本周，美国国会的一份报告明确建议，美国公司与政府部门应该排斥两家中国最大的电信公司。报告称，从这两家公司购买设备将威胁美国国家安全。美国众议院情报委员会（the House Intelligence Committee）对两家中国公司——华为（Huawei Technologies）与中兴（ZTE Corp.）——展开毁灭性打击，似乎给美国公司带来了巨大的发展机会。可事实上，美国公司面临的境况可能截然相反。

    据贸易政策专家称，为了反击美国国会的攻击，中国可能会提高关税、或者禁止进口某些设备，从而对美国科技进口设置障碍。这种策略将使美国公司受到严重伤害，因为美国公司的销售与增长越来越依赖中国。可谓利害攸关。据美国商务部（the Commerce Department）公布，去年，美国公司向中国出售的高新技术价值200亿美元。加州大学（University of California）洛杉矶分校商学教授克里斯托弗•唐致力于研究制造业与中国市场，他说：“我认为中国肯定会进行报复性的反击。这是一场政治博弈。”

    这份由两党共同推出的国会报告似乎专门针对华为和中兴。这两家跨国公司销售通话连接和互联网通信路由设备。调查人员称，中国政府可能参与了其中的关键技术，监视和窃取商业机密。他们称，这两家公司均未提供证明其公司控制权和与中国政府关系的具体证据。公司总部设立党支部的事实也在调查人员心中亮起红灯。（注意，这两家公司都不是所谓的SOE，即国有企业。）

    10月10日，中国商务部（the Commerce Ministry）发言人沈丹阳在新华社（Xinhua news agency）的一篇报道中回应称，这种指责的依据仅仅是“主观猜忌”和“不实依据”。他认为，美国此举违反了其一直坚持的自由市场原则，将破坏两国之间的合作与发展。沈丹阳说：“我们希望美国能做出切实努力，为两国公司创造一个公平、公正的市场环境，促进两国经济与贸易关系的健康发展。”

    市场调查公司ACG Research的主理合伙人瑞•摩塔认为，从短期来看，思科（Cisco Systems）和瞻博网络（Juniper Networks）等美国公司可能从中受益。因为它们的中国竞争对手忙于弥补声誉损失的时候，美国公司可能赢得更多合同。但摩塔解释说，从长期来看，美国科技公司免不了陷入动荡。贸易战一旦爆发，它们就会失去在中国的所有业务。他说：“这取决于中国政府态度的强硬程度。它可能给美国公司带来伤害。”

    达特茅斯学院（Dartmouth College）商学教授理查德•德阿凡尼预计，中国肯定会采取报复措施，但中国政府不会立即进行反击，而是会静待时机。此外，别指望中国政府会提前发表什么重大声明，这可不是他们的一贯作风。他说：“我认为，中国会采取更加圆滑的手段。中国人很少会直接反击，反而会旁敲侧击，或者通过其他途径发出信号，告诉你：‘我生气了’。”

    A congressional report this week recommended in no uncertain terms that U.S. companies and government agencies avoid two of China's biggest telecommunications companies. Buying equipment from them risks national security, the report said. The House Intelligence Committee's withering attack on the two Chinese companies, Huawei Technologies and ZTE Corp., would seem like a big opportunity for U.S. firms to gain ground. The reality for U.S. businesses, however, could be the very opposite.

    In response to the congressional assault, China may throw up roadblocks against the U.S. tech imports by raising tariffs or prohibiting certain kinds of equipment, according to trade policy experts. Such a tactic would harm U.S. companies, which increasingly count on China for sales and growth. The stakes are huge. Last year, U.S. firms sold $20 billion in advanced technology to China, according to the Commerce Department. "I'm afraid that there will be some sort of retaliatory attack," said Christopher Tang, a business professor at University of California at Los Angeles whose focus is manufacturing and China. "It's a political game."

    The bipartisan congressional report looked exclusively at Huawei and ZTE, two global businesses that sell gear for connecting phone calls and routing Internet traffic. Investigators said that China's government could tamper with the technology to spy and to steal trade secrets. Both companies failed to provide details about their corporate control and government ties, they said. The presence of Communist Party offices in the companies' headquarters also raised red flags. (Note that neither is a so-called SOE, state-owned enterprise.)

    On October 10, Shen Danyang, a spokesman for China's Commerce Ministry, responded in an article by the official Xinhua news agency that the accusations were based on "subjective guesswork" and "untrue evidence." He said that the U.S. had violated its long-held free-market principles and risked undermining cooperation and development between the two countries. "We hope the United States can make concrete efforts to create a just and fair market environment for the two countries' companies and promote a sound development of bilateral economic and trade ties," Shen said.

    In the short-term, Ray Mota, managing partner for ACG Research, a market research firm that tracks the technology industry, said that U.S. companies like Cisco Systems (CSCO) and Juniper Networks (JNPR) would benefit. While their Chinese rivals try to repair their reputations, U.S. companies will likely win more contracts. Longer-term, however, U.S. tech companies may be in for turbulence, Mota explained. If a trade war starts, they will likely lose business in China. "It depends on how much hardball the Chinese government wants to play," he said. "This is something that could hurt U.S. companies."

    Richard D'Aveni, a business professor at Dartmouth College, predicted that China would indeed retaliate, but that it would wait until later rather than acting quickly. And don't expect a big announcement because it's not their style. "I think the Chinese will be more subtle," said D'Aveni, who is the author of Strategic Capitalism: The New Economic Strategy for Winning the Capitalism Cold War. "The Chinese don't usually react directly. They will strike somewhere else, or in some other way to send a signal that they are displeased."

    德阿凡尼认为，在不对外公布的情况下，五年内取消对美国科技产品的进口，或至少部分产品，将是中国可能采取的方式之一。另外一种方式，则是提高美国科技业赖以生存的中国造集成电路的价格。令人好奇的是，美国科技界对此次美国国会报告竟然保持沉默。数个行业贸易团体要么拒绝对报告进行评论，要么拒绝接受采访。德阿凡尼认为，为华为和中兴辩护可能会让美国科技公司留下不爱国的负面形象。与此同时，反对华为和中兴又会激怒他们的中国供应商、合伙人和客户。他补充道：“他们现在最保险的做法就是保持沉默，但在幕后，却要为保住供应商而四处游说。”

    实际上，由于两国之间的相互依赖性，目前的形势非常复杂。完全中断贸易几乎不太可能。中国需要美国的技术，保持其基础设施和工厂继续运转。与此同时，美国的科技制造商则依赖中国生产的组件。两国之间不可能做到泾渭分明，一款产品的原产地通常只限于语义学上的概念。比如，苹果公司（Apple）的iPhone和iPad大部分都是在中国组装。这种相互协作、彼此受益的情况同样存在于美国的电信设备制造商。但美国国会的调查却对这种联系的安全风险视而不见。

    加州大学洛杉矶分校的唐教授称，是政治导致了形势的进一步激化。中美两国都处于选择下一任领导人的关键时刻。两国的政治派别都在利用贸易摩擦来争取民众支持。唐说：“目前的时机有点尴尬。”他解释道，未来的贸易谈判肯定会提到这个话题。但在新任领导人上台之前，中国方面肯定不会采取明确的措施。届时，中国新任领导人肯定会说“这是美国反对中国的又一个阴谋，我们必须采取行动。”

    译者：刘进龙/汪皓

    Eliminating U.S. tech imports in five years, or at least some of them -- without ever publicly announcing such a plan -- is one way, D'Aveni said. Another is to raise the price for Chinese-made integrated circuits, on which the U.S. technology industry depends. Curiously silent on the report is the U.S. technology industry. Several industry trade groups declined to comment or failed to respond to messages seeking an interview.

    Defending Huawei and ZTE risks branding U.S. tech companies as unpatriotic, D'Aveni said. Meanwhile, siding against them would antagonize their Chinese suppliers, partners and customers. "Their best move is to stay silent, but behind the scenes, lobby for supplies," he added.

    Indeed, the situation is complicated by the interdependence of both nations. Cutting off trade is nearly impossible. China needs U.S. technology to keep its infrastructure and factories operating. Meanwhile, U.S. tech manufacturers depend on Chinese components. The lines are so blurry that a product's origin is often a matter of semantics. Apple's (AAPL) iPhones and iPads, for example, are largely assembled in China. Similar cross-pollination is the norm for U.S. telecommunications equipment makers. Congressional investigators, however, did not look at any security risks created by such ties.

    U.C.L.A. professor Tang said that politics are helping to inflame the situation. China and the U.S. are in the process of selecting new presidents. Political forces from both countries are using the trade disagreement to drum up support. "The timing is a bit awkward," Tang said. The topic will undoubtedly come up in future trade negotiations, he explained. But there won't be any definitive move from China until it has a new leader, who will inevitably "say there's a conspiracy -- that the U.S. is against China -- and we need to do x, y and z."