On the local date of [month and day], the day after the high-level economic talks between China and the United States, the White House website released a presidential memorandum signed by Donald Trump titled the "America First" Investment Policy. Screenshot of the "America First" Investment Policy on the White House website. Alongside it, a briefing was also issued: "Briefing: President Trump Encourages Foreign Investment While Protecting National Security." Dubbed the "toughest ever" investment policy towards China, its release immediately drew widespread global attention, signaling that the U.S. approach to bilateral investment with China has escalated from "partial restrictions" to a "comprehensive blockade."

Comprehensively upgraded investment restrictions. This memorandum represents a comprehensive escalation of the U.S. policy to contain China, primarily consisting of four sections: principles and objectives, policies, implementation, and definitions. The core focus is on attracting allied capital to the U.S. and blocking the flow of technological and capital exchanges between China and the U.S.

Principle: U.S. national security and interests take precedence. The memorandum prioritizes U.S. national security, explicitly stating that "economic security is national security," and emphasizes that all foreign investments must align with U.S. national interests. At the same time, the memorandum falsely claims that China is utilizing American capital to advance its military modernization, thereby posing a national security threat to the United States. It asserts that the U.S. must urgently guard against "foreign adversaries," including China, from acquiring critical technologies, strategic assets (such as infrastructure, minerals, artificial intelligence, etc.), and "dual-use" technologies through investments.

Strategy: Selective Openness Coupled with Containment. Unlike Trump’s previous approach of indiscriminate attacks, the newly released memorandum clearly divides foreign investments into two distinct camps: "allies" and "adversaries." For "allies," such as countries with sovereign wealth funds (e.g., Middle Eastern sovereign funds, Japanese and South Korean conglomerates), the U.S. is willing to open investments in critical sectors like artificial intelligence and quantum computing. Concurrently, the U.S. will introduce supportive policies, such as establishing fast-track approval channels for advanced technology sectors, expediting the review of investment projects exceeding $100 million, encouraging passive investments, and allowing foreign capital with no controlling stake or governance rights in non-sensitive technology areas. However, there is one non-negotiable red line: all investors benefiting from these preferential policies must commit to maintaining a "verifiable distance" from adversaries like China.

For "adversary countries" such as China, the United States will implement comprehensive containment and suppression. Specific measures include issuing bans in key technology sectors, strictly reviewing and restricting investments in the U.S. by Chinese entities through mechanisms like the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), rigorously vetting Chinese companies listing in the U.S., and blocking bilateral capital penetration. The memorandum even prioritizes restricting U.S. investors from investing in China, requiring all investors with U.S. affiliations to refrain from investing in so-called "military-related projects" in China. It also limits entities such as pension funds and university endowments from engaging in China-related investments.

Domain: Expanding outward with technology at its core. The "America First" investment policy continues to prioritize key technological sectors, placing what the U.S. considers "sensitive technologies"—such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology, and advanced manufacturing—at the forefront, whether in terms of restrictions or investment attraction. It also highlights the significance of so-called "dual-use technologies," including hypersonic technology and aerospace. Beyond this, the memorandum further broadens and generalizes the scope of security reviews, extending restrictions previously applied only to the technology sector to "strategic areas" such as critical infrastructure, healthcare, agriculture, energy, and raw materials. Even farmland, land, and real estate will now fall under investment protection measures. In recent years, American politicians have repeatedly disregarded facts to sensationalize the issue of Chinese buyers purchasing U.S. farmland as posing a "national security risk."

What is even more noteworthy is that the memorandum also includes "university research collaboration" under regulation for the first time, which implies that joint laboratories between prestigious American universities such as Stanford and MIT and Chinese institutions may face scrutiny. In terms of investment types, the memorandum also subjects various forms of investment, including private equity, venture capital, greenfield investments, corporate expansions, and publicly traded securities, to review, covering nearly all forms and channels of investment.

Means: Integration of Legal Tools and Expansion of Institutional Authority. At the implementation level, the memorandum consolidates a series of legal instruments, strengthens existing agencies, and further establishes new interdepartmental collaboration mechanisms. The memorandum integrates a range of legal tools, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (HFCAA), the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN), the reverse mechanism (established under Executive Order No. X), the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), and the Defense Production Act (DPA), leveraging their favorable provisions to impose restrictions and sanctions. Meanwhile, other legal frameworks unfavorable to the U.S. in countering and containing adversaries, such as the U.S.-China Income Tax Agreement signed in [year], will be suspended or terminated. This will significantly increase the tax burden on American companies operating in China by %-%, likely accelerating the relocation of their industrial chains.

During the Trump administration, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), an agency originally tasked with conducting national security reviews of foreign investments within reasonable bounds, was manipulated into a key tool for suppressing foreign investments and upholding America's so-called "economic security." This time, the memorandum has significantly expanded CFIUS's authority, enabling it to conduct comprehensive reviews and impose restrictions on almost all investment activities across all sectors. Additionally, the memorandum places strong emphasis on the importance of interagency collaboration. Led by the Treasury Department, the plan involves multiple agencies—including the Department of Defense, the Department of Commerce, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Department of Justice, the Department of Labor, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation—to jointly establish a dynamic mechanism integrating standard-setting, review, and enforcement. On [specific date], U.S. President Donald Trump delivered remarks in the White House Oval Office after witnessing the swearing-in of Wilbur Ross (right) as U.S. Secretary of Commerce. The White House stated that on the same day, he signed a national security memorandum ordering restrictions on Chinese investments in critical sectors in the U.S.

The Accelerating Descent of the "Iron Curtain of Capital." The recent "America First" investment policy introduced by the United States is not merely an economic measure—it conceals deeper strategic considerations of the Trump administration. Trump's ambitions extend beyond "making America great again"; he seeks to solidify America's hegemonic position in the global landscape through a strategy of "containing China." However, the U.S.'s broad overreach in the name of national security has not only severely damaged bilateral relations between China and the United States but has also undermined international multilateral order.

Accelerating the decoupling of technology between China and the U.S. The memo explicitly targets multiple technology sectors, signaling the imminent arrival of harsher and more extensive technological blockades. In the short term, the decoupling of certain segments of the China-U.S. technology supply chain may accelerate, particularly in critical areas such as semiconductors and artificial intelligence. Technical exchanges and cooperation could face disruptions, supply chain flows may be further obstructed, and Chinese companies involved could encounter severe challenges, including supply interruptions and rising costs. On [Month Day], Hangzhou Unitree Technology showcased a humanoid robot at the Global Developers Pioneer Conference hosted by the Shanghai AI Industry Association.

At the same time, channels for Chinese enterprises to engage in international exchanges and cooperation will face further restrictions, and may even risk being completely blocked, severely hindering China's technological development progress. In an era where the global industrial chain highly depends on the division of labor and cooperation among nations, the spread of such a "decoupling" trend would deal a severe blow to the recovery and growth of the global economy, exacerbating its instability and uncertainty.

Threatening global financial security. By erecting barriers to two-way investment and restricting investments in China, the United States has significantly increased the political risks associated with cross-border capital flows into China, potentially triggering widespread panic globally. Companies already invested in China may consider withdrawing their capital, leading to turmoil within China's financial markets, disrupting normal economic order, and posing a threat to China's economic and financial security. At the same time, this move will also exacerbate volatility in the U.S. capital market. The total market value of Chinese concept stocks amounts to approximately one trillion dollars, and if these companies are forced to delist, U.S. investors could face direct losses exceeding billions of dollars. Meanwhile, companies that have yet to enter the Chinese market may reassess their investment policies as a result, hindering the free flow of capital between China and the U.S., as well as globally.

Disrupting the global industrial chain layout. The "selective opening strategy" advocated by the memorandum also shifts the pressure of "decoupling from China" onto global investors. This may push traditional U.S. allies such as Japan and the EU into the awkward position of having to "choose sides." Taking the EU as an example, in a given year, the return on investment in China reached as high as %, a figure significantly higher than that in North America. If the EU opts to align with U.S. restrictions on investment in China and reduces industrial chain interactions with China, not only will China's existing industrial and supply chain arrangements be disrupted, but the EU itself may also lose out on substantial benefits in the Chinese market.

Undermining the global economic order. By bringing most China-related investments under scrutiny and restrictions, and encouraging long-arm jurisdiction to push for capital decoupling in the technology sector, Trump's China policy may subject Chinese enterprises to a more challenging financing environment and higher financing costs. The difficulty for Chinese companies to list in the U.S. or seek international capital investment will significantly increase, potentially even leading to a sharp decline in financing scale in the short term. This shift will leave many Chinese enterprises, especially startups, facing severe challenges such as capital shortages during critical phases of their development. For the U.S., restricting Wall Street's investments in China could weaken the global standing of the dollar—currently, the share of cross-border payments in RMB has climbed to a historic high of .%.

Overall, when Trump wrote in the memo that "American investors will invest in America’s future, not China’s," he may have forgotten that global capital has always chased profits, not ideology. This memo, which attempts to rewrite market rules through executive orders, is less a victory for "America First" and more a projection of anxiety before the decline of unipolar hegemony. Loud calculations don’t necessarily mean sound arithmetic. The memo introduced by the Trump administration this time will not only fail to secure a "single win" for the U.S., but will also bear new bitter fruit.

The pictures in the article come from the Internet