America’s bruising trade battle with China may have reached a temporary pause, but if the United States intends to win the 21st-century space and tech race, much more must be done. The tariff strategy presents a new diplomatic opening for Washington to build stronger coalitions and close loopholes that Beijing is using to bypass bipartisan restrictions on emerging technologies.
If this opportunity is wasted, the U.S. will have taken on economic pain without meaningful strategic returns, a failure that could haunt American interests for decades. Now is the time for policymakers and diplomats to step up and reorient U.S. strategy to confront the real stakes: technological dominance.
To that end, U.S. negotiators must refocus trade talks on the technologies most central to national security and economic leadership. As noted by researchers at Penn State, China is no longer just the world’s factory, it is evolving into a high-tech, innovation-driven economy.
This transformation is deliberate. China’s rapid progress in semiconductors, artificial intelligence, 5G, and quantum computing reflects a state-directed push to challenge U.S. leadership in the industries of the future. Policymakers on both sides of the aisle recognize this as a direct challenge to U.S. competitiveness, which is why both the Biden and Trump administrations imposed restrictions on China’s access to critical American technologies.
Yet, recent efforts, particularly around semiconductors, have fallen short. The Trump camp appears to understand this, and it now has an opportunity to course-correct.
In a recent speech, Michael Kratsios, the former White House Chief Technology Officer, correctly pointed out that the Biden administration’s "small yard, high fence" policy is inadequate. It’s not enough to defend existing advantages; the U.S. must actively promote technological leadership.
This is a welcome shift in tone, but leadership requires precision, and there is no more important front than semiconductors, the essential engines behind nearly every modern technology. Dominance in this sector will dictate long-term economic outcomes and strategic advantage.
Ironically, the real failure isn’t that the yard was small, but that the fence had a gaping hole — one through which China continues to advance its semiconductor capabilities.
Despite export controls and IP restrictions, China is exploiting policy blind spots. One of the most glaring is the unchecked proliferation of RISC-V, an open-source chip design architecture governed by a Swiss-based foundation that left the U.S. to avoid geopolitical scrutiny. RISC-V is widely adopted by Chinese firms and is now central to Beijing’s long-term chip strategy.
China has invested heavily in RISC-V as part of a broader, state-driven initiative to develop indigenous capabilities. Reports describe this as a “coordinated and accelerated” campaign, one that includes military applications and dual-use technologies.
This should alarm U.S. officials. Because RISC-V is open-source and used by American companies as well, it presents a unique challenge: a shared architecture where adversaries can build without restrictions, and without detection. Experts like Rick Switzer, expected to serve in the Trump administration, have long warned about the risks. In light of China’s cyber operations targeting U.S. infrastructure, these warnings demand urgent attention.
There are steps the U.S. can take. First, the administration should consider limiting how U.S. persons and companies contribute to RISC-V development. Second, it should examine banning the use of RISC-V-based chips in sensitive infrastructure, government systems, and military equipment.
These targeted responses will strengthen national security without abandoning global trade frameworks. At the same time, they signal to allies and adversaries alike that the U.S. is serious about retaining its edge in foundational technologies.
While trade negotiations must still address a wide range of issues, from intellectual property enforcement to agricultural exports, national security should remain paramount.
Because in the end, it’s not just about building a taller fence. If the intruder is already inside and torching the foundation, no amount of yard expansion will save the house. The fire must be extinguished, and the gates secured permanently.
