June 24, 2025 | Hinrich Foundation
The need for alliances in US tech denial strategy
Tech denial to restrict China’s access to critical technologies is likely to remain one of the key pillars of US policy regardless of who’s in the White House. But the current suite of measures will likely come up short, as they increase the market reward of circumventing the American government’s security-motivated push. Such blockade – and other defenses – must be coordinated across jurisdictions, and airtight execution of supply chain restrictions requires allies.
June 24, 2025 | Hinrich Foundation
The need for alliances in US tech denial strategy
Tech denial to restrict China’s access to critical technologies is likely to remain one of the key pillars of US policy regardless of who’s in the White House. But the current suite of measures will likely come up short, as they increase the market reward of circumventing the American government’s security-motivated push. Such blockade – and other defenses – must be coordinated across jurisdictions, and airtight execution of supply chain restrictions requires allies.
Excerpt
Market and security interests are competing to shape today’s macro-economy. The tension is certainly not new. But the current moment is unique: Globalization is a mature and hardwired reality; information technology has reinforced and enhanced market links. Furthermore, the two largest economies in the world, the United States and China, are the leading combatants attempting to make sense of these competing tensions.
The US-China rivalry is a classical showdown in many respects – an incumbent fending off a disruptor; a ruling hegemon challenged by a rising power. But they are competing to define the rules of global economic interaction at a time of novel technological change. The global market is both the battleground and the weaponry for today’s grand strategic competition. American visions for restricting China’s technological ascendance, therefore, is bound to underperform. Tech denial – and the broader suite of security-focused arguments for handling ties with China – will likely come up short in delivering strategic effects.
The high-tech blockade demand signal
The US’ current suboptimal mix of market and security-minded policies is exacerbated by outdated economic statecraft models and tools. Product- and entity-based designations for export controls, for example, make it difficult to deliver surgical precision in restricting problematic access to technology that may carry military or strategic utility. The bluntness of tariffs similarly ignores the reality of complex value chains and capacity for circumvention presented by China’s current global positioning. If promised security objectives aren’t achieved or can only be realized with significant collateral damage, then trust in security arguments and their political capital vis-à-vis market arguments diminishes.
Emily de La Bruyère and Nate Picarsic, Senior Fellows, Foundation for Defense of Democracies; co-founders, Horizon Advisory