（下边有中文翻译请继续看到底。 谢谢。）
The intersection of technology and national security has become one of the most contested battlegrounds of our time. Nowhere is this more visible than in the intensifying U.S.-China tech rivalry. Washington continues to tighten export controls, limit access to advanced semiconductors, restrict academic collaboration, and frame these actions under the guise of “national security.” However, a deeper examination reveals that these policies are as much about technological containment as they are about security.
While every nation has a right to safeguard its interests, there is a growing perception worldwide that the United States is using security concerns as a veil to maintain technological supremacy and strategically constrain the rise of China. This shift from open innovation to selective restriction marks a significant departure from the principles of globalization and free-market competition that the U.S. once championed.
Containment Under the Cloak of Security
The distinction between national security and technological competition is increasingly blurred. U.S. restrictions target China’s most dynamic sectors—semiconductors, artificial intelligence, 5G, and quantum computing. These technologies are not only foundational to modern economies but also crucial for industrial transformation, scientific advancement, and global development.
Rather than responding to immediate threats, these measures seem designed to delay China’s ascent as a global technology leader. This approach suggests not a defensive posture but a preemptive strike in a zero-sum game. If national security was the sole driver, we would expect consistent, narrowly tailored policies focused on sensitive applications. Instead, we see sweeping actions, including export bans and the blacklisting of entire companies and research institutions.
The Erosion of Moral Authority
Once admired for its leadership in open innovation, the United States risks undermining its own global credibility. By politicizing technology and education, Washington is perceived—especially by the Global South—not as a protector of global order but as a gatekeeper of privilege. Unilateral sanctions, trade barriers, and academic restrictions are incompatible with the values of transparency, fairness, and global cooperation.
The consequences are not just reputational. The world is witnessing a shift in how emerging economies align themselves. As countries weigh their development priorities against great power politics, many are opting for a more balanced approach, increasingly turning to China for infrastructure, innovation, and partnerships through initiatives like the Belt and Road and the Digital Silk Road.
Backfiring Strategies: Fueling Innovation in China
Far from containing China, U.S. tech restrictions may be accelerating Beijing’s drive for technological self-reliance. In response to sanctions, China has scaled up investments in critical technologies, including semiconductor fabrication, AI, green tech, and smart manufacturing. The strategic blueprint of “Made in China 2025,” once criticized in the West, is now bearing fruit.
Universities are expanding STEM education at an unprecedented rate. State-owned enterprises and private tech giants are aligning resources to close the gap in high-end chip production. Local startups are gaining momentum, bolstered by generous R&D support and a growing domestic market. China is not retreating—it is reinventing itself as a science and technology powerhouse.
This policy backfire is a lesson in strategic patience. Attempts to throttle access to technology often serve as a catalyst for domestic innovation, not as a deterrent. In the long run, the U.S. risks strengthening the very competitor it seeks to constrain.
Collateral Damage to the Global South and Innovation Ecosystem
Tech decoupling does not only affect Washington and Beijing. The entire global technology ecosystem is feeling the strain. Supply chains are disrupted. Countries in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia are being pressured to choose sides. Costs of hardware and innovation inputs are rising, slowing digital transformation in regions that need it most.
Moreover, innovation thrives in collaborative environments. Restrictions on technology transfer and research partnerships are hurting global science. Institutions once eager to host international scholars and researchers are now entangled in compliance checks, export regulations, and ideological screening.
The case of Iran is especially revealing. Despite repeated declarations by Tehran that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes—power generation, healthcare, agriculture—the U.S. continues to press for a total technology ban. This stance undermines global trust in fair treatment and scientific diplomacy. Nuclear technology, like many others, is dual-use. Blanket restrictions ignore the vast potential of civilian applications and hinder development goals in a country that has not pursued nuclear weapons capability.
Knowledge Should Be Borderless
One of the most troubling dimensions of this new containment strategy is the restriction on foreign students entering high-tech programs at American universities. This move is not only unjust; it is deeply counterproductive. Scientific advancement knows no borders. The free exchange of ideas is the bedrock of global innovation.
Denying access to knowledge on the basis of nationality or geopolitical competition violates the very spirit of academic freedom. It also erodes U.S. leadership in higher education—a domain it has long dominated because of its openness and diversity. If international scholars begin to feel unwelcome, they will take their talent elsewhere, often to China, Europe, or regional innovation hubs that are more receptive.
U.S.-China Interdependence: A Hidden Strength
Despite the rhetoric of rivalry, the tech sectors of China and the United States remain deeply interconnected. American companies rely on Chinese manufacturers for hardware, from smartphones to solar panels. Chinese firms use American chips, software, and research inputs. Universities from both countries co-author thousands of scientific papers annually. Collaborative AI projects, medical research, and climate tech innovations are already yielding global benefits.
This interdependence is not a weakness. It is a shared strength—an opportunity to solve global challenges together.
The Case for Tech Cooperation
Whether it’s tackling climate change, managing pandemics, or setting ethical norms for artificial intelligence, joint innovation is no longer optional—it’s imperative. The magnitude of these problems requires collective intelligence, shared resources, and mutual trust.
Take AI governance, for example. Algorithms that shape finance, healthcare, and policing must be transparent and accountable. That cannot happen without international dialogue and standard-setting. Or consider green technologies—electric vehicles, energy storage, and carbon capture. China and the U.S. are both leaders in different aspects. Working together could multiply their impact.
A cooperative tech future would benefit everyone. It would stabilize global supply chains, lower costs, accelerate innovation, and create jobs across borders. In contrast, decoupling is a race to the bottom—where mistrust replaces merit, and every breakthrough becomes a potential threat.
Toward a Balanced, Secure, and Cooperative Future
What might a better relationship look like? First, there must be clearly defined rules for sensitive technologies, built on mutual respect—not unilateral imposition. Second, the U.S. and China can maintain healthy competition in some areas while expanding collaboration in others. Joint research centers, people-to-people exchanges, and inclusive multilateral platforms can lay the foundation for trust.
Security and openness are not mutually exclusive. A framework that safeguards national interests while fostering global progress is both possible and necessary. Rather than choosing between containment and capitulation, the choice must be between isolation and cooperation.
Lessons from the May 2025 Conflict
The recent Pakistan-India war in May 2025 illustrates the profound role technology plays in modern conflicts. Despite India’s overwhelming size—militarily, economically, and demographically—Pakistan demonstrated superiority through advanced technologies, especially in cyber operations, precision systems, and surveillance.
This episode underscores that technological advancement is not a luxury but a necessity for national security and sovereignty. Yet, it also raises a critical point: advanced technologies must not be hoarded or weaponized at the cost of global development. The line between defense and development must be drawn with wisdom, not fear.
A Shared Future for Mankind
Technology has the power to uplift societies, connect civilizations, and save lives. It should not be confined by geopolitics or exploited for short-term gain. The future must be shaped by bridges, not walls. The United States and China, as the two leading technological powers, have a shared responsibility to chart a path of coexistence, not confrontation.
Restrictions breed division. Cooperation breeds progress. As we stand at the crossroads of a digital century, let us not allow suspicion to dictate our decisions. Let us reaffirm our faith in the power of knowledge, the promise of innovation, and the principle of global partnership.
Only through cooperation can we build a world where technology serves humanity, where prosperity is shared, and where no nation is left behind.
Author’s Note:
In the spirit of internationalism and human dignity, we must uphold the universal right to knowledge, education, and development. Let us reject fear-driven restrictions and work together toward a community with a shared future for mankind.
技术与国家安全的交叉已经成为我们这个时代最具争议的战场之一。这一点在日益加剧的美中科技竞争中表现得最为明显。华盛顿继续加强出口管制，限制获得先进半导体，限制学术合作，并在“国家安全”的幌子下制定这些行动。然而，更深入的研究表明，这些政策既关乎安全，也关乎技术遏制。
虽然每个国家都有权维护自己的利益，但全世界越来越多的人认为，美国正在利用安全担忧作为幌子，维持技术优势，并在战略上限制中国的崛起。这种从开放式创新到选择性限制的转变标志着与美国曾经倡导的全球化和自由市场竞争原则的重大背离。
安全外衣下的遏制
国家安全和技术竞争之间的界限越来越模糊。美国的限制针对的是中国最具活力的行业——半导体、人工智能、5G和量子计算。这些技术不仅是现代经济的基础，也是产业转型、科技进步和全球发展的关键。
这些措施似乎不是为了应对迫在眉睫的威胁，而是为了延缓中国成为全球科技领导者的步伐。这种做法表明，这不是一种防御姿态，而是在零和游戏中先发制人的打击。如果国家安全是唯一的驱动因素，我们会期待针对敏感应用的一致的、狭隘的政策。相反，我们看到的是全面的行动，包括出口禁令和将整个公司和研究机构列入黑名单。
道德权威的侵蚀
美国曾经因其在开放式创新方面的领导地位而受到钦佩，但现在却面临着削弱其全球信誉的风险。通过将科技和教育政治化，华盛顿（尤其是在全球南方国家眼中）不再是全球秩序的保护者，而是特权的守门人。单边制裁、贸易壁垒和学术限制与透明、公平和全球合作的价值观是不相容的。
后果不仅仅是声誉。世界正在见证新兴经济体相互协作方式的转变。随着各国在发展优先事项与大国政治之间进行权衡，许多国家选择了一种更加平衡的方式，越来越多地转向中国，寻求基础设施、创新，并通过“一带一路”和“数字丝绸之路”等倡议建立伙伴关系。
适得其反的策略：推动中国的创新
美国的技术限制非但没有遏制中国，反而可能加速北京在技术上自力更生的步伐。作为对制裁的回应，中国扩大了对半导体制造、人工智能、绿色技术和智能制造等关键技术的投资。曾经受到西方批评的“中国制造2025”战略蓝图，现在正在结出果实。
大学正以前所未有的速度扩大STEM教育。国有企业和私营科技巨头正在调整资源，以缩小高端芯片生产的差距。在慷慨的研发支持和不断增长的国内市场的推动下，本土初创企业正在获得动力。中国并没有退却，而是将自己重塑为科技强国。
这一政策的反作用是战略耐心的教训。限制技术获取的尝试往往会促进国内创新，而不是作为一种威慑。从长远来看，美国面临的风险是，它试图遏制的竞争对手反而会变得更强大。
对全球南方和创新生态系统的附带损害
科技脱钩不仅影响华盛顿和北京。整个全球科技生态系统都感受到了压力。供应链被打乱。非洲、拉丁美洲和东南亚国家正面临选择立场的压力。硬件和创新投入的成本正在上升，减缓了最需要数字化转型的地区的数字化转型。
此外，创新在协作环境中蓬勃发展。对技术转让和研究伙伴关系的限制正在伤害全球科学。曾经渴望接待国际学者和研究人员的机构现在陷入了合规检查、出口管制和意识形态筛选的困境。
伊朗的情况尤其能说明问题。尽管德黑兰一再声明其核计划是用于和平目的——发电、医疗和农业——但美国继续敦促全面禁止其核技术。这种立场破坏了全球对公平待遇和科学外交的信任。核技术和其他许多技术一样，具有双重用途。全面限制忽视了民用应用的巨大潜力，阻碍了一个没有追求核武器能力的国家的发展目标。
知识应该是无国界的
这项新的遏制战略最令人不安的方面之一是限制外国学生进入美国大学的高科技项目。这一举动不仅不公正；这是非常适得其反的。科学进步没有国界。思想的自由交流是全球创新的基石。
基于国籍或地缘政治竞争而拒绝获取知识，违背了学术自由的精神。它还侵蚀了美国在高等教育领域的领导地位——由于其开放性和多样性，美国在这个领域长期占据主导地位。如果国际学者开始感到不受欢迎，他们就会把自己的才华带到其他地方，通常是中国、欧洲或更容易接受的地区创新中心。
美中相互依存：一种隐藏的力量
尽管中美两国在言辞上存在竞争，但两国的科技行业仍然紧密相连。从智能手机到太阳能电池板，美国公司的硬件都依赖中国制造商。中国公司使用美国的芯片、软件和研究投入。两国大学每年共同发表数千篇科学论文。协作人工智能项目、医学研究和气候技术创新已经产生了全球效益。
这种相互依赖并不是弱点。这是一种共同的力量，是共同解决全球挑战的机会。
技术合作的理由
无论是应对气候变化、管理流行病，还是为人工智能制定道德规范，联合创新都不再是可有可无的选择，而是势在必行。这些问题的严重性需要集体智慧、共享资源和相互信任。
以人工智能治理为例。影响金融、医疗保健和警务的算法必须透明和负责。没有国际对话和制定标准，这是不可能实现的。或者考虑一下绿色技术——电动汽车、能源储存和碳捕获。中国和美国在不同方面都处于领先地位。共同努力可以扩大他们的影响。
一个合作的技术未来将使每个人受益。它将稳定全球供应链，降低成本，加速创新，并创造跨境就业机会。相反，脱钩是一场逐底竞赛，不信任取代了优点，每一次突破都成为潜在的威胁。
迈向平衡、安全和合作的未来
一段更好的关系应该是什么样的？首先，敏感技术必须有明确的规则，建立在相互尊重的基础上，而不是单方面强加。第二，美国和中国可以在一些领域保持健康的竞争，同时在其他领域扩大合作。联合研究中心、人文交流、包容性多边平台可以为信任奠定基础。
安全与开放并不相互排斥。一个既能维护国家利益，又能促进全球进步的框架既是可能的，也是必要的。我们必须在孤立与合作之间作出选择，而不是在遏制与投降之间作出选择。
2025年5月冲突的教训
最近发生在2025年5月的巴印战争说明了技术在现代冲突中发挥的深远作用。尽管印度在军事、经济和人口上具有压倒性的优势，但巴基斯坦通过先进的技术展示了优势，特别是在网络作战、精确系统和监视方面。
这一事件表明，技术进步不是奢侈品，而是国家安全和主权的必需品。然而，这也提出了一个关键问题：不能以牺牲全球发展为代价囤积先进技术或将其武器化。要用智慧，而不是用恐惧来划清防御和发展的界限。
人类命运共同体
技术具有提升社会、连接文明和拯救生命的力量。它不应受到地缘政治的限制，也不应被短期利益所利用。塑造未来的必须是桥梁，而不是高墙。美国和中国作为两个主要的科技大国，有共同的责任走共存而不是对抗的道路。
限制品种划分。合作孕育进步。当我们站在数字世纪的十字路口时，让我们不要让怀疑左右我们的决定。让我们重申我们对知识的力量、创新的希望和全球伙伴关系原则的信念。
只有通过合作，我们才能建设一个技术为人类服务、共同繁荣、不让任何国家掉队的世界。
作者附言:
本着国际主义和人类尊严的精神，我们必须维护普遍的知情权、受教育权和发展权。让我们摒弃恐惧束缚，携手构建人类命运共同体。
( 注意： 本文是用AI翻译的，或有误差。请以原版英文为准。谢谢。)
Reference Link:- https://www2.apdnews.cn/en/item/25/0602/axjfzdzfd60a51ac3ef8eb.html