October 24, 2024
America Needs Clear Standards for China Tech Decoupling
Last month, the Biden administration proposed a rule to effectively sweep Chinese cars from the U.S. market. If enacted, the rule would ban the sale or import of any “connected vehicle” with certain Chinese technology. Today’s cars are essentially smartphones on wheels, equipped with increasingly sophisticated external connections, software, and sensors that constantly monitor the world around them. The administration rightly worries that Beijing could exploit these underlying technologies to turn American vehicles into unwitting surveillance vans for the Chinese Communist Party—or worse, to hijack them entirely.
Policymakers are slowly awaking to a rise in China’s cyber threat and the United States’ digital vulnerability. If there is a growing consensus to expand the country’s decoupling from Chinese tech, however, there is still no clear vision for how to do so responsibly.
This broad, virtually unchecked authority to ban Chinese apps and products resembles more of a loaded gun than a considered policy.
Washington must soon move beyond ad hoc bans against specific apps (such as TikTok) and categories (such as connected vehicles) and articulate a broader policy that identifies clear risks and limiting principles to inform which Chinese technologies Washington can tolerate in the U.S. market, and which it cannot. Absent this, policymakers risk barreling toward an improvisational, potentially vast tech decoupling from China with poorly understood consequences for American consumers, industry, and foreign policy.
The absence of a clear risk mitigation framework for Chinese tech creates uncertainty for the businesses, factories, and farmers who rightly wonder if their Chinese-linked products and components will be the next mole that Washington decides to whack. Today’s vague and easily abused executive power to ban Chinese tech also gives Beijing pretext to justify its own arbitrary restrictions on the $154 billion of U.S. exports to its massive market.
Read the full article on Foreign Policy.
More from CNAS
-
Commentary
Technology & National Security
Fighting AI Cyberattacks Starts with Knowing They’re HappeningThis article was originally published in Lawfare. Anthropic reported in November 2025 that Chinese threat actors used its Claude model to launch widespread cyberattacks on com...
By Janet Egan & Michelle Nie
-
Commentary
Technology & National Security
The Sovereignty Gap in U.S. AI StatecraftThis article was originally published in Lawfare. As the India AI Impact Summit kicks off this week, the Trump administration has embraced the language of “sovereign AI.” Thro...
By Pablo Chavez
-
Commentary
Technology & National Security
America’s Key to Biotechnology Leadership? AI-Ready Biodata.This article was originally published in Just Security. From strengthening armor for U.S. warfighters to patching supply chain vulnerabilities, the convergence of AI and biote...
By Sam Howell & Michelle Holko
-
Commentary
Technology & National Security
The Rise of the Answer MachinesThis article was originally published in Financial Times. Every spring, I take red-eyes from Austin, Texas, to Oxford, England, to teach a graduate seminar on AI and philosoph...
By Brendan McCord
