Trump takes the mic on Fox News, and he doesn’t mince words. The anchor’s pushing the line—Chinese diplomats threaten to “behead” Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi. They want Trump to pick a side: China or Japan, ally or adversary?
Feeling the heat, Trump chose to shrug it off instead: “A lot of our allies are not friends either. Our allies took advantage of our trade more than China did.” He reminds the host, casually but firmly, “But look, I get along great with President Xi. I get along great with China. But the only way you're going to get along well with China is you have to deal from a position of strength.”
Let’s call it as it is—Trump doesn’t need to say Japan isn’t a friend. It’s written between the lines. Japan doesn’t stack up against China. With Xi, the U.S. gets the goods: trade, economy, rare earths. Japan? Zilch. Not only no upside, but they set sneaky traps—like asking the U.S. to tumble down Japan’s rabbit hole.
Abe’s Gamble: Taiwan Means Trouble for Japan
Back in 2021, Shinzo Abe dropped the bomb: “If Taiwan’s in trouble, so is Japan. And that pulls in the U.S.-Japan alliance too.” Why? China’s muscle makes reunification inevitable. Abe insists, “If Taiwan faces invasion, Japan itself is on the line. And it’s not just about us—it flips the switch on the U.S. alliance.”
The Chinese Foreign Ministry torches Abe’s theory: Japan started the war of aggression against China. Japan has no right to mouth off about Taiwan. Play with fire, and you’ll get burned.
Now Takaichi jumps in, guns blazing: “Japan will exercise its collective self-defense if Taiwan’s attacked.” No retreat, no fuzziness. She insists Japan can send troops to meddle in China’s business. Is Japan really that bold? Not a chance—it’s about dragging America in with them.
Japan’s played this game before. In 2015, Abe pushed through the Peace and Security Laws—the “New Security Laws.” Now Japan can claim limited collective defense. Before, their constitution nailed the SDF to “defensive only.” Attack the homeland? SDF responds. Anything else? Tough luck.
But the new laws open a loophole: If trouble hits the region—like Korea or Taiwan—but skips Japan itself, can the SDF fight next to the U.S.? That’s the gray zone. Takaichi, bold as brass, jumps the gun, answering for America: “If Taiwan’s in trouble, Japan and the U.S. are in it together.” If it happens, she says, the SDF will “presumably” fight shoulder-to-shoulder with U.S. troops.
If America lets Takaichi loose, the blowback could be fierce. Japan is America’s front line in containing China—over 53,000 U.S. troops, 120 bases—number one for overseas U.S. deployments. Theoretically, America can’t ditch Japan. But cross-strait watchers see it clear: Beijing’s military parade on September 3rd proved the PLA can hit the U.S. homeland, no sweat. So Trump lays out the cards: “Both China and America play from a position of strength. The China-U.S. friendship? It lasts forever.”
Reunification is coming—no question. Trump gets it: Whether China and America clash depends on U.S. moves over Taiwan. Trump wants to do business and keep the peace. If he’s smart, he should just spell it out: America backs China’s reunification.
But Japan just won’t sit down—they decide to jump into the fray, hoping to get their shot. Here’s the twist: for China’s reunification, the first move isn’t Taiwan—it’s pulling Japan out of the picture. Japan’s made it clear: “If Taiwan’s in trouble, SDF deploys.” That leaves two doors: First, the U.S. withdraws from both island chains, including its bases in Japan, and the SDF stands alone against China—deal with the fallout yourself. Second, China and America fight, but it won’t be doomsday—just a contest for first place. Hitting each other’s home turf? That’s mutual destruction. So if there’s ever a clash, the ideal battleground is on Japanese soil.
Trump’s weighing his options, but he’s not biting on either outcome. He’s still working his “King of Deals” mantra, angling for a deal with China. As for Japan—well, if you ask for trouble, you get it. Who else goes to hell if not you? Be careful what you wish for.
Deep Blue
** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **
Zhuque has silenced America. SpaceX's repeated successes in rocket recovery drove home one point: American business works. And China? How could a feat achieved by marshaling the strength of an entire nation possibly compare with a private outfit pulling off a mission impossible?
Cast your mind back. The Clinton boom, built on the information superhighway, delivered four consecutive fiscal years of budget surplus. From 2015 onwards, SpaceX achieved rocket recovery, putting American commercial spaceflight at least a decade ahead of China. What more could anyone say? Behold the splendor of America's overall national power!
At 7:35 this morning, the reusable Zhuque-3 Y2 carrier rocket lifted off smoothly. Its builder is LandSpace, a Chinese commercial space company founded, coincidentally, in that very same year of 2015. The mission report reads: "About 137 seconds after liftoff, the first and second stages separated. The first stage then began its return sequence. After key maneuvers including high-altitude attitude adjustment, deceleration and aerodynamic gliding, it made a successful soft landing at the Gansu landing pad at 7:43. The flight test was a complete success."
A few points are worth adding. First, the Zhuque-3 Y1 made its maiden flight on December 3, 2025. It successfully delivered a satellite into its designated orbit, though its first-stage vertical recovery test failed.
Second, eight months on, Zhuque-3 has delivered on its mission, a task of major significance. Zhuque becomes our country's second reusable rocket after the Long March 10B.
Third, mind you, the Long March rockets belong to the "national team."
Fourth, China's state and commercial space programs are setting sail like "twin dragons out to sea." America is feeling the competitive pressure.
SpaceX has made a blockbuster stock market debut. The world is counting on America, following the internet, to lead the globe once more through space technology. The hope is a replay of the Clinton-era golden age. SpaceX pulled off the first successful recovery of a Falcon 9 rocket, then industrialized the technology. Today it launches the Falcon 9 around 150 times a year, roughly three times a week. A single booster can be reused dozens of times.
Yet even before the successful recovery of the Zhuque-3 Y2, American think tanks were already worried. China, doing things the Chinese way, has achieved recovery in both state-run and commercial spaceflight, with equally precise touchdown points. China's "catch-up" is no longer out of reach.
What deserves attention is this: China's state and commercial sectors are advancing in tandem, while NASA has widely adopted the commercial model. In return-to-the-Moon programs such as Artemis, NASA has contracted out uncrewed lunar landers, precursor satellite launches and even rocket servicing and replenishment support to multiple private space companies. Commercial players such as SpaceX, Firefly Aerospace and Rocket Lab are the mainstays.
Two years ago, analyses weighed the relative strengths of the Chinese and American space programs. Commentators argued that NASA's shift from "designing and building in-house" to "commercial contracting" would push national scientific talent out of front-line positions. Over the long run, that would weaken the state's "deep control and independent assessment capability" over space technology.
And if complex spaceflight life-support systems or new space station designs were left entirely to private leadership, NASA would face the twin hazards of technology and risk. Boeing's Starliner saga, which stranded two American astronauts on the International Space Station for a full nine months, is in its own way the same tune as today's USS Abraham Lincoln incident. Go figure.
The pair finally left the station "smoothly" aboard a SpaceX Dragon on March 18, 2025. They landed safely back on Earth the next day. Trump sang Musk's praises for a job well done.
A quick explainer: history has seen a so-called "Sputnik moment." In truth, it was a "Sputnik" crisis for America. In 1957, the Soviet Union successfully launched Sputnik 1, humanity's first artificial satellite. The phrase has since come to describe the turning point when a nation suddenly realizes it is lagging a rival in technology or a critical field. That realization triggers an acute sense of crisis and an urgent drive to catch up.
President Kennedy led America out of the Sputnik crisis with the Apollo lunar landing program. Today, can America build a crewed Mars program to overtake its rival? Musk, this round is all on you. Stop firing off low-orbit satellites like crazy to rake in cash. The day a crewed Mars landing succeeds will be the ultimate MAGA moment. Let's keep at it, together.
