The United States has been completely caught off guard this time. Recently, the US has accumulated a large stockpile of copper, driving copper prices sky-high. China also has no intention of letting the US get away with it; in response, China has struck back. Americans across the ocean are now somewhat bewildered, watching their warehouses filled with copper, while at the same time seeing the sudden tightening of silver exports from across the ocean. Their feelings are probably mixed. This is a classic case of "I want to compete with you on price, but you cut off my technological supplies."

Stockpiling copper is not merely speculation but a targeted strategic move against China. As a "hard currency" of the industrial age, copper is a core material for electricity, infrastructure, and new energy industries. China is the world's largest copper consumer, accounting for 53% of global consumption in 2024, with over 70% dependence on imported copper.

The US has clearly seen this, aiming to monopolize copper resources, inflate copper prices, increase China's industrial production costs, and slow down China's new energy and infrastructure development.

According to the latest data released by the US Geological Survey in October 2025, from the beginning of 2025 to September, the US strategic reserves' copper stockpile surged by 68%, reaching 1.2 million tons, the highest since 1980.

Private capital is also following suit, with giants like Glencore and Freeport shipping copper to US storage centers. Copper inventories at Houston port alone have tripled compared to the same period last year.

Under the frenzy of capital speculation, copper prices on the London Metal Exchange soared from $8,500 per ton at the start of 2025 to $14,000 in November, an increase of over 64%, hitting a 15-year high.

The US dares to do this because it has two main sources of confidence: first, control over the copper resources in the Western Hemisphere. Among the proven copper reserves worldwide, countries like Chile and Peru account for 62%. The US, through military presence and economic pressure, has tightly linked these resource-rich countries.

In August 2025, the Trump administration signed a new mineral cooperation agreement with Chile, using "security guarantees" as leverage to secure 30% of Chile's copper exports over the next five years.

Second, the US aims to replicate the success of the "oil hegemony" of the last century by controlling core industrial resources to force China to make concessions in trade negotiations.

In July 2025, the US halted the expansion of its largest domestic copper smelter citing "environmental concerns"; in September, it imposed sanctions restricting copper exports from Russia and Kazakhstan, which together account for 12% of global copper production.

These moves artificially widen the global copper supply-demand gap, allowing the US to reap the benefits while waiting for China to pay high prices for copper.

However, the US did not anticipate that China would not follow the usual pattern. Instead of succumbing to copper price hikes, China has precisely targeted the US's "weak spot"—silver.

Many people do not realize that silver is no longer just a precious metal but a "technological staple" for new energy and semiconductor industries. Especially in photovoltaic (solar) industries, N-type batteries (TOPCon, HJT) demand 80%-100% more silver paste than traditional batteries. By 2024, the global silver used in photovoltaics reached 7,217 tons, accounting for 19% of total industrial silver consumption.

More critically, silver's excellent electrical conductivity and chemical stability mean there are currently no perfect substitutes in high-precision chips, 5G equipment, and other fields.

The US hopes to wage a "cost exhaustion war" by raising copper prices, targeting China's traditional industries and infrastructure. Meanwhile, China's counterattack with silver is a "precise decapitation strike," directly hitting the core of US high-tech industries.

Behind this difference are the contrasting industrial structures of the two countries: China, although a major copper consumer, is reducing dependence through technological innovation and resource diversification; whereas the US's tech industry has a rigid demand for silver that cannot be eliminated in the short term.

In the 1980s, the US monopolized rare earth resources and restricted exports to Japan, causing Japan's semiconductor industry to stagnate. Now, the US seeks to repeat that tactic with copper to choke China, but it overlooks that China has already gained the means to counter.

Even more interestingly, China is not only a major silver exporter but also the world's largest producer and refiner. In 2024, China's silver output reached 3,600 tons, accounting for 28% of global production, and it controls over 70% of the world's silver refining capacity.

This means China's control over the silver supply chain is even stronger than the US's control over copper.

What makes the US more troubled is that its copper stockpiling has begun to backfire on its own economy. Rising copper prices have increased domestic infrastructure costs. The US's $1.2 trillion infrastructure plan in 2025 saw its budget gap increase by $230 billion due to higher copper prices.

Additionally, the rise in copper prices has driven up electricity, home appliances, and other industry prices, further intensifying US inflation pressures.

Data from the University of Michigan shows that in November 2025, the US's one-year inflation expectation hit 6.9%, a new high since 1981, with commodity price increases contributing 35% to inflationary pressure.

The US's current predicament is self-inflicted. It initially aimed to trap China with rising copper prices but was caught off guard by China's counterattack with silver.

This confirms a fundamental truth: in great power competition, mere speculation and monopolization are ineffective. Only by accurately targeting the core needs of the opponent can one achieve precise strikes.

China's effective countermeasure lies in understanding the "weak spot" of US technological industries, achieving maximum deterrence at minimal cost.

The US's failure stems from its obsession with traditional resource hegemony and neglect of the fragility of its tech industries. China's success, on the other hand, is due to its precise grasp of industrial upgrading trends and control over key resource discourse.

In the future, as new energy and tech industries continue to develop, similar resource battles will keep unfolding. But as long as China persists in technological innovation and open cooperation, it will always maintain the initiative in these contests. Countries attempting to use hegemonic means to curb China's development will ultimately suffer their own consequences.