Today, we'll talk about a battle between China and the world. The heart of this battle is not land, oil, or chips, but people—talent. The competition between countries is ultimately a competition for talent.

I remember a friend once said that a country's most valuable resource is its people. Over a decade ago, a friend of mine was concerned about his son, who had just graduated from Tsinghua University. His son had two choices: work at Huawei or study in the United States. He asked for my opinion. I told him it wasn't even a question. His son later went to California, worked in Silicon Valley after graduation, and has now been there for many years, integrating into the elite circle of Chinese-Americans.

Since the 1990s, the flow of talent between China and the U.S. has been largely one-way. But in the last decade, as China has chosen to engage in comprehensive competition with the United States, the two countries have entered a state of substantial rivalry. The battle for talent has become a silent battlefield.

America's strength is rooted in its economic, human, and governmental systems. For over 100 years, the U.S. has used its unique social system to attract the world's top talent. This is a huge advantage that China lacks. Although China has a vast market and enormous growth potential, its social system, especially when compared to the U.S., has fundamental shortcomings in attracting global talent.

While many talented individuals from China hold key positions in America's high-tech companies and research institutions, the success of individuals cannot change the fundamental structure of an entire society. A country's true appeal lies in the superiority of its system.

We can simply look at history. The renowned scientist Albert Einstein came from Germany. Looking at today, NVIDIA's founder, Jensen Huang, is from Taiwan; Google's CEO, Sundar Pichai, is from India; and the founder of Tesla and SpaceX, Elon Musk, is from South Africa. Over the past several decades, nearly all major technological breakthroughs in the U.S., from nuclear energy and the internet to today's artificial intelligence, have been driven by these immigrant talents from all over the world. It can be said that without these global elites, there would be no technologically advanced America today.

In 2019, then-President Donald Trump proposed a significant increase in the application fees for the **H-1B visa** (a non-immigrant work visa that allows U.S. employers to temporarily employ foreign workers in specialty occupations). Many interpreted this as a sign of Trump's anti-immigrant stance and his unwelcoming attitude toward high-tech talent. However, to understand this policy, we must look beyond the surface and delve into its underlying political logic.

Trump's policies often appear inconsistent, but this doesn't mean he lacks a long-term goal. His actions are primarily driven by the pursuit of votes. At that time, the U.S. tech industry was undergoing major layoffs. Companies like Google, Amazon, and Meta let go of tens of thousands of employees, making it difficult for many American graduates to find jobs. The media widely reported on the situation where American students struggled to find work while tech companies continued to hire large numbers of foreign workers, particularly Indian engineers, through the H-1B visa program.

This public opinion directly influenced government policy. As a shrewd politician, Trump needed to respond to the concerns of this voter base. His move to raise H-1B application fees was a simple and direct political gesture to tell voters anxious about their children's employment: "I am protecting your jobs." It was a tactic to gain support and solidify his voter base.

Does this policy actually deter top talent? Not really. For large corporations like Google, the increased fees are negligible. Furthermore, the U.S. immigration system is multi-layered. The H-1B is just one pathway; for truly exceptional individuals, there are other channels like the O-1 visa (for individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement). Trump's policy effectively closed the door for lower-skilled labor while opening a more precise window for top-tier talent. It appeased domestic sentiment in the short term without shaking the foundation of America's ability to attract global elites.

In contrast, China is facing severe challenges. Official data showed that the youth unemployment rate for ages 16 to 24 once reached a record high of 18.9%. This year, nearly 12 million university graduates are entering the job market. Even with strict information control, we can still see numerous reports about young people facing unemployment right after graduation.

China's biggest problem is its gradual decoupling from the world, especially from global trade and markets. This practice of "destroying its own great wall" has led to shrinking domestic job opportunities, leaving young people with little hope. Government policies, such as cracking down on the education and tech platform industries, have further exacerbated the problem. As a result, China is not only failing to attract external talent but is also losing the talent it cultivates.

Here, I want to quote the former Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew. He once offered a profound analysis of the future world order. He believed that China would find it difficult to surpass the United States in technology within the next century. He raised two core arguments.

First, the size of the talent pool. Lee Kuan Yew said that America selects the best talent from a global population of 7 billion people, whereas China can only select from its own population of 1.4 billion. The superiority of one model over the other is clear. The United States can gather the world's intelligence and wealth, while China's talent sources are relatively limited.

Second, the advantage of language. The United States uses English, which is the global lingua franca. From a very pragmatic perspective, Lee Kuan Yew analyzed that English has an advantage over Chinese in expressing precise, logically rigorous scientific and legal concepts. I am not a linguist, but based on personal experience, conducting complex logical arguments in Chinese is indeed more challenging than in English.

These three factors—language, culture, and social system—collectively determine a country's ability to attract global talent. This is America's most fundamental advantage. Trump's short-term policies may cause some fluctuations, but as long as America's open system remains intact, its leading position in the global talent competition will be difficult to challenge. As for China, if it continues on its path of isolation, the challenges it faces will only grow larger.