The United States has updated its decades-old science and technology agreement with China, aiming to address the growing rivalry between the two nations in the fields of technological dominance and national security. Signed on Friday, the revised agreement reflects the evolving geopolitical landscape and introduces stricter safeguards to minimize risks. The U.S. State Department emphasized that the new provisions will strengthen intellectual property protections, promote transparency, and establish data reciprocity between the countries.
While the agreement continues to focus on intellectual collaboration, it now exclusively covers basic research and explicitly excludes cooperation on critical and emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing. These fields, central to both economic power and military supremacy, are seen as areas too sensitive for open cooperation between the two nations. This strategic narrowing of the agreement’s scope is intended to protect U.S. interests while still allowing for scientific exchanges.
The original agreement, signed in 1979 to counter the Soviet Union’s influence, was intended to foster U.S.-China cooperation in science and technology. Over the years, however, the rapid rise of China as a technological powerhouse led to increasing concerns about intellectual property theft and national security threats. In response, the U.S. has imposed bans on the export of advanced semiconductor chips to China and restricted investments in certain high-tech sectors that could enhance China’s military capabilities.
This updated pact is seen as a reflection of the shifting U.S.-China relations, with an emphasis on maintaining collaboration in less sensitive areas. While the agreement no longer fosters large-scale government-to-government programs, experts suggest that it allows for continued scientific cooperation under stricter safeguards. As both nations navigate a more complicated relationship, the new agreement marks a step toward preserving some level of engagement while addressing national security concerns.
Reference:
