Experts Recommend Aggressive China Policy Platform for Future US Presidential Candidates
Future U.S. presidential candidates should put forth an aggressive agenda to tackle China trade issues, including stronger export controls, experts with the American Enterprise Institute said in a blog post this month. The post, by AEI senior fellows Derek Scissors, Zack Cooper and Dan Blumenthal, includes a range of suggestions for presidential candidates to form a “comprehensive policy on how to approach the economic, military, and political threats that China poses.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Scissors, who serves on the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, said future candidates need to address the current “bureaucratic opposition” to new, stronger export controls; U.S. industry’s ability to circumvent existing export restrictions; and what he said is the U.S. lack of export control coordination with allies. Although he said the Commerce Department’s October chip export controls against China (see 2210070049) “seem promising,” more needs to be done. “Political leadership requires ensuring export controls are fully implemented, not melted by the allure of the China market.”
Scissors also said candidates should propose a “ban” on Chinese participation in “multiple key supply chains,” including in chips and possibly pharmaceuticals. “America is too reliant on China in supply chain components from vitamins in animal feed to semiconductor materials/packaging,” he said. “China can threaten pharmaceuticals and other necessities in a fight over Taiwan.”
In a third recommendation, Scissors said the U.S. should require U.S. companies to disclose if China has stolen their intellectual property. He said U.S. firms often aren’t transparent about China’s IP theft because they don’t “want stockholders to know valuable IP has been lost.” As a result, the U.S. “doesn’t know what China has stolen or coerced,” he said. “Without that information, we can’t prevent China from profiting off illegal activity. The US should require disclosure of lost IP, with guaranteed confidentiality, and block transactions with those who benefited.”
Cooper, who worked for DOD and the National Security Council, said the U.S. needs to collaborate better with allies on “technology issues related to China,” including on actions that go beyond rhetoric. “Washington needs to present a positive alternative vision for key supply chains,” he said. “Simply criticizing trade with China won’t attract many friends when America is adopting protectionist measures itself. Implementing a true friend-shoring approach should be a top priority for US leaders.”
Blumenthal, former senior director for China, Taiwan and Mongolia at DOD, said the U.S. needs a free trade deal with Taiwan as part of a “counter-coercion strategy” on China. He also called for a stronger crackdown on Chinese technology companies. “The US and its allies need to enforce their laws against malfeasant [Chinese Communist Party] companies that operate within US and allied jurisdiction,” he said. “The US would find many more Huaweis -- companies doing business in the US that are violating a panoply of laws from anti-racketeering to fentanyl distribution.”