America, Drop the Pretense of "National Security"

The words and actions of the U.S., a country that widely touts its free trade practices, are often quite disparate. One striking example of this occurred not long ago in Section 516 of the "Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act," passed by Congress and signed into law by the president in 2013, which restricts the federal government from purchasing information technology systems from any company associated with the Chinese government.

The clause cited national security as justification, utilizing legal and administrative sleight of hand to interfere in normal economic activity between the U.S. and China. Commercial forays by Chinese companies Huawei, ZTE, and Sany have also been blocked in the past due to allegedly presenting a threat to U.S. national security.

The U.S. believes in the presumption of innocence — that anybody who has not yet been proven and judged guilty should be viewed as innocent. When it comes to Chinese trade and investment in the U.S., however, this presumption has turned to one of guilt. Predetermining that the intent and likelihood of Chinese companies and products "harming U.S. national security" exist despite a clear lack of supporting evidence runs counter to the laws and philosophies of the U.S. itself, and is absurd to the extreme.

National security has become an umbrella under which anything and everything can be placed. At this point in time, the U.S. has yet to produce conclusive evidence in any of these cases proving that Chinese companies' products and operations would cause substantial harm to national security. However, this has not prevented the U.S. from labeling Chinese firms, products and investments as injurious to military, defense-related, resource and information security.

America's misguided actions have elicited protests from several domestic businesses and organizations as well. U.S. China Business Council President John Frisbie has written letters to leaders in both the House and Senate, pointing out that while national security is important, it should not serve as a pretext for protectionism; policies directed specifically against China, such as prohibiting the purchase of Chinese-produced goods, clearly exceed the bounds of reasonable security concerns.

There are two key reasons behind why a portion of U.S. politicians, government institutions and even private enterprises are so eager to use national security as an excuse to obstruct the entry of Chinese exports and investments. First, they use these exports and investments as a basis to conjure up the "China threat theory." All manner of variations on this theory have taken root within the U.S., and it is accordingly easier to strike a chord with certain segments of the public. Furthermore, circulating the theory comes with low political cost and even can win proponents of the theory greater support. Second, they can advance a protectionist agenda while tooting the horn of national security. This is especially true within high-tech fields such as the information industry. Chinese companies are competitive, and certain U.S. companies will not shrink from vilifying and turning public sentiment against their competitors to edge them out of the market. A few members of Congress and other politicians have also fabricated excuses to stymie Chinese exports and investments, for reasons such as protecting employment in their own district.

The U.S. and China are closely linked, and their interests are likewise intertwined. Economic cooperation is the "ballast" in relations between the U.S. and China, and by its very nature is mutually beneficial. The U.S. seemingly uses the excuse of national security at every turn to erect barriers to importation and foreign investment, a practice that can be likened to its restrictions on high-tech exports to China. The discriminatory behavior of the U.S. toward Chinese enterprises is not only deleterious with respect to the rightful interests of Chinese firms, but also harms the U.S. itself; it is both a grave violation of the principles of fair trade and a serious detriment to the process of building mutual trust between the two powers.

The Chinese government places great importance on bilateral cooperation in trade with the U.S. and for many years has actively promoted the stable and healthy development of bilateral trade relations via the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, the U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade, and other platforms. The U.S. should not politicize economic issues, but should adopt practical policies, abandon the discriminatory measures it has taken against Chinese firms and direct its efforts more toward building mutual trust and developing relations with China. Above all, it must refrain from holding onto a Cold War mentality and playing that dangerous zero-sum game.