China and the United States are engaging in renewed dialogue, marked by recent high-level meetings and the establishment of new communication channels, including those focused on artificial intelligence. These interactions reflect cautious efforts to manage a complex relationship that remains fraught with unresolved issues, particularly around technology competition and export controls.
Denis Simon, a US-China technology and higher education strategist currently teaching at Schwarzman College, part of Tsinghua University in Beijing, says these developments have influenced discussions both inside and outside the classroom. Schwarzman College, founded by Blackstone chief executive Stephen Schwarzman, aims to bring together future global leaders through its Schwarzman Scholars program, now in its tenth year.
Simon notes that the timing of recent US-China summits—the visit of former US President Donald Trump to China in May and President Xi Jinping’s trip to Washington last month—has provided a unique real-time aspect to his course on China’s science and technology policy and innovation strategy. Although these summits have not resolved key tensions such as export restrictions on advanced semiconductors, they have created a somewhat more constructive atmosphere for dialogue.
Despite renewed communication, both countries continue to protect their respective technology developments and remain reluctant to ease export controls. Simon emphasizes that the relationship has become deeply contradictory, with channels for dialogue reopening even as technological and scientific collaboration narrows. He describes a shift in his students’ attitudes, noting that many have become more cautious about expressing personal viewpoints due to political sensitivities. This shift underscores the broader challenge of distinguishing individual opinions from politically influenced statements in academic settings.
With a diverse student body—approximately 40% American, 20% Chinese, and the remainder from other countries—Simon highlights the international dimension of the dialogue. Many non-US and non-Chinese students question the premise that alignment with either power is inevitable or desirable, instead advocating for strategic engagement with both nations’ technologies, markets, and infrastructure. Their presence has prompted Simon to regularly update his curriculum to reflect the evolving dynamics of US-China technological competition.
Simon’s teaching approach includes a framework that categorizes technological areas into “red” (national security-critical), “yellow” (requiring caution and safeguards), and “green” (low-risk) zones. He expresses concern that the United States increasingly treats “yellow” areas as “red,” shifting the burden to prove safety rather than justify restrictions—a trend he warns may undermine sustainable technology policy.
The emerging AI dialogue between Washington and Beijing exemplifies this tension. While new communication channels provide opportunities to manage potential crises, Simon cautions that these mechanisms do not resolve fundamental disagreements over technology access, governance, or development priorities. He stresses that such diplomatic channels are valuable but fragile, and their durability remains uncertain.
Simon also notes the mounting impact of geopolitical considerations on academic institutions. His experience at Duke University, where a China-focused science and technology seminar was discontinued despite available funding, illustrates how reputational and political risks increasingly influence educational decisions. He warns that reduced academic engagement with China’s innovation system could hamper the United States’ ability to compete effectively.
Within Schwarzman College, students observe China’s evolution from a global manufacturing hub toward an innovation-driven economy across sectors such as electric vehicles, robotics, clean energy, and AI. Simon, who has tracked China’s development for over four decades, views this as the outcome of a long-term strategy rather than a sudden leap. For Chinese students, this shift represents both national progress and a changing employment landscape, while international students recognize its implications for global science and technology competition.
Ultimately, Simon emphasizes that the future of US-China technological relations will not be a return to past models of engagement but a complex coexistence of competition and cooperation. The goal, he suggests, is to build sufficient “connective tissue” to ensure competition does not escalate into continuous conflict, enabling dialogue even amid disagreement. Institutions like Schwarzman College, NYU Shanghai, and Duke Kunshan embody this approach by fostering cross-cultural engagement and teaching students how to maintain conversation when consensus is unattainable.
“Cooperation,” Simon concludes, “does not have to mean agreement, technological sharing, or slowing down. Cooperation can mean simply agreeing on what happens when we disagree.”