The argument that U.S. export controls accelerate China's domestic tech efforts is a fiction. China's "indigenization pedal has been on the floor" since 2014, long before recent controls were implemented. It is a core national priority, meaning U.S. policy has little marginal effect on an already maxed-out effort.
Related Insights
Instead of a total ban, a more strategic approach is to "slow ball" an adversary like China by providing them with just enough technology. This keeps them dependent on foreign suppliers and disincentivizes the massive state investment required to develop their own superior, independent solutions.
Evaluating export controls by asking if China is still advancing is the wrong metric. The true test is the counterfactual: where would China be *without* the restrictions? The controls act as a significant handicap in a competitive race, not a complete stop, and it's highly likely China would be ahead of the U.S. in AI without them.
Despite the U.S. easing export controls, China's government may restrict imports of NVIDIA's advanced chips. Beijing is prioritizing its long-term goal of semiconductor self-sufficiency, which requires creating a protected market for domestic firms like Huawei, even if Chinese tech companies prefer superior foreign hardware.
Instead of crippling China, aggressive US sanctions and tech restrictions are having the opposite effect. They have forced China to accelerate its own domestic R&D and manufacturing for advanced technologies like microchips. This is creating a more powerful and self-sufficient competitor that will not be reliant on the West.
China's refusal to buy NVIDIA's export-compliant H20 chips is a strategic decision, not just a reaction to lower quality. It stems from concerns about embedded backdoors (like remote shutdown) and growing confidence in domestic options like Huawei's Ascend chips, signaling a decisive push for a self-reliant tech stack.
Contrary to their intent, U.S. export controls on AI chips have backfired. Instead of crippling China's AI development, the restrictions provided the necessary incentive for China to aggressively invest in and accelerate its own semiconductor industry, potentially eroding the U.S.'s long-term competitive advantage.
China's superior ability to rapidly build energy infrastructure and data centers means it could have outpaced US firms in building massive AI training facilities. Export controls are the primary reason Chinese hyperscalers haven't matched the massive capital spending of their US counterparts.
China is engaged in a strategic propaganda campaign, exaggerating its technological self-sufficiency in areas like AI chips. The goal is to convince U.S. policymakers that export controls are futile. This narrative aims to pressure the U.S. into relaxing restrictions, which would then allow China to acquire the very technology it claims not to need.
Beyond raw materials, China's national ambition is to achieve near-total self-sufficiency. The prevailing mood is that there is "nothing for which it wants to rely on foreigners a single day longer than it has to." This philosophy of aggressive import substitution signals a fundamental break with the logic of reciprocal global trade.
U.S. export controls on advanced semiconductors, intended to slow China, have instead galvanized its domestic industry. The restrictions accelerated China's existing push for self-sufficiency, forcing local companies to innovate with less advanced chips and develop their own GPU and manufacturing capabilities, diminishing the policy's long-term effectiveness.
