From China's perspective, producing more than it needs and exporting at cutthroat prices is a strategic tool, not an economic problem. This form of industrial warfare is designed to weaken other nations' manufacturing bases, prioritizing geopolitical goals over profit.

Instead of a total ban, a more strategic approach is to "slow ball" an adversary like China by providing them with just enough technology. This keeps them dependent on foreign suppliers and disincentivizes the massive state investment required to develop their own superior, independent solutions.

The administration's explicit focus on re-shoring manufacturing and preparing for potential geopolitical conflict provides a clear investment playbook. Capital should flow towards commodities and companies critical to the military-industrial complex, such as producers of copper, steel, and rare earth metals.

Under 'Sanae-nomics,' Japan's growth strategy is pivoting towards sectors linked to national security. This includes not only defense and heavy industries but also advanced technology like AI, robotics, and quantum computing, as well as energy and food security. These areas are expected to be core beneficiaries of the new administration's industrial policy.

While headlines focus on advanced chips, China’s real leverage comes from its strategic control over less glamorous but essential upstream inputs like rare earths and magnets. It has even banned the export of magnet-making technology, creating critical, hard-to-solve bottlenecks for Western manufacturing.

China is restricting exports of essential rare earth minerals and EV battery manufacturing equipment. This is a strategic move to protect its global dominance in these critical industries, leveraging the fact that other countries have outsourced environmentally harmful mining to them for decades.

China is explicitly subsidizing domestic semiconductor firms through its National Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund. This state-backed capital is the key driver behind its policy to achieve technological independence and replace foreign companies like NVIDIA.

Beyond raw materials, China's national ambition is to achieve near-total self-sufficiency. The prevailing mood is that there is "nothing for which it wants to rely on foreigners a single day longer than it has to." This philosophy of aggressive import substitution signals a fundamental break with the logic of reciprocal global trade.

Globalism was highly successful, lifting millions from poverty. Its failure wasn't the concept itself, but the lack of strategic boundaries. By allowing critical supply chains (like microchips and steel) to move offshore for cost savings, nations sacrificed sovereignty and created vulnerabilities that are now causing a predictable backlash.