You have this weird idea that tying up the US financial sector into Chinese assets would not be a win for China at the moment. You want to cause issues in a country, get everything directly aligned against the geopolitical projections of the military industrial complex. That said, to the degree that the English Chinese media portrays itself as wanting U.S. investment, it’s likely because much of the Chinese bourgeois financial assets are tied up in the U.S. and Canada, which was a poor decision by them, and places them right in the line of expropriation if an actual conflict pops off between the U.S. and China. If Wall St gets as involved in China as the U.S. retail and services market does, that limits the possibility of that happening, as the financial sector has massive political sway in D.C. specifically.

55% tariffs is absolutely a win. It does nothing to actually create an incentive for the U.S. to actually pivot towards rebuilding it’s domestic manufacturing base, since Chinese products are usually three to four times less than their competitors anyways, and is a drop in the bucket for what they actually trade globally. And this is besides the point that if they really cared, they would likely just redirect the trade through cut-outs in Malaysian.

The way we will know if this was actually a win for the U.S. is if Chinese companies start acquiring domestic manufacturers and then developing the domestic manufacturing production in the U.S. as has happened with the Saudi and UAE bourgeois in order to get around the tariffs.

Edit: Reading through this and other stuff you have posted, you make the assumption that the U.S. is going to somehow reverse it’s decline in the ability to militarily project force and that they will eventually be able to take out China militarily. I am on the opposite side of that speculation. We are simply not going to agree on this. I too hope that China doesn’t pull another China-Vietnam war and not learn from the mistakes of the U.S. in terms of understanding the changes and adaptations made in modern warfare. Historically, they have been very poor at it, and given how conflict adverse they are, they likely won’t have any real experience up until the big one happens.

2nd Edit: And none of this implies that this is ‘Good for Communism’. I think it is good for China, but I’m pretty unsure if continually entrenching yourself in the neoliberal world order will ever be a fantastic way to bring it about globally.

It would be virtue-signalling for them to stop trading with Israel, of which my understanding is that many government owned entities have already as Israel is seen as a risky investment (which yeah). Sanctions would not deter anything that is going on in Palestine, as they have been completely ineffective elsewhere, and particularly ineffective with the U.S.'s full backing. They will make hay while the sun shines.

China is literally in range of Iran’s missiles who, while on friendly terms, is not, unlike Pakistan, an official ally of China, in relation to their permanent conflict with China’s major local geopolitical rival, India. In the same way, the less data that the U.S. has on any of the performance specs of Chinese anti-air capabilities, the better. The rewards simply do not outweigh the risks.

Capital investments and technology transfers are painstaking processes can take years to implement effectively, which by now would likely be too little, too late. If Iran is able to stand on it’s own through this I can see China seeking to strengthen their relationship, but it was unlikely before.