Why does the US want to strangle Huawei? The dean of Tsinghua University analyzed this issue thoroughly

In the future, as long as Trump is in power, the biggest feature of the US stock market may be the high probability of instability, and the trend of the entire stock market will change with the policy changes of the Trump administration. That is to say, in terms of China policy, if the Trump administration relaxes its attitude, the stock market will rise, and if the tough attitude leads to tensions between China and the United States, the stock market will fall. As for the change cycle between the two policies of easing and confrontation of the Trump administration, it is very short, sometimes not more than 24 hours, that is to say, every minute may switch from confrontation to easing, or from easing to confrontation. Many investors hope for certainty, but the biggest "certainty" of Trump's foreign policy to the world is "100% uncertainty", and the characteristic of uncertainty has become the biggest certainty. The stock market will change with such rapid changes in attitude, rising and falling, and this trend will not change, and will become more and more serious.

01

The core of the strategic competition between China and the United States is high technology

What is the strategic competition between China and the United States? Can the China-US trade negotiations reach an agreement? Or what impact will it have if an agreement is reached?

From the perspective of international relations, my understanding of these issues is exactly the opposite of the comrade who asked the question: negotiation or non-negotiation has an impact on the relationship between the two countries, but the impact of success or failure on the relationship between the two countries is not significant. Because if the negotiation fails, of course it will not be implemented, but if the negotiation succeeds, it does not guarantee that it will be implemented. Therefore, there is no essential difference between success and failure. For example, even if the trade negotiations are successful, if the Trump administration wants to continue to impose 300 billion trade tariffs, it will say that China is not strictly implementing it, and then continue to impose tariffs. Therefore, there is no necessary relationship between success or failure of the negotiations and whether Trump continues to impose 300 billion tariffs. It mainly depends on whether the US government wants to impose tariffs. So we can only say that it is better to negotiate than not to negotiate. If the negotiations are successful, the Sino-US relations will be eased, and if they are not negotiated, the relationship will be tense.

Why does this phenomenon occur?

On April 11, 2019, Francis Collins, director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), said that in the next week or two, some U.S. universities will review their measures to prevent foreign governments from improperly using NIH-funded research. Collins suggested firing researchers who violated the rules. NIH requires all relevant universities in the United States to conduct investigations. Any scientist who uses U.S. government funding to conduct research and cooperates with foreign countries will face the possibility of being fired, and many of them will be Chinese scholars.

On May 11, MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) in the United States announced the 2019 early admission list. Among the 707 freshmen admitted in this year's EA round, there was not a single student from mainland China.

How serious is the situation here? The United States has already started an investigation, closed some research institutes run by Chinese scholars, and fired some Chinese professors, preventing them from continuing their research. These researchers may have US green cards, but they will find it difficult to get job opportunities, so some of them have returned to China. The number of Chinese students admitted to US universities has also decreased.

I learned from Columbia University that in the past, Columbia University admitted many Chinese students, but now they have made it clear that they want to reduce the number of Chinese students. In fact, all schools in the United States are facing political pressure to reduce the number of Chinese students. In this regard, students at Tsinghua University also feel deeply. Some students majoring in high-tech at Tsinghua University find it difficult to get a US visa because the United States does not allow Chinese college students to learn advanced American technology. These phenomena actually reflect that the core of this Sino-US dispute is high technology.

02

5G will determine the future of China and the United States

Why has 5G technology become the focus of competition between China and the United States this time?

Trump had such a speech: "5G networks will be closely linked to the prosperity and security of the United States in the 21st century. We cannot allow other countries to surpass the United States in important industrial fields in the future... The 5G competition is a competition that the United States must win... Next year, the United States will have the most 5G channels in the world, because you know someone is ahead of us. Maybe we should have done this a long time ago to prevent 5G from being mastered by other countries."

From this passage, we can see that 5G technology determines the future of the United States, and this technology also determines the future of China. Since 2013, 2014, and 2015, the Internet economy has gradually risen and developed very rapidly. The current stage of the development of the Internet economy is called the digital economy. From the perspective of the proportion of digital economy in GDP, the United States has reached about 60%, China about 40%, Japan about 50%, and Germany more than 60%. This also means that in the future, more and more human wealth will rely on digital economy rather than natural resources. In the future, the world's largest resource will no longer be mineral or oil resources, but data resources. Data is the result of human activities, and data resources are very rich, but ultimately it depends on whether the country has the ability to develop and utilize them, which determines whether wealth will increase. The reason why 5G determines the future of both China and the United States is that whichever country has 5G technology can turn data into greater wealth.

The 5G Ecosystem Report released by the U.S. Department of Defense said: "Today, among the top ten Internet economy companies, Chinese companies occupy four seats. This trend continues... If China continues to lead, the future network represented by 5G is likely to tilt further towards China... China's development in the 5G field will reproduce the glory of the United States in the 4G field."

In the past seven or eight years, the strength of the US economy is due to the fact that Samsung and Nokia, which were once leading companies in the 3G era, were squeezed out of the market. The US has taken the lead in the 4G market, creating the prosperity and glory of the United States in recent years, and the social wealth has grown very fast. According to the US forecast, "the leaders of the 5G era will earn hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue in the next decade."

China has currently deployed 350,000 operational base stations, almost 10 times that of the United States. Huawei has shipped 10,000 base stations overseas. Before 2009, the top ten Internet companies in terms of revenue were all American companies, but in 2018, four of the top ten were Chinese companies, such as Tencent, Alibaba, and Baidu. In the future 5G era, if 5G is mastered first, the top ten companies may be Chinese. This also explains why the United States regards China as a major competitor and why 5G has become the focus of strategic competition between China and the United States.

03

The changing attitude of American companies

Although everyone is generally concerned about whether an agreement can be reached in the China-US trade negotiations, from the perspective of international relations, I think it is not important. This is because the purpose of the US trade negotiations is not for trade, but the US wants to prevent China's technological development from catching up with the United States through trade negotiations. If China cannot catch up with the United States in technology, it will be difficult for China to surpass the United States in terms of economic wealth in the future.

Japanese technology developed very fast in the 1980s, but then Japan failed in the competition between the United States and Japan. It was not the so-called "Plaza Accord" or the exchange rate war that caused the Japanese economy to stagnate, but the United States required Japan's basic research to be open to American companies. The United States suppressed Japan's technological progress by purchasing shares in Japanese high-tech companies. The United States needs Japan to stay within the reach of the United States. Japan's research focus is on technology commercialization rather than basic science. Such a policy reassures the United States and ensures that Japan does not pose a threat to the United States in terms of technology.

Now, some people have suggested that China could promise the United States that it would not surpass the United States in technology to reassure the United States. I think such a condition is unacceptable to China. Therefore, the core of this trade negotiation is that the United States wants to stop the so-called Chinese government subsidies to enterprises through negotiations and prevent China's technological progress from catching up with the United States.

Trump declared a state of emergency and issued an executive order saying: "Some countries are constantly creating and exploiting weaknesses in the field of communications and information, posing extraordinary threats to the defense, diplomacy, and economy of the United States. In view of the above findings, the United States is required to enter a state of emergency and empower the U.S. Department of Commerce to allow the latter to prohibit U.S. companies from purchasing telecommunications equipment and technology produced by the above countries."