I recall that renowned professor Di Dongsheng conducted detailed research on sanctions between modern nations, concluding that the key to destroying an adversary through sanctions lies not in their duration or ultimate severity, but in the magnitude of their immediate impact. In other words, stretching a severe sanction over three years with a gradual tightening from lenient to strict often proves ineffective. Take the U.S. sanctions against Huawei and China's semiconductor manufacturing: Huawei ultimately survived, and China successfully built its semiconductor supply chain. Sanctions capable of crippling an adversary are swift and sudden—like those targeting rare earths and agricultural products. Rare earth sanctions shut down factories, while agricultural sanctions left crops rotting in the fields. Conversely, if rare earth sanctions were fragmented into incremental, stepwise measures, the targeted nation's manufacturing sector could swiftly find substitutes and gain sufficient time to build its own supply chains. China's recent easing of sanctions on rare earths and critical minerals clearly aims to keep Europe and the U.S. dependent on Chinese supplies. This delays their efforts to build independent supply chains and positions China to deliver the next blow in the future.
