【By Guan察者网, Liu Bai】

The U.S. government has been recklessly and indiscriminately imposing technological bullying on China, escalating its suppression measures with no limits, but what is the result?

"A policy of decoupling that lacks clear planning, which is both chaotic and uncoordinated, not only harms American innovation but also helps China," an article published by The Congressional Report on December 14th pointed out. The U.S. strategic "decoupling" policy, based on national security and economic resilience, lacks a clear plan and has generated multiple negative impacts, not only confusing America's allies, but also damaging the innovation and economic interests of American companies, and exacerbating Sino-U.S. trade friction into a vicious cycle. At the same time, the policy's unpredictability has weakened the united front of the U.S. and its allies, forcing allies to seek independent strategies, which in turn accelerates China's technological self-reliance process.

The author directly stated that the U.S. government's "decoupling" strategy has become one of the most emblematic and controversial policies in the global business field in the 21st century. After Trump first entered the White House, after nearly ten years of implementing the first major tariffs, the results have gradually become clear: the strategy has caused confusion among America's allies, undermined American innovation, and inadvertently accelerated China's technological independence process.

The U.S. government's argument claims that these policies are necessary "precision strikes" aimed at "de-risking" key supply chains. However, the reality is far from a precise operation, but rather a series of arbitrary, self-inflicted wounds.

In November, the United States prohibited the sale of NVIDIA's degraded B30A artificial intelligence chips to China. This decision is a concentrated embodiment of the failure of this strategy, highlighting a policy cycle: restrictions provoke Chinese retaliation, leading to even stricter bans by the United States.

On October 28, 2023, in Washington, D.C., NVIDIA CEO Huang Renxun spoke at the NVIDIA GTC event. Visual China

However, this is not a sustainable strategic framework. It is a small-scale economic conflict that forces American companies to bear losses of billions of dollars, while also strengthening the resolve of its main competitors.

The article wrote that the financial losses for American industries are shocking. NVIDIA, a core innovative enterprise in the field of artificial intelligence, is a typical example. The repeated chip restrictions this year have already cost the company billions of expected revenue. Earlier this year, NVIDIA had to write off about $4.5 billion due to inventory of chips designed to comply with previous U.S. regulations. Predictions show that NVIDIA will face an additional revenue loss of up to $8 billion in the next quarter.

These are not small numbers. American companies could have reinvested this income into domestic R&D, innovation, and high-paying jobs, but now it disappears from the U.S. balance sheet. The direct impact of protectionism (especially in high-tech fields) is weakening the scale and market access of leading U.S. companies, and in the long run, this will hinder their ability to maintain a global technological advantage against emerging competitors.

Moreover, the "decoupling" policy has created significant friction with the U.S.'s treaty allies. This strategy only works effectively in a few industries, provided that American companies can find alternative suppliers in countries where it is economically viable and geographically aligned with Washington's stance.

But when potential suppliers are located in non-allied countries, American companies often prefer to take political risks to remain in China, indicating that differences often stem from political expediency rather than actual supply chain needs.

Economies such as Japan and South Korea, which are essential in the global semiconductor supply chain, have suffered massive financial losses due to U.S. export controls, which forced them to shift manufacturing and abandon existing facilities in China. The lack of consistency and predictability in U.S. policies (such as monthly revisions to the list of restricted chips) has created great uncertainty. This uncertainty undermines the overall strategy of building a united front against China, forcing allies to pursue independent strategies prioritizing stability over loyalty to the unpredictable U.S. The ambiguity of the U.S. position also prompts other countries to diversify their alliance relationships and conclude trade agreements that bypass U.S. influence.

However, the biggest contradiction of the current protectionist strategy is that it is funding and accelerating the very outcome it originally sought to prevent - China's technological self-sufficiency.

The article states that every new ban on advanced components imposed by the U.S. provides the Chinese side with a clear and undeniable reason to invest tens of billions of dollars in state support for its leading domestic enterprises and their AI chip development departments.

When the U.S. cut off the supply of the most advanced NVIDIA chips, China prioritized its own alternatives; when the U.S. later provided a compliant lower-grade chip (such as H20), China quickly banned its use in strategic data centers to avoid "addiction to outdated U.S. technology," as publicly claimed by U.S. officials.

The Trump administration's recent ban on B30A chips will only further strengthen China's resolve. In effect, the U.S. is outsourcing its competitive policies to China, allowing China to set the rules of the game and mobilize its vast national resources to fill the market gaps left by the U.S. withdrawal.

The article concluded, "The original designer of the tariff strategy, former U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, believed that the post-war global trade system had collapsed, which is somewhat reasonable, but trying to fix it through unilateral withdrawal and domestic market protection has proven costly, chaotic, and ultimately counterproductive."

Instead of slowing down China's rise in strategic technologies, the U.S. is ensuring that when China eventually achieves independence in artificial intelligence and chip manufacturing, it will become a competitor forged in the fire of "forced self-reliance," no longer dependent on or认同 the U.S. system or standards.

"The White House should recognize that the current 'decoupling' strategy has failed to achieve its intended goals. The future path must include coordinated actions based on international consensus, targeted restrictions, rather than broad and chaotic bans that only harm American companies and hand strategic advantages to China," the author wrote.

This article is exclusive to Observer Net. Reproduction without permission is prohibited.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7583921374012523014/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author himself.