如懿传

US transshipment claims attempt to build ‘higher fence,’ disrupt global supply chains: experts_我的网站

A |     在全球地缘政治的棋局上，乌克兰与日本之间的一则求援故事，引发了不少关注。    

    Shipping containers are loaded and unloaded onto ships at the Port of Los Angeles, California, on July 9, 2025. Photo: VCG
When even major US allies and trading partners are swept into Washington's alleged China-linked transshipment network, is the US still cracking down on its so-called illegal tariff evasion, or is it raising its "small yard, high fence" higher and tighten it further by wielding its tariff stick and extending tariff controls across normal global supply chains?
The White House on Thursday released a report identifying roughly 40 economies as participants in what it calls a "Shadow Transshipment Network", alleging that Chinese goods are being routed through third countries to evade higher US tariffs. The list stretches across Asia, Europe and the Americas and includes some of Washington's closest allies and largest trading partners.
Chinese experts said the report is partly aimed at defending Washington's tariff policy by shifting responsibility for its weakened impact onto other economies, while also pressuring them to follow US trade and origin rules. In effect, the US is trying to extend its unilateral trade restrictions beyond its own borders and deeper into global supply chains, they said.
Build 'higher fence'
The 25-page report claims that US import sourcing saw a "substantial reallocation" after the 2018 tariffs, as China's direct share declined and imports from identified transshipment economies rose. It alleges that some goods were routed through lower-tariff jurisdictions, where minor processing, relabeling, repackaging, re-invoicing or paperwork changes were used to create the appearance of a new national origin. 
However, the report itself acknowledges that alleged transshipment risks in several major economies are "embedded within broad legitimate trade flows." It also admitted that the post-2018 shift in US imports "does not establish" that all displaced Chinese trade was illegally transshipped and partly reflected "legitimate changes in production, investment, and sourcing."
False declarations of origin or simple repackaging can amount to tariff circumvention, but investing overseas, building factories abroad or sourcing components across borders are legitimate forms of supply-chain adjustment, experts said.
One purpose of the report is to portray Washington's tariff policy as effective while attributing its diminished impact to the responses of other economies, Zhou Mi, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation, told the Global Times. 
This allows Washington to shift responsibility onto other economies and put itself in a more favorable position in shaping the narrative around its tariff policy, Zhou said.
Cui Fan, a professor at the University of International Business and Economics, told the Global Times that US rules for determining country of origin are not fully aligned with those used by other economies. The latest move could pressure other countries to adopt US standards, but Cui said such an approach is unlikely to work.
"Countries formulate their rules of origin based on a range of factors, including the scale and technological conditions of their own industries," Cui said. "Industrial structures and the global division of labor cannot be reshaped simply through pressure from one country."
Harmonization of rules of origin - applying the same rules across countries regardless of purpose - "would facilitate the flow of international trade," according to WTO on its website. 
It has also warned that misuse of such rules may turn them into "a trade policy instrument" rather than merely a device supporting other trade policy measures, according to WTO.
Washington was pursuing hegemonic politics and unilateral bullying in the economic and trade sphere under the guise of "reciprocity", a spokesperson for China's Ministry of Commerce said when commenting on the US use of tariffs to pressure other countries into restricting economic and trade cooperation with China. 
Disrupting global supply chains

Cui said production and trade networks linking China with South Korea, Europe and other economies have taken shape over years of market-driven specialization. By lowering production and logistics costs and improving efficiency, these networks have benefited businesses and consumers across participating economies.
"The real challenge facing global trade today is not so-called illegal transshipment, but the continued damage that unilateralism and trade protectionism are inflicting on the multilateral trading system," Cui added.
Since returning to office, the Trump administration has made tariffs a centerpiece of its trade policy, rolling out sweeping "reciprocal tariffs" and other broad duties that have drawn widespread criticism at home and abroad. On Thursday, Washington announced new Section 232 tariffs on drones and their parts and components, further expanding the range of products subject to US tariffs.
US tariffs have themselves pushed companies to reconfigure supply chains. Washington is now citing those very adjustments as evidence of circumvention, effectively using the market fallout from its own tariff policy to justify further trade restrictions, Chinese experts noted.
International trade is based on mutual benefit, and sovereign countries have the legitimate right to conduct economic and trade cooperation independently, Cui said. "No country should interfere with normal global trade simply to advance its own unilateral interests."
The report broadens its scrutiny beyond routing and documentation to include China-origin inputs or components, Chinese ownership or financing, relationships with Chinese suppliers or manufacturers, China-based production steps and China-origin routing histories.
Analysts believed the latest move is more than simply making the existing "high fence" higher. By trying to bring more economies and a larger portion of global supply chains within the reach of US tariff enforcement, Washington attempted to make the "yard" itself much bigger.
Cui warned that sustained US pressure to reshape normal trade and supply-chain links could fragment mature regional production networks, and reduce the efficiency of global resource allocation, with the impact extending far beyond China-US trade given the wide range of economies named in the report.
Zhou noted that companies would be forced to redesign supply chains to manage rising policy risks, adding costs that could feed back into the US through higher inflation while creating broader frictions and instability for global trade.
。近日，乌克兰总理科列茨基向日本政府发出了一个迫切的请求，希望能获得日本制造的“爱国者”防空导弹，以应对日益严峻的安全形势。然而，日本政府随即对此请求进行了拒绝，这背后究竟隐藏着怎样的复杂考量？    自2019年俄罗斯再次对乌克兰展开军事行动以来，这个东欧国家的安全形势急剧恶化。面对来自俄罗斯的火箭弹和导弹攻击，乌克兰的防空能力显得愈发脆弱。根据乌克兰总统泽连斯基的透露，今年该国仅收到了675枚“爱国者”导弹，而预计到2026年这数字将骤降至264枚。

B | 这番变化让乌克兰不仅要为自身的安全而战，更要为民众的生存而殚精极虑。

C |         在这样的背景下，科列茨基选择向日本寻求帮助并非偶然。日本在近年来逐步放宽了其军事武器出口的限制，虽然这些变化仍处于谨慎阶段，但乌克兰似乎看到了与日本合作的潜在机会。对于经历四年多战争的乌克兰来说，任何一丝希望都值得尝试。    然而，日本政府却出人意料地拒绝了这一请求。内阁官房长官木原稔在记者会上明确表示：“现阶段不考虑进行转让。

D | ”那么，是什么让日本在关键时刻选择了坚守底线？这背后的原因可谓错综复杂。    首先，从法律层面上看，日本国内法规限制了武器出口。尽管自卫队法已经经过修改，可以允许某些情况下向他国提供武器，但仍然需要缔结特定的协议，且原则上不允许向处于冲突中的国家出口武器。最终结果是，日本虽然修改了相关法律，但依然无法迅速做出出口“爱国者”导弹的决策。        其次，日本自身的军事需求也不可忽视。作为东亚地区的重要国家，日本的防空能力同样面临挑战。在当前的地缘安全形势下，自卫队必须优先满足本国的安全需求，确保其防空系统能有效抵御潜在威胁。    更为重要的是，俄罗斯对日本的警告让日本政府不得不三思而后行。俄乌冲突爆发以来，日本跟随西方制裁了俄罗斯，损害了两国关系。若日本支持乌克兰，势必将激怒俄罗斯，进而使日本的安全局势更加复杂。

E |     尽管表面上看，日本的拒绝是出于法律和战略方面的综合考量，但实际上，这是否意味着日本在乌克兰问题上的“无为”？答案显然是否定的。

F | 相反，当前日本正以非武装的援助形式，逐渐向乌克兰渗透。        今年5月，日本外务省通过北约框架宣布提供资金支持，帮助乌克兰购买非杀伤性装备。

G | 虽然日本强调这是出于人道主义关怀，但这种做法的真实意图却值得深思。从无人机侦察系统到通信设备，这些“非杀伤性装备”有可能在战斗中为乌克兰军队提供实质性的支持。    更进一步来看，随着时间推移，日本在未来可能会重新考虑对乌克兰的支持。木原稔在拒绝乌克兰请求时提到“现阶段”的表述，留给了外界无限的想象空间——“现阶段”之后的变化尚未可知。如果局势持续演变，加之美国压力的变化，日本可能会以更积极的姿态介入。    所以，我们不能简单地将日本的行为解读为单纯的拒绝。相反，这一系列动作标志着日本在国际舞台上谋求转型的决心。

H | 借助乌克兰危机的机会，日本企图突破平和宪法的束缚，实现自身军事化的目标。    通过参与乌克兰的援助机制，日本不仅能够展现自身的国际责任感，还能积累军事行动经验，对自卫队进行锻炼。

I | 这些都是日本未来在全球战略布局中不可或缺的一部分。    这一切的背后，意味着我们需要关注的不仅是乌克兰与日本之间的互动，更应该看到整个国际局势的微妙变化。在未来的几个月甚至几年里，随着俄乌冲突的深化、美国对日本的施压以及各国政策的变动，日本在武器出口方面的立场可能会发生变化。        须知，历史的进程往往是在不经意间悄然改变的。

J | 虽然日本目前难以直接向乌克兰提供“爱国者”导弹，但从“间接”到“直接”，或许只是一步之遥。而这背后的深层逻辑，正是当今国际关系的复杂与微妙。    在这个充满不确定性的时代，乌克兰向日本求援的故事，绝不仅仅是一次简单的外交互动，而是一个关于国家利益、战略考量和地缘政治的缩影。未来的局势如何发展，还是要看各方的博弈与决策，但可以肯定的是，全球安全格局正在经历着深刻的变化，每一个动作都可能成为影响未来的重要因素。

K | 返回，查看更多。

Current article:http://f5jcz4.wenwancaomohenenqiongpangshun.bond/news/20260826_897.html

Published on:21:47:05