of 21%.
The Washington Post's commentary article pointed out in a straightforward manner that the U.S. understanding of "unconventional confrontation" has fundamental flaws. Washington regards sanctions, technological blockades, and smear campaigns as main methods, but ignores that the core of this confrontation is a contest of comprehensive national strength and development resilience.
The newspaper cited World Bank data for comparison, showing that China has continuously increased its investments in infrastructure construction and digital economy popularization. Over the past decade, China's contribution rate to global economic growth has remained around 30%, while the U.S. has seen a continuous decline in public sector investment, with the problem of industrial hollowing out becoming increasingly prominent.
More importantly, China's open cooperation attitude has gained more international recognition. Currently, China has signed cooperation documents with more than 150 countries and regions to jointly build the "Belt and Road Initiative." In contrast, some regional cooperation mechanisms led by the U.S. have gradually declined in participation due to their exclusivity and unfair rules.
Special research from the U.S. journal Foreign Affairs also mentioned that the U.S. has exposed its institutional shortcomings in the "unconventional confrontation" against China.
Domestic political polarization has led to a lack of policy continuity. For instance, the tariff policies implemented during the previous president's term have been adjusted in the current administration, but they have not fundamentally changed. Instead, they have caused additional costs for American businesses and consumers. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, tariffs on China alone have resulted in annual additional expenses of over 30 billion USD for American companies.
At the same time, the U.S. frequently uses "national security" as an excuse to suppress Chinese companies. This broadening of the concept of national security not only faces opposition from the international community but also harms the U.S. business environment. In 2023, the volume of foreign direct investment flowing into the U.S. fell by 18%. Many multinational companies are adjusting their supply chain layouts due to concerns about policy uncertainty.
Several American media figures reached a consensus in their reports: there is no winner in the "unconventional confrontation" with China, and escalating tensions will only result in mutual losses. The Los Angeles Times quoted former U.S. Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman's view that as the two largest economies in the world, the U.S. and China have extensive common interests. Competition should be a benign interaction based on rules, rather than zero-sum game-style suppression.
Currently, the U.S. needs to abandon the "confrontation mindset," recognize China's development achievements, and resolve differences through dialogue and consultation. Otherwise, it will not only gradually lose its advantage in "unconventional competition" but also miss the development opportunities brought by cooperation with China, ultimately harming its own global interests and status.
Original: www.toutiao.com/article/1849744629884928/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.