在中美两国此前达成“战略稳定的建设性关系”这一表述之后，中国许多内阁顾问、国家安全部下属研究人员以及顶尖高校学者却日益将当前双边关系界定为“战略相持”。这一概念源自毛泽东于1938年在延安发表的《论持久战》演讲。毛泽东将持久战划分为三个阶段：初期革命力量在防御中坚守，中期陷入战略相持即敌人无法前进且革命力量更有组织，最终阶段则是发起反攻并击溃敌人。在中国观察家眼中，美国被视为疲惫的守成者，而中国则是充满活力的革命力量。

自2018年特朗普首次加征关税以来，中国在第一阶段展示了所谓“退却的勇气”，签署了不对等的第一阶段贸易协议以保存实力。在拜登执政期间，中国清醒认识到美国在先进半导体等领域的巨大杠杆，不惜代价大力培育本土替代品，并强化出口管制与对关键矿产开采加工企业的控制。当特朗普重返白宫并大幅升级关税时，中国通过限制稀土等关键矿产出口展现出凶猛反击能力，威胁切断美国关键工业供应链。目前双方形成分析人士所称的“相互确保中断”或“脆弱性平衡”的对等格局，中国认为能够走到相持阶段本身已是重大进步。

然而，多数中国学者认为对美取得决定性且持久的经济胜利并不现实，维持相持是更合理目标，复旦大学学者黄仁伟甚至希望该局面能维持30年。但相持状态脆弱易变，由于担忧在人工智能领域被永久置于劣势，中国在自身AI模型达到与美国相当的相持水平之前，不愿接受美国提出的AI安全机制，并持续限制对美及日本等盟友的稀土出口以作为纪律约束手段。此外，毛泽东曾警告相持阶段将是“极度痛苦且悲观情绪滋长”的时期；如今中国将巨额资金投向工业产能和技术自立而非社会福利，导致居民收入增速放缓，使国家经济呈现出深度的战时状态。

While the Chinese and American governments previously agreed on establishing a “constructive relationship of strategic stability”, many Chinese cabinet advisers, researchers under the Ministry of State Security, and top university scholars now describe bilateral ties as a “strategic stalemate”. This framing draws directly from Mao Zedong’s 1938 “On Protracted War” speeches delivered in Yan’an. Mao posited three stages: an initial defensive phase where revolutionary forces hunker down, a strategic stalemate where an overstretched adversary cannot advance while revolutionaries organise better, and a final counter-offensive that routs the enemy. Chinese thinkers view America as the weary incumbent and China as the energetic revolutionary.

Following the start of the trade war in 2018 when Donald Trump first imposed tariffs, China initially demonstrated “the courage to retreat” by accepting an asymmetrical deal to conserve resources. Throughout Joe Biden’s presidency, China recognised America’s immense leverage in advanced semiconductors, poured massive resources into cultivating domestic alternatives, and tightened state control over the mining and processing of critical minerals. When Mr Trump returned to office and ramped up tariffs, China retaliated fiercely by throttling exports of critical minerals and rare earths, threatening broad swathes of American industry. This established what analysts describe as “mutually assured disruption” or a “balance of vulnerability”, which Chinese strategists view as meaningful progress.

Most Chinese thinkers consider a decisive economic triumph over America unrealistic, viewing a prolonged stalemate—which Fudan University’s Huang Renwei suggested could last for 30 years—as a more plausible goal. However, this stalemate remains inherently fragile: fear of permanent inferiority in artificial intelligence makes China reluctant to embrace American AI safety regimes until parity is achieved, while rare-earth export curbs against America and allies like Japan remain an active deterrent. Crucially, Mao warned that the stalemate phase would be a painful period of mounting pessimism; by channelling capital into industrial capacity and self-reliance at the expense of social welfare, household income growth has slowed, giving China the hallmark characteristics of a protracted war economy.

Source: What Mao can teach China about managing America

Subtitle: An insurgent power has fought the incumbent to a stalemate

Dateline: Sep 24th 2026\n