12 Comments
User's avatar
Glorfindel's avatar

Hi Mr. Gao...

So, I was reading some of the comments of U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance that he uttered on the U.S. network Fox News on Sunday, Oct 12th regarding the latest trade imbroglio. From a Chinese perspective, I would find his comments quite insulting. He was being quite 'passive aggressive'. Perhaps he was intending to 'lower the temperature', but viewed from a Chinese perspective, I think he TOTALLY missed the mark. Look forward to any post you might publish relating to the Chinese response to these comments.

Expand full comment
Fred Gao's avatar

Thanks, just I don't think there will be directly response to Vance’s comments from Chinese side, unless it has been transformed to some kind of policies.

Expand full comment
Glorfindel's avatar

You may be quite right. The more these gentleman squeal, the more desperate they appear. From the Chinese side, silence also conveys a message of calm assurance.

Expand full comment
Glorfindel's avatar

It is a little hard to get through the weeds on this, but I see this as a SIGNIFICANT escalation on the part of the Chinese. They are playing hardball. I'm a little surprised I don't see the big American defense contractors on any unreliable entity list such as RTX corporation (formerly Raytheon). Is this because they're better at compliance? On a somewhat unrelated point, if the Chinese are escalating on the trade front, I don't see the TikTok deal happening despite President Trump's assertion that it was a 'done deal'. Am I wrong?

Expand full comment
Fred Gao's avatar

And both Raytheon and Rockheed on the unreliable entity list already: https://www.mofcom.gov.cn/zwgk/zcfb/art/2025/art_c164b1339d694766938f75c1f83bddf8.html

Expand full comment
Glorfindel's avatar

Oh...thanks for that. I hadn't realized it.

Expand full comment
Fred Gao's avatar

Both sides take TikTok as a separate case from the overall tech competition.

Expand full comment
Glorfindel's avatar

Mr. Trump seems to perceive the TikTok divestiture as a 'done deal' which I suspect it is not.

Expand full comment
Fred Gao's avatar

China has given a green light for commercial negotiations, but our government also reserves the right to block them if the Trump side uses maximum pressure to force forward a deal that China doesn't want. The “done deal” is just a consensus on starting the commercial talk

Expand full comment
钟建英's avatar

How is it a significant escalation by China? You may be right, just want to understand the reasons.

Expand full comment
Glorfindel's avatar

Well, I'm not an authority on this, but it appears to me that China has skillfully crafted a list of items for export controls that the U.S. will have difficulty finding elsewhere.

The list Mr. Gao has provided goes well beyond just rare earth minerals.

Now, as Mr. Gao has indicated, PART of this could be escalating to deescalate by creating bargaining chips which could used in future trade negotiations.

Expand full comment
钟建英's avatar

Thanks for explaining. I have since read many other commentators also saying this is a significant step by China, so calling this an "escalation" might be right. My only objection is that lots of actions by the US could rightly be called escalatory, whereas this "significant tightening" by China over its control of essential materials for military applications can be justified as a way to limit their use to peaceful applications. Sending warships to pass through the Taiwan straits is an escalation that is provocative and has no legitimate justification.

"Significant tightening" avoids any implication of being provocative. It does not harm the US economy or American legitimate interests (in so far as they are peaceful). I suppose the next step is for more American defense contractors to be placed on the unreliable entity list. (But don't call it an "escalation"! 🤣)

Expand full comment