At the end of the day, whether it's short-term U.S. Treasury yields or risk markets, it all depends on oil prices. And the rise and fall of oil prices essentially reflect whether the existing international order remains effective. From the third and fourth outcomes announced by China, as long as China has no intention of challenging the current international order, no other country can really shake things up. To put it bluntly, if you can make a trillion dollars a year under this order without shedding blood, why resort to fighting? Just like what Cao Cao said, 'If not for me, how many would claim to be emperor, and how many would claim to be king?' At this stage, dealing with the U.S. alone is far more cost-effective for China than directly handling Europe, Russia, Japan, Korea, the Middle East, South America, etc. So naturally, it’s better to continue supporting the U.S. as the leader. Only when China's strength rises to a point where staying low-key is no longer an option, or when the benefits of dominating outweigh the costs, will it consider taking the lead. For now, hitching a ride and contributing some resources to help the U.S. maintain low-cost international public safety and order is a very cost-effective strategy. As for blocking the Strait, that's destined to be short-lived. If Iran completely blocks it, how will it sustain its own economy and livelihood? Moreover, if the Strait remains unstable for a long time, this 20% energy export will naturally be replaced by other means. Once it's replaced, it means their leverage is gone. So, Iran will only tug on the rope occasionally but won't really choke it off. And once the international order is completely restructured and a new international currency is born, that will be the time to abandon gold. Until then, risk assets will of course fluctuate, but these fluctuations are more about arbitrage by various parties rather than structural upheaval. @BITstocks_CN Buy U.S. stocks on BIT, 10,000+ U.S. stocks and ETFs, real holdings, enjoy dividend payouts.