Yanwen’s blog

12/20/2024

Yesterday, I discussed China's rise alongside the growing tide of globalization. Today, I will continue with my narrative on when relations between the U.S. and China began to sour.

The turning point that I remember can be traced back to the "Pivot to Asia" policy, a hallmark of Barack Obama’s foreign policy. This strategic shift redirected the U.S.’s diplomatic, economic, and military focus from the Middle East to the Asia-Pacific region. As part of this pivot, Obama committed to stationing 60% of the U.S. naval force right at China’s doorstep in the South China Sea.

Amid rising geopolitical tensions, supply chains—a once purely economic matter—emerged as a critical national security concern. The U.S. began prioritizing securing its supply chains over cost-efficiency, marking a significant shift in policy.

By 2018, under the Trump administration, trade wars erupted. The U.S. imposed tariffs on Chinese goods five times in succession, escalating tensions between the two nations.

In 2019, following the detention of Meng Wanzhou in December 2018, the Trump administration targeted Huawei, banning its 5G technologies and cellphones from the U.S. market, accusing Huawei of carrying out espionage and surveillance, though without any evidence.

Concurrently, export controls on high-tech products to China tightened, and these measures evolved into a systematic effort to dismantle China’s supply chain system. If anything, the Huawei event and Trump might be the pivot moment, a wake-up call for China to build independence in every aspect imaginable.

Fast forward to today, U.S. policies revolve around “decoupling,” “de-risking,” and “choking” China’s high-tech development, pushing out these major strategies:

1. Onshoring Manufacturing   Opposite to offshoring, this strategy aims to relocate manufacturing operations back to the U.S. However, its impact has been limited due to high wages, insufficient supporting industries, and incomplete supply chains. As a result, much of the manufacturing that was offshored decades ago remains unviable to bring back.

2. Nearshoring Manufacturing   This approach relocates manufacturing operations to nearby countries, such as Mexico and Canada. In 2020, the U.S. signed the USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement) to stimulate regional manufacturing. Yet, progress has been slow, hindered by limited industrial capacity, skilled labor shortages, and production constraints in North America.  

3. Friendshoring Manufacturing   This strategy focuses on moving manufacturing to allied nations, ensuring political alignment and economic stability. For instance, the U.S. has partnered with Japan and South Korea to establish semiconductor factories and increased investments in countries like Vietnam and India. Intel invested $1.5 billion in Vietnam to build Asia’s largest chip testing and assembly plant. Similarly, Apple has set up 14 production bases in India, aiming to produce over a quarter of its global iPhone output there. These efforts are designed to reduce reliance on China’s supply chain. But friend countries have not reduced their reliance on China.

There's a Chinese saying, “置之死地而后生” (Zhì zhī sǐ dì ér hòu shēng), means: "Driven to a dead end, one is forced to find a way to survive and ultimately thrives," similar to the English saying, "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger." This saying captures the spirit that external pressures or crises can drive innovation and resilience, as shown how U.S. sanctions on Huawei have spurred China to redouble their efforts to be independent.

Ultimately, China moves head regardless. And the U.S. government's strategies have thus far failed to achieve their intended goals. China continues to advance in technology and maintain its formidable, seemingly unbreakable supply chain.

Continue tomorrow...

12/19/2024

With the incoming Trump administration and the promise of tough tariffs, I started researching how we got to where we are today.

I came across an article from the Council on Foreign Relations, titled, "What Happened When China Joined the WTO?" and the United States thought it was directing the show when China acceded to the World Trade Organization. Instead, China wrote its own script (June 17, 2021).

The article highlights, “American consumers broadly benefited from China’s WTO entry because they could buy goods at lower prices. Corporations profited from increased access to China’s massive market. In 2017, for example, Chinese consumers accounted for about 15 percent of Apple’s sales, and since 2001, U.S. exports to China have skyrocketed by 450 percent.”

Indeed, China’s accession to the WTO marked a significant milestone. According to a Cambridge University study, "China and the WTO: A 20 Years Assessment", China—now the world’s second-largest economy—saw its GDP surge from $1.339 trillion in 2001 to $14.723 trillion in 2020. Meanwhile, China became the leading trading nation, with exports increasing nearly 8.74 times, from $266.1 billion in 2001 to $2.59 trillion in 2020. Imports also climbed nearly 7.44 times, from $243.55 billion to $2.05 trillion over the same period.

However, China’s economic transformation cannot be viewed as an isolated event. It must be understood within the broader context of globalization and its underlying logic.

At its core, globalization is driven by multinational corporations seeking to maximize profits through efficiency, cost reduction, and the free flow of goods. This pursuit of greater profit margins led companies to voluntarily relocate manufacturing processes to regions with lower labor costs. The United States, as the country with the world’s most powerful corporations, played a central role in shaping this global economic landscape.

Globalization had already shown its power in the economic rise of the Four Asian Tigers—South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Before the 1970s, these economies were primarily dependent on agriculture and light industries. By adopting export-oriented strategies and strong development policies, they first absorbed labor-intensive industries like textiles, clothing, and toys brought about by global trade. Gradually, they advanced into technology-intensive industries, such as electronics, semiconductors, household appliances, and automobiles. By the 1990s, the Four Asian Tigers had entered the ranks of developed economies. Their success was fueled by the openness of the U.S. market, capital inflows, and technology transfers.

A Chinese saying goes, “水涨船高” (shuǐ zhǎng chuán gāo) means: When the water rises, the boat floats higher. This reflects the interconnected nature of globalization, it can lift every boat (country) in its process.

When China joined the WTO in 2001, it already had a clear roadmap: replicate the success of the Four Asian Tigers but on a far larger scale. With its vast reservoir of low-cost labor and continuous inflow of Western capital and technology, China rose with the tide and achieved an unprecedented economic miracle.  

Of course, in this round of globalization, the United States has been a significant beneficiary as well. 

When my children were little, I took them to Beijing, where McDonald’s was the most popular choice for kid's birthday parties, and Coca-Cola was their favorite drink. These symbols of American prosperity became deeply integrated into China’s consumer culture, demonstrating how U.S. companies profited from China’s emergence. Now Chinese parents save money to send their children to America for higher education.

Consider Apple: it is the world’s most valuable company, yet 90% of its phones are manufactured in China. Walmart, the world’s largest retailer, procures 70% of its global inventory from China. Tesla, another success story, derived 40% of its global sales in 2022 from the Chinese market, with its Shanghai factory producing over half of its vehicles.

America’s prosperity today has been built, in no small part, on the foundation of China’s manufacturing power—mature supply chain. China today not only provides an immense consumer market but also possesses unmatched manufacturing capabilities. Over the past two decades, the globalized division of labor—where American design and innovation meet Chinese manufacturing strength—has created a win-win scenario. However, as geopolitical tensions rise and economic priorities shift, the sustainability of this symbiotic relationship faces increasing uncertainty. All remains to be seen with the entrance of Trump into the White House next year.

Continue tomorrow…

12/18/2024

Last Thursday, December 12, I came across a CNN report about President-elect Donald Trump extending an invitation to Chinese President Xi Jinping to attend his inauguration ceremony. My initial reaction mirrored the disbelief I felt upon hearing about South Korea’s martial law: This can’t be true. It must be fake news.

To verify, I checked other reputable outlets—AP, The Guardian, CBS—and found the same story. The report caused quite a stir globally.

After the initial shock wore off, I started to make sense of it. Once it sank in, it became clear that this bold and unconventional act was quintessential Trump. His style has always been defined by unpredictability, norm-breaking diplomacy, theatrical gestures, and headline-seeking moves. This invitation aligns with his penchant for personal diplomacy and his desire to redefine U.S.-China relations on his own terms.

The invitation itself has sparked a range of interpretations. I believe there could be some positive implications:

1. A Signal of Engagement Over Confrontation  The invitation suggests Trump’s willingness to prioritize engagement with China rather than confrontation. It hints at his desire to reset, from day one, the often-contentious U.S.-China relationship and pursue closer ties.

2. A Pragmatic Shift in Tone   The gesture stands in stark contrast to Trump’s earlier campaign rhetoric, which emphasized being tough on China through tariffs and addressing trade imbalances. This pragmatic move may signal a more flexible approach to future dealings.

3. Symbolism Over Seriousness   Given the unconventional nature of the gesture, the invitation seems more symbolic than a real expectation for Xi’s attendance. This flexibility allows Xi to decline without risking offense or diplomatic fallout.

4. A Glimpse of Trump’s Personal Diplomacy  Trump values direct engagement with world leaders, often bypassing traditional institutional channels to create high-profile, personal relationships. This invitation sets the tone for what the world might expect from his approach to foreign leaders.

A Chinese saying goes, "礼尚往来" (Lǐ shàng wǎng lái), meaning, "Courtesy demands reciprocity." This saying emphasizes the cultural and diplomatic principle of making gestures of goodwill in the hopes of fostering mutual respect and exchange. It aligns with the spirit of Trump’s invitation as an overture to reset the frosty relations, even if it means breaking traditional norms.

However, while the invitation is bold and unconventional, it’s unlikely to gain traction with a leader like Xi Jinping. Here’s why:

First, Chinese diplomacy prioritizes convention, discipline, and respect for established norms. A domestic event like a U.S. presidential inauguration falls outside the traditional parameters of international diplomacy.

Second, Trump’s unpredictability can be a liability. World leaders, including Xi, often avoid high-stakes, unpredictable situations. Trump’s penchant for sudden shifts and headline-making gestures may be viewed as a risk rather than an opportunity.

Third, the two leaders have vastly different leadership styles. Trump’s bold, short-term, and attention-driven diplomacy contrasts sharply with Xi’s disciplined, long-term, and risk-averse approach. The lack of alignment in styles further diminishes the likelihood of Xi entertaining the invitation.

Ultimately, while Trump’s invitation may be more symbolic than practical, it speaks volumes about his intentions and his willingness to break with tradition. Even if Xi declines, the gesture signals that Trump’s presidency will likely feature dramatic, unconventional diplomacy aimed at shaking up the established order. Whether such moves prove effective remains to be seen, but globally, all eyes and ears are on it.

12/17/2024

In Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values (1974), Robert M. Pirsig recounts an interesting story about catching monkeys that illustrates a profound truth about human nature and society.

A tribe of Native Americans devised a unique method for catching monkeys. They would drill a small hole in its top, hollow out its inside, and fill it with rice. The coconut was then securely tied to a wooden post with a rope. Attracted by the rice, a monkey would reach its hand into the small hole to grab the grains. However, the hole was too small for the monkey to withdraw its clenched fist.

Refusing to let go of the rice, the monkey remained trapped, oblivious to the fact that something more important than rice was at stake -- its freedom—and even its life. The villagers, exploiting this weakness, could easily capture the monkey and put it in a cage.

The method works because of what Pirsig refers to as "value rigidity." The monkey becomes so fixated on the rice that it cannot see the bigger picture. What it clings to seems so trivial in comparison to what it loses.

As onlookers, we might pity the monkey for its stubbornness and think we are smarter than this, but the truth is, we often fall into similar traps. Our own fixations—on wealth, status, power, or rigid beliefs—can blind us to what truly matters. As Pirsig aptly notes in his book:  

 "Of the value traps, the most widespread and pernicious is value rigidity. This is an inability to revalue what one sees because of commitment to previous values."

This saying also resonates with the idea of value rigidity, where an inability to reassess what truly matters leads to misguided choices.

This concept of value rigidity doesn’t just apply to individuals. A country can fall victim to it, particularly when it comes to war. Some countries' obsession with war offers a striking example of value rigidity. Like the monkey clutching the rice, they have become fixated on the outdated dominance, control of resources, and supremacy, refusing to let go of the "rice" in their clenched hands, even when the pursuit leads to staggering costs in human lives, resources, and global instability.

Ultimately, the success of a country—or a person—comes from seeing the large picture and understanding what truly matters and having the flexibility to adapt. On the individual level, the monkey’s freedom is always within its grasp; it just has to loosen its fist.

12/16/2024

A few weeks ago, I heard a true story about a man who wrote to his mother every day. Later, he compiled all those daily writings into a book. I can’t recall exactly what he wrote to his mother, whether she wrote back, or if the book was a success. In fact, I don’t even remember where I heard the story. Yet, something about it resonated deeply with me.  

The man said that knowing his mother was waiting for his writing motivated him to keep doing it. He knew he had only one reader—but that was enough to keep him to write every single day. With just one dedicated audience, he didn’t need to worry much about what or how he wrote.

This story stays with me because, in a modest way, I see myself in a similar situation. I write every day, and though my audience is larger on social media, my readership still feels small and personal. Like him, I also feel motivated knowing that someone, somewhere, is reading, though my motivation comes mainly from within.

But more to it, I’ve come to realize that the ultimate reward of consistent daily practice—whether writing, painting, exercising, or any activity—often lies not in external impacts but in how it transforms us as individuals, and how unexpectedly this writer builds something truly lasting, both for him and beyond.

A friend of mine once sent me this to encourage me to keep writing: “功不唐捐” (Gōng bù táng juān), "No effort is ever wasted." The saying conveys the idea that every action, no matter how small or directed toward how few, has value.

First is the idea of connection and writing. Writing isn’t all about reaching large crowds; it is about the satisfaction of sharing and maintaining a bond.

Second, writing daily, either for a large or small audience, builds discipline and improves skill. It’s practicing an art form; the process itself is valuable for personal growth and honing one’s craft.

Third, there is always an intrinsic feeling of fulfillment with daily self-improvement, either organizing one's thoughts or communicating one's understanding of the world through writing or drawing.

Fourth, a legacy is not built in a day but with the accumulation of this small daily output. The written words become a record of our thoughts, feelings, and impactful moments, holding value as a legacy for future generations or as a testament to a relationship like the one between this writer and his mother.

Finally, sometimes authenticity can be compromised for a writer who targets for large audiences. This story offers a reminder that writing can still be meaningful, personal, authentic, even when the audience is small.

Ultimately, the true reward of one act each day is not measured by the number of people witnessing it, but by how it impacts us. Whether writing for one or for a thousand, it is the act itself—the discipline, the reflection, practice, and the growth—that makes it meaningful.