Curbing tech investments to impede a competitor’s progress will not do the world any good

The executive order signed by US President Joe Biden that restricts high-tech investments by US entities in China has sparked a heated debate about the negative impact of political rivalry on global growth, with the Chinese Ministry of Commerce strongly opposing the curbs. Washington’s unilateral move will impede investments in semiconductors, microelectronics, quantum information technologies, and artificial intelligence.

The details of Biden’s executive order reveal a sense of mistrust and anticipation of threats on the US side in regard to advanced information technologies and devices. However, this mistrust should not escalate into paranoia that could create global issues within the market economy. China has consistently adhered to global market norms, prioritizing growth, among international powers.

Meanwhile, the United States has not followed the same path, as it often utilizes the Bretton Woods system to its advantage against any country pursuing an independent foreign policy. Instances abound where the US has imposed its will on other nations through economic means, making it a leader in sanctions. Blocking or regulating investments is tantamount to a veiled sanction against countries designated as political rivals.

As the US seeks to maintain its global supremacy with a win-or-lose approach, it views China as a competitor, given the rivalry in aspects such as economy, trade, growth, and global influence. Such an approach is overtly negative and aggressive, likely leading to conflicts and wars in the long term. Every member of the international system aspires to, and is entitled to, improve their economic standing, enhance investments, and foster stronger industries to boost their presence on the global stage. But this does not imply that nations should hinder each other’s progress to gain greater influence. 

The Chinese side is not going to sit idly by amid the US moves, as the ambassador to Washingon, Xie Feng, said after Biden’s executive order. Washington’s actions are detrimental to the global market. Consider a trade scenario where the US and China mutually restrict investments in cutting-edge technologies due to concerns about potential military applications. This approach would yield negative outcomes threefold. Many of the technological conveniences we currently enjoy originated as military projects aimed at addressing troop-related challenges.

Restrictions would hinder our technological progress. The practice of securitizing technology and research has consistently posed challenges, as it compels states to maintain various technologies at the military level. This prevents millions from benefiting from solutions that could significantly enhance their lives. Moreover, this trend could establish a precedent in political rivalry and extend beyond critical sectors, going further than the most essential domains in which military competition and leverage-building occur.

The “Shanghai Spirit” of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization established common ground for all proponents of growth, and redefined norms of competition that avoid a descent into conflict. Clearly, adopting an alternative approach to life, business, and political interactions will not occur overnight. Resistance to change will persist, yet there is only one genuine norm in international relations: change itself. The unceasing pursuit of an improved, well-managed international system will ultimately triumph over all other pursuits and interests. 

The history of international relations provides ample evidence that unilateral actions or sanctions do not produce positive outcomes. The US executive order dated Aug 9 stands as an illustrative instance of this phenomenon. Former US president Donald Trump has said that the Biden administration appears to be teetering on the brink of triggering World War III. Though not all agree with his remark, the assertion is not a mere political catchphrase; rather, it represents a tangible possibility, even as numerous minor and middle-tier powers emphasize the responsibility of global powers to avert such a catastrophic war.

The approach the US has taken in regard to global affairs is causing self-inflicted damage for Washington on the economic as well as political fronts. Unilateral actions are often devised to improve the standard of handling international affairs, yet they typically prioritize safeguarding the interests of the executing side, sometimes at the expense of harming others’ interests, all in pursuit of gaining leverage or comparative advantages. 

The world has endured sufficient amount of conflicts and wars, and the time has come for us to discover peaceful solutions to our challenges. Even with all the education and progress we have achieved, if we continue to attempt to coerce others or impose our will through sheer force, we are not significantly different from the cavemen who solely relied on violence for survival. Political leaders of today’s world can achieve peace while wearing suits, without resorting to bloodshed or sacrifice.

The author is a research assistant at the Sakarya University Middle East Institute, Turkiye. 

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.