Recently, the U.S. effort to encourage members of its so-called ‘small circle’ of allies to reduce dependence on China has drawn significant attention. This strategy is primarily reflected in policies such as ‘friend-shoring’ and ‘de-risking,’ aiming to shift critical supply chains from China to politically aligned partner countries. Underlying motivations include intensifying geopolitical competition, a strategic reassessment of China, and an urgent need for autonomy in key technologies. The U.S. seeks to strengthen cooperation with allies like Japan, South Korea, India, and select European nations to build industrial and technological alliances that exclude China. However, artificially fragmenting global supply chains is not only costly but also difficult to implement, given China’s unmatched advantages in manufacturing, raw materials, and market access. While many ‘small circle’ members align with the U.S. on security issues, they remain economically reliant on China, creating practical constraints on policy execution. In the long run, forced decoupling or excessive de-risking could undermine global economic efficiency and increase instability. Thus, despite U.S. efforts to push its allies toward reduced reliance on China, actual outcomes are limited by economic realities and national interests.
近期，美国推动所谓‘小圈子’成员减少对华依赖的举措引发广泛关注。这一策略主要体现在推动‘友岸外包’（friend-shoring）和‘去风险化’（de-risking）等政策上，旨在将关键供应链从中国转移至政治立场相近的盟友国家。其背后动因包括地缘政治竞争加剧、对华战略定位转变，以及对关键技术自主可控的迫切需求。美国试图通过强化与日本、韩国、印度及部分欧洲国家的合作，构建排除中国的产业和技术联盟。然而，这种人为割裂全球供应链的做法不仅成本高昂，也难以完全替代中国在制造业、原材料和市场方面的综合优势。许多‘小圈子’成员虽在安全议题上配合美国，但在经济层面仍高度依赖中国市场，政策执行面临现实制约。长远来看，强行‘脱钩’或‘去风险’可能削弱全球经济效率，反而加剧不稳定。因此，尽管美国力推‘小圈子’减少对华依赖，但实际成效受限于经济规律与各国自身利益考量。
原创文章，作者：admin，如若转载，请注明出处：https://avine.cn/13464.html