By Zhong Sheng, People’s Daily
Recently, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) added foreign-produced power inverters and advanced robotics to its so-called “Covered List.” As a result, new models of these products will be denied certification authorization and prohibited from entering the U.S. market.
Though presented under the guise of “non-discrimination” or “national security”, these measures are in essence discriminatory treatment and suppression targeting Chinese companies and products. They represent a typical act of unilateral bullying and a clear distortion of market principles and fair competition.
For some time, the FCC has repeatedly abused the concept of national security to introduce and expand restrictive measures. These actions have not only seriously undermined China’s legitimate trade rights and interests, but also weakened the foundation of China-U.S. economic and trade cooperation, disrupting the stability of global industrial and supply chains.
Using the so-called “Covered List” as a tool for targeted containment has become a recurring tactic of the FCC. Back in 2021, invoking “national security” as a pretext, the agency added telecommunications and video surveillance equipment from five Chinese companies to the list, setting a harmful precedent for the misuse of regulatory instruments.
Since then, the U.S. has continuously rolled out restrictive rules and expanded the scope of suppression, with products such as drones and routers subsequently brought under control.
In April this year, the FCC approved further measures to revoke the qualifications of testing and certification bodies from countries that have not signed “mutual recognition agreements” with the U.S., artificially raising compliance barriers for Chinese products.
By extending restrictions into areas such as new energy and advanced intelligent manufacturing, the latest move has further exposed the U.S. intention to contain China’s technological and industrial development.
These U.S. actions run counter to the current momentum of stabilizing and improving China-U.S. relations.
Over the past year, guided by the strategic direction set by the presidents of the two countries, economic and trade teams from the two sides have maintained pragmatic communication and achieved positive progress. This has injected valuable certainty into bilateral economic and trade cooperation and global economic recovery.
In May of this year, the two presidents jointly agreed to build a constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability, charting the course for future bilateral ties. All sectors on both sides should work in the same direction.
China has always maintianed that major-country competition is nothing new, but China-U.S. relations should not be defined by competition. When competition does occur, it should be healthy — where the two sides learn from each other, pursue excellence together, and compete fairly within established rules.
What the two sides should be expanding is a “cooperation list” that delivers mutual benefit and win-win outcomes, not a so-called “Covered List” designed to impose artificial restrictions.
The root cause of the U.S.’ repeated efforts to build walls and erect barriers lies in a zero-sum mentality and growing anxiety over competition with China. Faced with the rising global competitiveness of China’s new energy equipment and advanced intelligent manufacturing industries, some in the U.S. are not focusing on how to enhance their own competitiveness and gain development advantages through fair competition. Instead, they are bent on erecting barriers and attempting to slow the development of others.
Both the past and the present have repeatedly shown that protectionism is never the right path to development, and administrative barriers cannot halt the advance of industrial and technological progress.
Forcing “decoupling and severing supply chains” and building “small yards, high fences” will not stop the upgrading of China’s industries and technologies. Instead, such moves will accelerate the diversification of global industrial and supply chains, ultimately undermining U.S. economic vitality and technological competitiveness.
Many observers have long pointed out that prioritizing administrative barriers over market principles and industrial competitiveness amounts to building an inefficient “greenhouse” for domestic industries. This will, in the end, erode U.S. firms’ incentive to innovate, leaving consumers saddled with the dual burden of inflated prices and lagging-edge technologies.
From a broader global perspective, the U.S. approach also runs counter to the broader trend of economic globalization. Today’s economies are deeply interconnected, and global industrial divisions of labor are highly complementary. The formation and development of global industrial and supply chains are an inevitable result of market forces and an important opportunity for countries to pursue shared development.
Power inverters and advanced robotics are essential products supporting the global green transition and the upgrading of intelligent manufacturing. Free trade and technological cooperation benefit countries worldwide.
By artificially fragmenting markets and erecting technological barriers, the U.S. is not only increasing the operating costs of global industrial and supply chains, undermining global industrial cooperation and the ecosystem for technological innovation, but also hampering the progress of the green transition and intelligent industry development worldwide, to the detriment of the common interests of all countries.
Protectionism cannot enhance competitiveness, and building walls and barriers cannot bring security. China urges the U.S. to heed the calls of industries in both countries, respect the laws of the market economy and the principle of fair competition, immediately correct its wrong practices, and remove the relevant discriminatory restrictive measures. If the U.S. persists in going down the wrong path, China will take resolute countermeasures.
China hopes that the U.S. will earnestly implement the important consensus reached by the leaders of the two countries, abandon the zero-sum mentality, return to a rational and pragmatic approach, work together with China, and promote the sound and stable development of China-U.S. economic and trade cooperation. This will help inject more positive energy into the building of a constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.
(Zhong Sheng is a pen name often used by People’s Daily to express its views on foreign policy and international affairs.)