Thanks for pointing all this out and I certainly have heard similar explanations before of the problems facing Artemis program. I do agree with the sentiment of treating Artemis & CNSA program separately. China getting to the moon by 2030 and being set up for a long term stay should be celebrated regardless of whether it happens before Artemis.
The issues with the US Artemis Program are:
It is 100% certain that it is not the same plan as the previous HLS Program, because neither the Starship HLS nor the Blue Moon MK2 HLS is likely to beat China's lunar landing timeline before 2030.
The truly viable plan is actually the Blue Moon MK1, which was originally the cargo version of the US lunar lander, much smaller than the Blue Moon MK2 (about one-third). In fact, there have been early reports that Blue Origin has long been preparing to modify the Blue Moon MK1 into a crewed lunar lander. This is the real PLAN B for the US Artemis Program.
The payload capacity of this Blue Moon MK1 is similar to that of the Apollo LM Spider (China's actual crewed lunar landing also falls within this category). There’s really no other secret to it.
As for the changes in the Artemis Program, they were all inevitable and long foreseen (when the Americans made those choices, professional circles in China and Russia began watching as spectators).
These choices are determined by interstellar travel, astrophysics, and the current state of aerospace technology reserves (Chinese literature reviews many detailed issues every year. After reading for over a decade, one can understand the state of various fields and only admire how brave Musk truly is).
In fact, there are quite a few insightful people in the comments sections of related YouTube videos.
