U.S. experts on industrial policy and supply chains have urged Washington to adopt a more strategic approach toward engagement with Chinese technology, drawing on Beijing’s own industrial model as it seeks to regain competitiveness in key sectors. The call comes amid ongoing debates over proposed U.S. restrictions targeting Chinese technology imports and related investment.

At a virtual panel discussion organized by the Quincy Institute, a Washington-based think tank advocating for a less militarized American foreign policy, specialists emphasized that simply banning Chinese technology is unlikely to close the gap with China in areas where the latter has established dominance, such as electric vehicles and battery manufacturing. Instead, panelists advocated selectively opening certain sectors to Chinese investment, while structuring arrangements to facilitate beneficial technology transfer and innovation spillovers.

“China has figured out a way to incorporate American business and technology in its advanced sectors,” Jake Werner, director of the East Asia Program at the Quincy Institute, commented. He questioned why the U.S. could not adopt a similar tactic to leverage Chinese technological advancements to boost domestic capabilities.

The recommendations come as U.S. policymakers consider broad new restrictions, including banning the sale of connected vehicles with Chinese-linked technology and prohibiting imports of Chinese humanoid robots and power inverters, amid concerns over national security and supply chain vulnerabilities. While some national security advocates support strict bans, other voices warn that such policies risk undermining U.S. innovation and competitiveness.

Susan Helper, former chief economist at the U.S. Department of Commerce, pointed to China’s past success in opening its economy to European and American multinationals as a mechanism for acquiring advanced technology and managerial know-how. She suggested the U.S. might adopt a similarly “brilliant” approach but cautioned against “extreme openness” without robust protections for American workers and mechanisms to maximize technology spillovers while minimizing security risks.

Jonas Nahm, associate professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, highlighted potential regulatory tools such as requiring Chinese firms to develop local supply chains within the U.S. in sensitive fields like data storage, thereby fostering domestic capacity rather than relying solely on foreign suppliers. He noted that many such measures are already practiced within China’s regulatory framework.

However, a significant uncertainty remains regarding Beijing’s willingness to permit increased outward technology flows. Recent actions by Chinese authorities, including intervention in Meta Platforms’ attempt to acquire a Chinese-founded artificial intelligence startup, signal a tightening of controls on the export of strategic technologies.

As Washington grapples with balancing national security concerns and economic competitiveness, questions persist over whether a more engaged and strategic U.S. approach toward China’s technological prowess can be realized.