Author: Prof. Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan, Founding Chair GSRRA, Sinologist, Diplomat, Editor, Analyst, Advisor, Consultant, Researcher at Global South Economic and Trade Cooperation Research Center, and Non-Resident Fellow of CCG. (E-mail: awanzamir@yahoo.com).
The intersection of technology and national security has become one of the most contested battlegrounds of our time. Nowhere is this more visible than in the intensifying U.S.-China tech rivalry. Washington continues to tighten export controls, limit access to advanced semiconductors, restrict academic collaboration, and frame these actions under the guise of “national security.” However, a deeper examination reveals that these policies are as much about technological containment as they are about security.
While every nation has a right to safeguard its interests, there is a growing perception worldwide that the United States is using security concerns as a veil to maintain technological supremacy and strategically constrain the rise of China. This shift from open innovation to selective restriction marks a significant departure from the principles of globalization and free-market competition that the U.S. once championed.
Containment Under the Cloak of Security
The distinction between national security and technological competition is increasingly blurred. U.S. restrictions target China’s most dynamic sectors—semiconductors, artificial intelligence, 5G, and quantum computing. These technologies are not only foundational to modern economies but also crucial for industrial transformation, scientific advancement, and global development.
Rather than responding to immediate threats, these measures seem designed to delay China’s ascent as a global technology leader. This approach suggests not a defensive posture but a preemptive strike in a zero-sum game. If national security was the sole driver, we would expect consistent, narrowly tailored policies focused on sensitive applications. Instead, we see sweeping actions, including export bans and the blacklisting of entire companies and research institutions.
The Erosion of Moral Authority
Once admired for its leadership in open innovation, the United States risks undermining its own global credibility. By politicizing technology and education, Washington is perceived—especially by the Global South—not as a protector of global order but as a gatekeeper of privilege. Unilateral sanctions, trade barriers, and academic restrictions are incompatible with the values of transparency, fairness, and global cooperation.
The consequences are not just reputational. The world is witnessing a shift in how emerging economies align themselves. As countries weigh their development priorities against great power politics, many are opting for a more balanced approach, increasingly turning to China for infrastructure, innovation, and partnerships through initiatives like the Belt and Road and the Digital Silk Road.
Backfiring Strategies: Fueling Innovation in China
Far from containing China, U.S. tech restrictions may be accelerating Beijing’s drive for technological self-reliance. In response to sanctions, China has scaled up investments in critical technologies, including semiconductor fabrication, AI, green tech, and smart manufacturing. The strategic blueprint of “Made in China 2025,” once criticized in the West, is now bearing fruit.
Universities are expanding STEM education at an unprecedented rate. State-owned enterprises and private tech giants are aligning resources to close the gap in high-end chip production. Local startups are gaining momentum, bolstered by generous R&D support and a growing domestic market. China is not retreating—it is reinventing itself as a science and technology powerhouse.
This policy backfire is a lesson in strategic patience. Attempts to throttle access to technology often serve as a catalyst for domestic innovation, not as a deterrent. In the long run, the U.S. risks strengthening the very competitor it seeks to constrain.
Collateral Damage to the Global South and Innovation Ecosystem
Tech decoupling does not only affect Washington and Beijing. The entire global technology ecosystem is feeling the strain. Supply chains are disrupted. Countries in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia are being pressured to choose sides. Costs of hardware and innovation inputs are rising, slowing digital transformation in regions that need it most.
Moreover, innovation thrives in collaborative environments. Restrictions on technology transfer and research partnerships are hurting global science. Institutions once eager to host international scholars and researchers are now entangled in compliance checks, export regulations, and ideological screening.
The case of Iran is especially revealing. Despite repeated declarations by Tehran that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes—power generation, healthcare, agriculture—the U.S. continues to press for a total technology ban. This stance undermines global trust in fair treatment and scientific diplomacy. Nuclear technology, like many others, is dual-use. Blanket restrictions ignore the vast potential of civilian applications and hinder development goals in a country that has not pursued nuclear weapons capability.
Knowledge Should Be Borderless
One of the most troubling dimensions of this new containment strategy is the restriction on foreign students entering high-tech programs at American universities. This move is not only unjust; it is deeply counterproductive. Scientific advancement knows no borders. The free exchange of ideas is the bedrock of global innovation.
Denying access to knowledge on the basis of nationality or geopolitical competition violates the very spirit of academic freedom. It also erodes U.S. leadership in higher education—a domain it has long dominated because of its openness and diversity. If international scholars begin to feel unwelcome, they will take their talent elsewhere, often to China, Europe, or regional innovation hubs that are more receptive.
U.S.-China Interdependence: A Hidden Strength
Despite the rhetoric of rivalry, the tech sectors of China and the United States remain deeply interconnected. American companies rely on Chinese manufacturers for hardware, from smartphones to solar panels. Chinese firms use American chips, software, and research inputs. Universities from both countries co-author thousands of scientific papers annually. Collaborative AI projects, medical research, and climate tech innovations are already yielding global benefits.
This interdependence is not a weakness. It is a shared strength—an opportunity to solve global challenges together.
The Case for Tech Cooperation
Whether it’s tackling climate change, managing pandemics, or setting ethical norms for artificial intelligence, joint innovation is no longer optional—it’s imperative. The magnitude of these problems requires collective intelligence, shared resources, and mutual trust.
Take AI governance, for example. Algorithms that shape finance, healthcare, and policing must be transparent and accountable. That cannot happen without international dialogue and standard-setting. Or consider green technologies—electric vehicles, energy storage, and carbon capture. China and the U.S. are both leaders in different aspects. Working together could multiply their impact.
A cooperative tech future would benefit everyone. It would stabilize global supply chains, lower costs, accelerate innovation, and create jobs across borders. In contrast, decoupling is a race to the bottom—where mistrust replaces merit, and every breakthrough becomes a potential threat.
Toward a Balanced, Secure, and Cooperative Future
What might a better relationship look like? First, there must be clearly defined rules for sensitive technologies, built on mutual respect—not unilateral imposition. Second, the U.S. and China can maintain healthy competition in some areas while expanding collaboration in others. Joint research centers, people-to-people exchanges, and inclusive multilateral platforms can lay the foundation for trust.
Security and openness are not mutually exclusive. A framework that safeguards national interests while fostering global progress is both possible and necessary. Rather than choosing between containment and capitulation, the choice must be between isolation and cooperation.
Lessons from the May 2025 Conflict
The recent Pakistan-India war in May 2025 illustrates the profound role technology plays in modern conflicts. Despite India’s overwhelming size—militarily, economically, and demographically—Pakistan demonstrated superiority through advanced technologies, especially in cyber operations, precision systems, and surveillance.
This episode underscores that technological advancement is not a luxury but a necessity for national security and sovereignty. Yet, it also raises a critical point: advanced technologies must not be hoarded or weaponized at the cost of global development. The line between defense and development must be drawn with wisdom, not fear.
A Shared Future for Mankind
Technology has the power to uplift societies, connect civilizations, and save lives. It should not be confined by geopolitics or exploited for short-term gain. The future must be shaped by bridges, not walls. The United States and China, as the two leading technological powers, have a shared responsibility to chart a path of coexistence, not confrontation.
Restrictions breed division. Cooperation breeds progress. As we stand at the crossroads of a digital century, let us not allow suspicion to dictate our decisions. Let us reaffirm our faith in the power of knowledge, the promise of innovation, and the principle of global partnership.
Only through cooperation can we build a world where technology serves humanity, where prosperity is shared, and where no nation is left behind.
Author’s Note:
In the spirit of internationalism and human dignity, we must uphold the universal right to knowledge, education, and development. Let us reject fear-driven restrictions and work together toward a community with a shared future for mankind.
(ASIA PACIFIC DAILY)