New Multilateral Body Needed to Manage High Tech, Report Says
The U.S. should pursue forming a new multilateral regime to coordinate export controls and related policies for critical and emerging technologies (CET) because existing multilateral export control entities are ill-suited for that role, the Center for Strategic and International Studies said in a new report.
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.
While the Wassenaar Arrangement was created to control a wide range of items, it is hindered by the membership of “uncooperative” Russia (see 2309270015) and the absence of key high-tech players, such as Taiwan, the report says. Its consensus-based approach also “makes for a long, arduous process that is not fit for the pace of CET evolution.”
Released on Feb. 14 and titled "Optimizing U.S. Export Controls for Critical and Emerging Technologies: Working with Partners," the report describes three other multilateral entities -- the Australia Group, the Missile Technology Control Regime and the Nuclear Suppliers Group -- as “too narrow in scope and membership” to handle controls on CET.
CSIS proposes the U.S. and allies create a Regime on Critical and Emerging Technologies (R-CET), potentially with committees devoted to such sectors as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, communications and networking technology, quantum technology and semiconductors.
The R-CET’s scope would not be defined by “rigid rules,” as what constitutes CET is likely to change over time, CSIS said. The new regime also would look not just at export controls but at usage rules and capacity development to present a united front on national security and promote technological advances.
An alternative approach would be to set up a series of "mini" regimes, each focused on a CET sector, the report says. But CSIS argues that countries would have difficulty staffing multiple regimes, and that having several independent entities would ignore how CET technologies are often intertwined.
CSIS said that unilateral export controls for CET are unlikely to be effective in the long term, as targeted entities will find ways around them, such as by designing American technology out of their products.
Bureau of Industry and Security Undersecretary Alan Estevez said in December that he favors creating a new multilateral forum to coordinate export controls on advanced, critical technologies (see 2312080053). But he said the Biden administration has not yet reached a consensus on how to proceed.