地球上最后一个人

一 |     A piece of cotton fabric, an AI supply-chain map, a "human rights" report and an electronics certification document appear to have little in common. 
Behind them, however, are the US entities that have helped build and operate Washington's machinery of restrictions against China - tracing materials linked to Xinjiang region, mapping supply chains for enforcement, producing reports used to advance "forced labor" allegations, converting those allegations into corporate compliance pressure, and lobbying to exclude Chinese laboratories from the US market.
On August 5, China responded.
China's Ministry of Commerce announced the countermeasures against Applied DNA Sciences, Inc., Stratum Reservoir, LLC., Altana Technologies, Inc., Responsible Business Alliance, Verite Group, Inc. and Human Rights in China, the Xinhua News Agency reported. 
These countermeasures, which took effect on Wednesday, were adopted in response to the US sanctions against Chinese companies under the pretext of "forced labor" in Northwest China's Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, according to the ministry.
In a separate decision, Compliance Testing LLC was listed over its support for restrictive measures taken by the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC), according to Xinhua. Compliance Testing LLC assisted and supported the FCC in taking these measures, which endanger China's sovereignty, security and development interests.
Chinese organizations and individuals are prohibited from conducting relevant transactions or cooperation with these entities.
Public filings and company disclosures point to a more complicated picture: The seven US entities listed by China occupy different points along a chain extending from research and laboratory testing to AI-powered supply-chain mapping and compliance services, while some have changed their core business or retained operations linked to China.
Who are these entities, who pays them and what exactly have they done to Chinese companies? GT found more behind the names through an investigation into corporate filings, government contracts, funding records and public statements.

    Photos: VCGTests, data and algorithms
The path from the US government's Xinjiang-related allegations to enforcement actions runs through laboratory testing, supply-chain data and algorithmic screening. Three of the entities targeted by China's latest countermeasures have served as "hired guns" along that path. 
Back to May 2024, Applied DNA Sciences and Stratum Reservoir drew international attention with a study of 822 cotton-containing products collected from major retailers and e-commerce platforms between February 2023 and March 2024. According to Reuters, 19 percent contained traces of cotton from Xinjiang region. Among the positive samples presented as having a single origin, 57 percent were labeled as containing only US cotton. The two companies declined to identify the retailers and brands involved.
But the test itself identifies a probable geographical origin: It does not examine recruitment, wages or conditions at a workplace. Those geographical findings acquire legal consequences through the US' prevention act on "forced labor" in Xinjiang, under which goods produced wholly or partly in Xinjiang face a rebuttable presumption.
According to an Applied DNA announcement republished by NASDAQ, the company received a subcontract from LRQA (Lloyd's Register Quality Assurance) in 2024 for an isotopic-testing pilot involving Pakistan's cotton sector. Under the subcontract, Applied DNA and its traceability partner Isotech, a Stratum Reservoir company, were to conduct isotopic testing and analysis. The pilot formed part of the US Department of Labor-funded Global Trace Protocol project, whose overall budget was $4 million. 
By the time China announced its countermeasures, however, Applied DNA had undergone a striking corporate transformation. A May 2026 filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission identifies the company as BNB Plus Corp, formerly Applied DNA Sciences, and describes it primarily as a digital-asset treasury company holding BNB cryptocurrency. The filing says it stopped providing textile isotopic-testing services during the previous fiscal year and was exiting its DNA tagging and security business.
The same filing recorded a net loss of $25.27 million for the six months ending March 31, 2026, as well as an accumulated deficit of $404.45 million.
Stratum Reservoir followed a different path into cotton traceability. The company was formerly the laboratory-services arm of oilfield-services group Weatherford. In 2019, Weatherford sold the business to an investor group led by CSL Capital for $206 million in cash, according to the Weatherford's website.
Stratum's own company profile still centers on reservoir characterization and laboratory analysis of rocks and fluids. Through Isotech, however, expertise developed for analyzing natural resources was extended to cotton-origin testing.
According to an Applied DNA announcement republished by NASDAQ, Applied DNA and Stratum Reservoir's Isotech division signed a memorandum of understanding in December 2021 to use isotopic analysis as a confirmatory test for determining cotton origin.
If Applied DNA and Stratum work from physical samples, Altana Technologies operates at the level of data networks. 
In 2023, Altana announced that US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) had awarded it a multi-year contract to provide what the company called a "foundational map of the global supply chain." Its Atlas platform applies artificial intelligence to public, non-public and proprietary data. 
According to Altana's announcement, thousands of Customs and Border Protection users would be able to conduct network analysis, screen value chains and compile evidence supporting enforcement actions.
That government relationship continued to expand. Records from the US government show that the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) awarded Altana another contract in July 2026, with nearly $7.5 million obligated for a forced-labor tool and trade-compliance modules through June 2029.
Altana's personnel structure further reflects its focus on government enforcement. Its leadership page lists government affairs chief Scott Friedman as a former DHS assistant secretary for trade and economic security. Its advisory board includes a former CBP commissioner and several former customs, intelligence and national security officials.
Altana also markets compliance services to companies facing the same enforcement system. In joint promotional material, Altana and Kharon say CBP analysts use their platforms to enforce the US forced labor import ban framework, while businesses can screen shipments through the "exact lens" used by regulators - placing Altana on both the enforcement and corporate-compliance sides of the market.
Together, the three companies illustrate how a technical chain can acquire enforcement power: A laboratory assigns a probable origin to a physical sample; a data platform connects companies, products and shipments across borders; government agencies use those findings to prioritize investigations or support enforcement. 
Roles in a false narrative chain

"Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth" is a maxim of propaganda often attributed to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. In the US' fabrication of the false narrative of "forced labor" in Xinjiang region and its effort to construct a complete chain of policies aimed at suppressing China, certain actors have repeatedly spread lies that smear China through softer means such as agenda-setting, report manufacturing, industry standard-setting and rule-based lobbying.
Among the seven US entities countered by China's Ministry of Commerce this time, some have played precisely such a role.
"Human Rights in China (HRIC)" is likely one of the key actors directly supplying the "ammunition" in this chain. Based in New York and long active on Xinjiang-related accusations, the NGO has even funneled disinformation, acting as a lobbyist and relentlessly pushing for the passage of more restrictive anti-China legislation, the Global Times found.
For years, HRIC's website has published large volumes of disinformation and allegations of "human rights abuses" targeting Xinjiang region, including the content that was plainly fabricated. The organization has also long maintained close ties with certain parts of the US government. In an early transcript of a Joint House and Senate hearing from February 2002, the Global Times found there were extensive sections detailing HRIC's "recommendations" to the US government's "Congressional-Executive Commission on China," including, but not limited to, exploiting the human rights narrative to urge the US government to adopt restrictive regulations and rules targeting "China's WTO accession obligations" and the "Beijing Olympics 2008." 
US labor-rights nonprofit Verite played the role of a fabricator of "evidence." This organization was once invited by the Switzerland-based Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) to join an investigation into whether "forced labor" was being used in cotton-related industries in the Xinjiang region. The budget for the project was $88,200, including $51,950 for Verite US headquarters and $18,250 for the Shenzhen Verite, a company affiliated to the organization, the Global Times learned.
However, there was no record in the Shenzhen Verite's financial reimbursement records of any employee going to Xinjiang to conduct a field survey on this BCI project. Worse still, employees from Shenzhen Verite told the Global Times that they did not go to Xinjiang for field surveys when putting together the draft report, but relied on online materials. They even referred to a report by the infamous anti-China "scholar" Adrian Zenz on "forced labor" in Xinjiang. Clearly, Verite's "investigation" was in fact a performance serving anti-China political purposes.
The next step in the fabrication chain of false narratives about China is to turn accusations into enforceable industry standards. The Responsible Business Alliance (RBA) has likely played a pivotal role in that process.
As a global coalition of major electronics companies, the RBA's Validated Assessment Program (VAP) and Responsible Labor Initiative (RLI) are widely regarded as gold-standard benchmarks for supplier screening by many multinational corporations. Yet on Xinjiang-related issues, RBA has allegedly issued supply-chain compliance guidance grounded in a predetermined position, indirectly aligning itself with US sanctions policy and pressuring many multinational firms to sever ties with China-linked industries.
    Photos: VCGIn a statement posted on its website in March 2020, for instance, the RBA cited a report released by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), an anti-China think tank. The RBA-cited report alleged that "forced labor" involving Uygur minority citizens in China "has been introduced into the supply chains of international brands across multiple industries," and said that it "has been closely following developments." This presumption of guilt has absurdly transformed a fabricated claim into a de facto compliance threshold in corporate operations.
Compliance Testing LLC took a more direct approach. In 2025, it called for Chinese laboratories to be banned from participating in US regulatory testing, arguing that the move would protect US' test labs and US engineer's jobs, the company's website showed. Its CEO, Michael Schafer, even declared on the website that "China is out."
The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently took negative measures against China, including barring devices with components from Chinese firms, which severely infringed upon the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises. 
"Compliance Testing LLC assisted and supported the FCC in taking these measures, which endanger China's sovereignty, security and development interests," Xinhua reported on August 5. Compliance Testing LLC is a driving force behind the anti-China measures issued by the FCC, state broadcaster CCTV News said on August 9.
US' deepening 'China anxiety'
There is no evidence showing that the seven entities operate as a unified organization, and their businesses and methods differ widely. What has connected them is not organizational affiliation but function: They occupy different points in a broader system that turns Xinjiang-related allegations into technical tests, supply-chain data, corporate compliance pressure and, eventually, government action.
Applied DNA and Stratum provide tools for tracing the origin of raw materials; Altana maps supply chains for regulators and businesses; HRIC and Verite produce and circulate reports and allegations; the RBA carries such claims into corporate compliance practices; and Compliance Testing has lobbied the US government to restrict Chinese laboratories. Their roles are distinct, but these functions can reinforce one another as allegations move from advocacy and research into commercial screening and regulatory enforcement. 
Chinese economist Bai Ming told the Global Times that, viewed together, the pattern resembles what he described as a "package deal," with different actors providing mutually reinforcing elements for accusations and sanctions against China.
"The ever-lengthening US trade restriction lists actually reflect the US' deepening 'China anxiety,'" Xiang Ligang, director-general of the Zhongguancun Modern Information Consumer Application Industry Technology Alliance, told the Global Times.
Gao Lingyun, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, noted that in recent years, the US has frequently invoked the "forced labor" rhetoric to restrict and suppress Chinese enterprises and curb the country's industrial development. China's countermeasures, he said, are not indiscriminate but are precisely calibrated to respond to specific US actions, reflecting a balance between defending national interests and preserving openness to cooperation.
Xiang argued that unilateral restrictions will not strengthen the US economy but will raise costs for American companies. 
"These measures are driven by industrial competition and fear of losing dominance in the coming era of embodied intelligence," he said. "But they will backfire, increase global supply-chain costs and hinder cooperation."
Gao noted that if the US government continues its discriminatory policies, China may take further action. 
"A healthy China-US economic relationship requires mutual respect and equal benefit. Unilateral pressure and 'decoupling' will only raise costs on both sides and destabilize the global economy," he noted.

。    最近，国际货币基金组织（IMF）的一把手和二把手接连发声警告“灰犀牛”：                    IMF总裁“一把手”格奥尔基耶娃表示，私募信贷市场规模已突破2.3万亿美元，远超监管与数据监测能力，是她“夜不能寐的风险之一”。IMF报告指出，私募信贷基金的高杠杆、低透明度，可能成为下一轮信用紧缩的触发点。                   同时IMF的“二把手”第一副总裁、前首席经济学家吉塔·戈皮纳特（Gita Gopinath）称美国股市如果崩盘，将可能引发比2000年互联网泡沫更严重、更全球化的经济危机。并称如果出现类似2000年的崩盘，美国家庭可能损失超20万亿美元，外国投资者损失约15万亿美元。                   这两个看似独立的警告，实则指向同一条暗流：全球金融体系的脆弱性正在加深，而结果或是史诗级财富大重置。

二 |                    IMF对股票崩盘严重性的估算                    IMF的“二把手”第一副总裁、前首席经济学家吉塔·戈皮纳特（Gita Gopinath）公开表示：                    若出现与互联网泡沫相当幅度的回调，可能会抹去美国家庭超过20万亿美元的财富，约相当于2024年美国GDP的70%……                    全球层面的后果同样严峻。海外投资者可能面临超过15万亿美元的财富损失，约为世界其他地区GDP的20%。                   相比之下，互联网泡沫破裂时海外损失约2万亿美元，按今日价值约4万亿美元，占当时世界其他地区GDP的不到10%。                   虽然上面提到的数字非常吓人，但是需要指出的是，吉塔·戈皮纳特（Gita Gopinath）的这段话不是一个“预测”，而是一个“情景分析”或更确切地说是“压力测试”：                    其核心逻辑是：今天的市场规模和全球对美国资产的敞口远大于2000年，因此同等幅度的下跌将造成大得多的损失。                   具体而言：                    互联网泡沫破裂时（2000年～2002年），市场经历了巨幅下跌：以科技股为主的纳斯达克指数（NASDAQ）从高点到低点下跌了约78%；范围更广的标准普尔500指数（S&P 500）下跌了约49%。                   当然以上都是从高点的最大下跌幅度，为避免用极端值，很多情景分析会取35%作为“互联网泡沫量级”的代表性回调幅度。

三 |                    图：美联储最新统计的美国家庭资产负债表                    如果按照目前的美国家庭股票持有情况来看，61万亿美元的35%大概就是20万亿美元；相比之下，2024年美国GDP总量为29万亿多点。                   那海外的15万亿美元损失是怎么来的呢？                    图：美国财政部统计的外资持有的美国证券存量                    从上图中可以看出，截至2024年6月30日，外资持有美股大约17万亿美元。（之所以用了这么滞后的数据，是因为这已经是最新数据了。这个数据的发布时滞很长：截至2025年6月的数据，预计在2026年2月27日才能发布）                    考虑到2024年6月30日标普只有5500点，而现在已经接近6700点，所以按照比例来算：17*（6700/5500）=20.71。                   如果市值回调35%，外资在美股的损失大概是7万亿美元；另外8万亿美元将来自于美国崩盘向海外股市外溢造成的损失：                    目前全球股市的总市值大概就是120万亿美元的水平，而美国自己就占了超过60万亿美元，在美国大跌的背景下，非美股市历史上也会联动下跌，但幅度通常低于美国本土。

四 | 保守起见，即便外围股市跌个15%，这就差不多八九万亿了。                   这回真的跌不起                    35%的幅度，实际上是正常熊市下跌的水平，但是这回真的跌不起。                   因为这一次不仅仅是蒸发市值这么简单。

五 |                    首先，这一次对消费的影响将非常严重。最近几年（2023～2025年），美国实际个人消费支出（Real PCE）同比大致在2.5%～2.6%附近，但在互联网泡沫前的90年代后期（1998～1999年）：美国实际个人消费支出常见增速在4%～5%。                   在目前牛市情况下已经非常疲弱的消费增速，是经不起熊市打击的，特别是现在的美国消费对股市依赖也越来越高的情况下，更是如此：                    2022年以来高收入群体支出领跑并托住了美国总消费：美国前10%人群的消费现在占比接近一半，而这群人持股与金融资产占比最高，因而对股市最敏感。                   主流研究估计股市财富每变动1美元，年消费变动约2.8～5美分，但在目前结构下，影响比例肯定会更高：如果美国股市蒸发20万亿美元，对消费的影响将是上万亿级别。                   由于美国约70%的GDP都是消费，这个冲击量级足以把当年消费增速拉低数个百分点，从而把GDP增速压低约至少2个百分点。                   关键问题是，这次可能不太好恢复。                   以往美国经济危机会出现大量“避险资金”来抄底：历史上，美元在危机时期往往走强，所谓“避险买入”有助于抵消以美元计价财富缩水的冲击。即便危机来源自美国，投资者也常常涌向美元资产，使美元升值。

六 |                    但现在有理由认为下一次危机时这种机制未必奏效。                   首先，市场对美联储的看法在维持投资者信心方面至关重要。

七 | 然而，近期的特朗普对美联储的一系列操控和挑战，让人质疑美联储能否能继续不受外部压力干扰地运作。若此类担忧加深，可能进一步侵蚀对美元及更广泛美国金融资产的信任。                   第二，与2000年不同的是，如今美国增长面临的逆风更为强劲：美国加征关税，以及全球经济秩序走向的不确定性上升；同时，政府债务处于历史高位，美国像2000年那样通过财政刺激来托底经济的空间也更有限。                   第三、之前危机都是有全球力量在相互配合，共同走出危机；现在特朗普把人都给得罪了遍，下次危机更可能的范式是各人顾各人，甚至“落井下石”。                   所以，如果这次美股市场崩盘，其后果不太可能像互联网泡沫破裂后的那样短暂且相对温和。如今面临的财富风险更大，而用于缓冲回调冲击的政策空间更小，结构性脆弱点与宏观环境都更为凶险。

八 |                    美股一旦崩溃，一个更加严峻、甚至是翻天覆地的全球性后果或将出现……。