4/2/2023 0 Comments Download china hustlmeasures against Huawei and TikTok have helped convince many in Beijing that Washington seeks wholesale economic containment. 1 Which goal takes precedence? Technological decoupling is fraught with these kinds of costs and risks-and unfortunately, their ripples can spread far beyond the technological realm, affecting seemingly unrelated U.S. technological competitiveness by spurning a key source of skilled labor. Barring Chinese graduate students helps to reduce illicit technology transfer, but it also hampers U.S. Without a sense of strategic priorities, decoupling can cause havoc as one objective smashes into another. prosperity and technology leadership, or to minimize China’s (which are not the same thing)? policymakers aiming for two largely separate international economic systems, or would China remain integrated within a modified global economy? And is the point to maximize U.S. Likewise, if Washington seeks to rebalance the terms of bilateral economic competition, it should have a desired model of the global economy in mind. The United States must define its desired “military edge” over China in more specific terms. military does not need (and cannot achieve) unlimited advantages over China’s military in every place, time, and domain. Without more strategic clarity, decoupling can become overaggressive or incoherent and contrary to U.S. Washington has struggled to clarify key objectives, prioritize them, and proffer a theory of success. A long list of policy aims is not a strategy. So far, Washington has struggled to articulate such a strategy. It would also proffer a theory of success-a realistic basis for determining which forms of technological decoupling will actually achieve U.S. A good strategy would clarify key objectives and prioritize them. They can also come into conflict with each other, or with other U.S. ![]() Many of these goals are vague and have no clear limiting principle. However, a long list of policy aims is not the same as a strategy. telecommunications sector was an early target for American restrictive measures, and the global telecoms marketplace remains a central preoccupation of Washington’s tech diplomacy. government officials, injection of disinformation, or subversion of critical infrastructure in a crisis, among other possibilities. telecommunications networks raises multiple fears simultaneously: theft of commercial secrets, tracking of U.S. For example, potential Chinese influence over U.S. tech policy, is more debatable.) In many cases, these policy rationales overlap and reinforce each other. (The corollary idea, that China should be at the heart of U.S. ![]() Technology is rightly at the heart of America’s China policies. The United States has many different concerns with China, and technology plays a significant part in nearly all of them. The existence of so many distinct policy rationales is not surprising. ![]() Table 5 describes nine apparent rationales for recent U.S. ![]() objectives is an important first step in developing a coherent strategy. leaders and analysts speak of “countering” or “reining in” Chinese technology threats and risks-highly general formulations that elide key goals and trade-offs. Yet in public discourse, and even in policy circles, distinct objectives are often left undifferentiated or undefined. Some sought to counter national security threats, some were more economically motivated, and some had ancillary purposes (like domestic or diplomatic gamesmanship) unrelated to technology itself. government technology controls aimed at China in recent years did not all have a single, unified objective.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |