On December 2, the first China International Chain Promotion Expo with the theme of "Linking the World and Creating the Future Together" came to an end. More than 500 Chinese and foreign enterprises and institutions distributed in the upstream, middle and downstream key links of their respective industrial chains participated in the exhibition, and American exhibitors accounted for 20% of the total number of overseas exhibitors. This shows that strengthening the cooperation of the first chain and refusing to "decouple and break the chain" is the common aspiration of global enterprises, including American companies. China has also demonstrated to the world that China has always been committed to safeguarding the security and stability of the global chain by hosting the world's first national-level exhibition with the theme of the world's best chain. However, just when the world is playing a strong voice of first-chain cooperation, the murmur of "decoupling and breaking the chain" has reappeared, and individual countries have frequently subverted the existing global first-chain network on the grounds of "security".
If China's attitude towards global chain cooperation is based on "inclusive cooperation", then the United States is characterized by "decoupling" and "seizing control", which can be seen from the recent actions of the two countries.
According to Hong Kong's South China Morning Post on December 3**, Wu Guoan, vice president of the Chinese Manufacturers' Association of Hong Kong, said in an interview that the United States requires local exporters who transfer their business to Vietnam to abide by the "unwritten rule" that companies must not be registered in Chinese mainland or Hong Kong, and must be registered in Singapore, otherwise they will be completely boycotted by the United States. Earlier, Biden announced the establishment of the White House version of the "Chain Resilience Committee" in Washington. The 30 new measures are said to be aimed at "strengthening the U.S. economy and the most critical chain", reducing the dependence of medical products on so-called "high-risk foreign countries", strengthening the "regulation" of the semiconductor chain, and so on. Its essence is still to engage in "decoupling and breaking the chain" and "starting anew".
As the world's largest economy and the first scientific and technological power, the United States' doubts and even fears about the global ** chain network are ridiculous. The global first-chain network is gradually formed in the context of the deepening of the global division of labor, and American companies with strong capital strength are not only the promoters of this process, but also the beneficiaries. To this day, American companies are still at the top of many industrial chains, taking the largest slice of the entire industrial chain profit cake. However, the United States believes that the United States should not only enjoy the most lucrative profits, but also hold all the control firmly in its hands. It can be seen that the anxiety of the United States is not due to the simple issue of profit distribution, but to the hegemonic mentality.
Therefore, the United States continues to generalize the so-called "** problem" in an attempt to "transform" the "** chain cooperation" into a tool to maintain the perpetuation of US hegemony and a sharp blade to hinder the development of other countries. Past experience has repeatedly proved that using administrative means to destroy the mature first-class chain network that has been spontaneously formed for decades is tantamount to using a mantis arm as a car. In recent years, it is true that some foreign-funded enterprises have been forced by the United States to move the first chain out of China, but China has huge comparative advantages in terms of industrial support, infrastructure, scientific research level, and mature labor, and the first chain that has been removed from this part is only a formal "decoupling" from China.
Previously, Laura Alfaro, an economist at Harvard Business School, and Davin Chu, an associate professor at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College, jointly published a research report pointing out that the United States thought that reducing imports of Chinese products would reduce its dependence on China, but after the industrial chain was redistributed through countries such as Vietnam and Mexico, in fact, the indirect chain between the United States and China was still intact. The addition of intermediate links out of thin air only makes China lose some assembly costs, but the increased costs are paid by American consumers. The Peterson Institute for International Economics in the United States also previously released a report saying that China accounts for more than 30% of the imports of the "Indo-Pacific Economic Framework" member countries led by Biden in the United States, and exports to China account for about 20% of the overall exports. Although the United States has made efforts to distance itself from China by strengthening its relations with the members of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, the economic dependence of these countries on China has not decreased, but has increased.
Recently, inflation in the United States has continued to run at a high level, which has directly lowered Biden's approval rating. The United States' forcible dismantling and reorganization of the global ** chain is one of the reasons for pushing up its domestic inflation. In this way, when the current round of "**chain new deal" was introduced, Biden advertised it as "the beginning of the United States to win the competition in the 21st century", perhaps not only to appease the voice of domestic opposition, but also to embolden himself. However, American giants gathered at the first China International Chain Promotion Expo and refuted the United States with practical actions: decoupling and breaking the chain "can't be exchanged for advantages, let alone win competition, and deepening cooperation is the way out."