We discussed the shift of the United States in its Eurasian strategy, from following the principle of strategic concentration to adopting a two front confrontation strategy. The United States has successfully avoided a two front war, but after the Russia-Ukraine conflict, despite the multiple domestic crises, the United States not only did not seek detente against China, but strengthened the containment and pressure on China and Russia. This shift reflects the tendency of American hegemonic thinking and requires a reassessment of the strategic reality, course, and outcomes of the United States. The article aims to accurately define the principle of strategic concentration, present in detail the process of US strategic transformation, and analyze the main reasons for the changes from the perspectives of social contradictions, economic development, and external conditions, summarizing the new Eurasian strategy and its impact.

1、 The formation of the principle of strategic concentration and the issue of strategic concentration in the United States

Discussed the formation of the principle of strategic concentration and its application in the issue of strategic concentration in the United States. The principle of strategic concentration originated from the military practice of modern European countries to avoid fighting on two fronts, and was later abstracted as a strategic guiding ideology. In history, if a great power fights against multiple equally sized enemy countries at the same time, it often leads to military failure and political collapse. On the contrary, a major power that concentrates its military power in a geographic region is more likely to win. With the expansion of international competition, the logic of war has spread to non military fields, and the theoretical processing and comprehensive application of military experience have become inevitable requirements. The research on the principle of strategic concentration mainly involves three issues: international structure, alliance relations, and strategic overdraft. International structural research suggests that maintaining a balance of power is the optimal strategy for a country's survival; The study of alliance relationships emphasizes that ideology has limited significance for alliances in high-intensity confrontational states, and national strength is the main indicator for measuring threats; The study on strategic overdraft analyzed the depletion of domestic resources and the breakthrough of people's psychological endurance caused by multi line expansion. These studies provide objective conditions and psychological foundations for the principle of strategic concentration, clarifying the living environment of sovereign states. The principle of strategic concentration requires sovereign states to avoid forming multi domain confrontational relationships with more than one country defined by material power in multiple regions at the same time, in order to maintain domestic political and economic stability. As a hegemonic country, the United States faces the choice of strategic concentration or strategic dispersion. Since World War II, the United States has emerged from isolationism and participated in shaping regional order and maintaining world hegemony. Faced with the rise of Russia and China, the United States must make a strategic choice between Europe and Asia, whether to confront them simultaneously or respond in sequence.

2、 The Operation and Transformation of the US Strategic Concentration Principle

Elaborate on the strategic concentration principle and its evolution pursued by the United States during the Cold War and post Cold War period. The United States has implemented strategies such as "uniting with China to contain the Soviet Union" and "uniting with Russia to contain China", but since 2017, the principle of strategic concentration has been abandoned by the US decision-making level and has shifted towards adopting a hostile attitude towards both Russia and China. In the late 1960s to 1991, the United States adopted the "United Front against the Soviet Union" strategy, aimed at reducing the strategic burden of the two front confrontation. From 1992 to 2007, the United States' emphasis on the two front confrontation decreased, and the reduction of external pressure led to a strategic "loss of focus". From 2008 to 2013, the United States viewed China as a strategic competitor and attempted a strategy of "joining forces with Russia to contain China". After the Crimean crisis in 2014, US Russia relations deteriorated and the US efforts to "unite with Russia to contain China" were forced to terminate. From 2014 to 2016, the United States began to adopt a hostile attitude towards both Russia and China simultaneously. Since 2017, official strategic documents of the United States have generally adopted a hostile attitude towards Russia and China, clearly proposing suppression plans against both countries. Both the Trump and Biden administrations tend to adopt multi-faceted, high-intensity, and confrontational measures, while exerting strategic pressure on Russia and China. The United States is not inclined to ease or repair Sino US relations due to substantive confrontation with Russia, but continues to exert strategic pressure on China.

3、 Analysis of the Reasons for the United States Abandoning the Principle of Strategic Concentration

The reasons for the United States abandoning the principle of strategic concentration include the combined effects of practical conditions and strategic anxiety. The proliferation of identity politics has led to a decline in national identity and severe social opposition. The US government needs to shape external threats to consolidate social consensus. Technological innovation is slowing down, and the profit growth of American companies relies on non technological progress benefits. Competing for the stock of benefits has become a strategic choice for the United States. The development models of China and Russia pose a threat to the United States, and the United States needs to simultaneously curb the development momentum of both countries. The strength advantage of the United States still exists, which can support the implementation of the Eurasian strategy in the short term and deeply control European and Asia Pacific allies.

4、 The Goals, Pathways, and Impacts of the United States' New Eurasian Strategy

The goal of the US New Eurasian Strategy is to occupy the global interest stock in the short term to maintain hegemony, with a focus on maintaining military, financial, and ideological hegemony. The implementation methods include precise investment to expand advantages, integration of allies to coordinate Europe and Asia, and shaping cognitive guidance for public opinion. This strategy may meet the short-term interests of the United States, but in the long run it will have a negative impact on the international landscape, world development, and allied partner countries, accelerating the decline of the United States. China should adhere to independence, expand global partnerships, open up to the outside world, engage in extensive consultation, joint construction and sharing, and promote the construction of a community with a shared future for mankind to cope with the strategic pressure from the United States.