Loading...
Before reading this article, please click "Follow", which is not only convenient for you to discuss and share, but also can bring you a different sense of participation, thank you for your support!
The release of Huawei's new generation of smartphones has undoubtedly set off a lot of waves in the global technology field. This mobile phone, which uses cutting-edge 5nm technology, stands like a technology giant, making the stock prices of Nvidia, the "big man" of the American technology industry, and Asmail, a chip equipment manufacturer in the Netherlands, fall sharply like a kite with a broken wire. This magnificent leap in technology not only declares to the world China's strong strength in the high-tech battlefield, but also is a powerful counterattack to the technological hegemony of the United States. And all this happened at the time of US Secretary of Commerce Raimondo's visit to China, which seems to be adding to China's international trade status.
Although the United States, a country that has always regarded itself as a technological powerhouse, has repeatedly tried to suppress China's technological rise by erecting obstacles, Huawei's heavy attack has undoubtedly made the United States' strategy seem stretched and even a little short-sighted. Huawei's success is not only a technological victory, but also a symbol of China's standing tall on the global technology stage.
At the same time, the United States continues to make groundless accusations against China in areas such as new energy and green technology. During U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's visit to China, she frequently mentioned the topic of "overcapacity", as if she wanted to use it as an excuse to suppress China. However, after returning to China, Yellen showed a stubbornness that turned a deaf ear to China's explanation, which undoubtedly exposed the paranoia and containment of the United States in its China policy.
Huawei's strong counterattack is not only the best proof of China's ability to innovate independently in technology, but also a demonstration of China's firm position on the global stage. Even the American economist Jeffrey could not stand it anymore, and he bluntly denounced the US government's China policy as a manifestation of its lack of confidence in its own competitiveness, and even more so a gross violation of China's legitimate right to development.
In the face of US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's absurd accusations, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying responded in a firm tone. She pointed out that what the United States has done is tantamount to isolating itself from the people and has no impact on China's development. China's openness and inclusiveness stand in stark contrast to the isolation and exclusion of the United States, which symbolizes the decline of an empire and the prosperity of China's international status.
Ms. Hua Chunying's words are full of strength and confidence. She stressed that China's leading position in the new energy sector is not accidental, but is due to careful strategic planning, continuous R&D investment, well-established industrial and supply chains, a huge domestic market, and a hard-working workforce and visionary entrepreneurs. It is the combination of these factors that has made China the leader in the global green production capacity arena. Yellen, however, sees this brilliant achievement as a thorn in the side, slandering China's overcapacity and trying to incite other countries to besiege China in order to contain its rise.
Yellen's remarks and the actions of the United States undoubtedly reveal a hegemonic mentality – an attempt to maintain its leading position in certain key areas by suppressing other countries. This hegemonic mindset has been deeply embedded in US foreign policy for decades, and it has maintained its hegemony through its global network of allies, such as NATO. However, the cost of this approach is that the image of the United States in the international community has been increasingly tarnished, and it is increasingly seen as an international power that ignores fair competition and international rules.
In this context, Academician Ding Zhongli's point out is particularly pertinent. He criticized the United States and its Western allies for often playing double standards, which is not only extremely unfair to China, but also a serious violation of the principle of global fair trade. Especially on the eve of Blinken's upcoming visit to China, the United States is expected to put more pressure on China over the alleged industrial gluttony. In the face of this aggressive posture, China must respond with a firm and sensible strategy. This includes strengthening close cooperation with the countries of the South, especially the BRICS, reducing over-dependence on Western countries, and promoting the building of a new international economic order that is more diversified and fair.
In summary, the tactics of the United States and its allies have only exposed their deep anxiety about China's rise and their inability to recover. Despite the unprecedented pressure, China has been able to maintain its pace of development and continue to demonstrate impressive strength and achievements on the international stage. Looking ahead, we have reason to believe that China will continue to unswervingly follow the path of independent development, work with more countries to jointly promote the development of a more just and balanced global governance system. This historic change is an inevitable product of the trend of global multipolarization, and it will not be transferred by the will of any single country. On the contrary, the self-isolation of an empire only hastened its end to decay.