After US chipmaker Nvidia announced it would resume sales of its H20 AI chips to China, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on Tuesday that the chip is not US "best stuff" and that allowing Nvidia to sell its AI chips to China is intended to make China rely upon it US technology - "get addicted to the American technology stack." On the same day, White House AI adviser David Sacks made similar remarks, stating that the US is not selling the latest and greatest chips to China, and describing the H20 as merely "a deprecated chip." One of the purposes of allowing its export, he said, is "deprive Huawei of basically having this giant market share in China," because "if you give the whole Chinese market to Huawei, it's a huge subsidy for their R&D."

These remarks were largely made to offset domestic political pressure in the US. After Nvidia's announcement, many American media outlets once again revived the familiar "China threat" narrative. The New York Times called the move a "reversed course" from the Trump administration's stance, noting that Washington had only imposed the relevant export restrictions three months earlier. The paper claimed this reversal marked a retreat "from a signature effort to stay ahead of China in the A.I. race." Some US scholars even described it as a "gift" to China. Against this backdrop, it's hardly surprising that certain US officials stepped forward to do damage control - stressing that the chips sold to China are "nothing special" and that the real aim is to ensure China can never catch up with the US. 

No matter how much rhetorical spin US officials may employ, a few fundamental facts remain clear: First, the real reason behind loosening restrictions on the H20 chip is that China's commitment to independent innovation has effectively broken through the US blockade. Second, some in the US still cling to a containment mindset toward China, and the "political correctness" of aggressive competition with China continues to poison the foundation of US China-policy thinking. Third, mutually beneficial economic and trade cooperation between China and the US is an inevitable choice - cooperation will not put either side at a disadvantage; it is the lack of cooperation that truly brings loss.

The debate surrounding the H20 chip has ironically revealed that why it is easy for Washington to make the wrong decisions on its foreign policy, while it is always difficult for the country to take the right step. Lifting the export restrictions was, in essence, a correction of a past mistake. 

It wasn't simply about "letting China get a chip" - it also meant US companies can regain access to a major market, benefiting both sides. The logic behind this is straightforward. Yet in today's domestic climate in the US, these plain facts have become unspeakable "political taboos." Instead, baseless and logically incoherent narratives tend to dominate the discourse.

This is also why so many misleading descriptions about China are always self-contradictory - because they are detached from reality and often serve as displays of political posturing. Take The New York Times as an example: when the Trump administration announced a ban this April, it claimed that restrictions on chip sales to China are "fueling concerns" that Chinese tech giant Huawei will become "a chip-making powerhouse"; when the ban was lifted, it immediately warned that the US has backed away from AI race with China. So whether H20 chips are sold to China or not, it's always framed as "China wins." This is not simply some media outlet contradicting itself on a single issue, but a common phenomenon: no matter what the political figures they oppose do, accusing them of "benefiting China" is always a convenient line of attack. The fact that China-US relations have sunk to their lowest point since normalization is due in no small part to this harmful, self-defeating mindset in the US. 

China is neither a monstrous flood intent on swallowing the US whole, nor a country that can only survive on American technological handouts. Those who constantly bind China's development to the US are being a bit too self-absorbed. The direction and purpose of China's technological progress have nothing to do with the US; rather, they are focused on providing a more modern life for over 1.4 billion people, which is the fundamental driving force behind China's continued progress. That's also the fundamental reason why, despite the US ramping up restrictions on China over the years, most of those seemingly intimidating sanctions have ultimately lost their effectiveness.

While some in the US endlessly argue over whether H20 chips should be sold to China, global cooperation in emerging technologies is thriving. The ongoing third China International Supply Chain Expo (CISCE) in Beijing is a good example. 

Among over 650 multinational exhibitors, the number of US companies has grown by 15 percent compared to the previous expo, once again ranking first among foreign exhibitors, with exhibition space up by 10 percent. For a large-scale exhibition like the CISCE, exhibitors have to book their booths well in advance, especially Fortune 500 companies and industry leaders, whose participation is part of their medium- to long-term strategic planning. In other words, exhibiting itself is an investment of long-term confidence in the Chinese market.

American politicians and media figures who claim to "care" about China-US tech competition would do well to come to China and experience firsthand the surging momentum of its new quality productive forces and innovation ecosystem, and see the dynamism of globalization and free trade on the expo floor. While some remain stuck in a zero-sum mindset, the interconnected world outside has already moved on to the Next Level. (Source: Global Times)