US-China Relations: From Trade War to Tech War in 2025

What Signals a Shift from Trade to Tech War Between the US and China?

The relationship between the United States and China has entered a new phase in 2025, with technology increasingly becoming the central battleground rather than traditional trade disputes. This evolution represents a fundamental shift in how these global powers compete and cooperate, with far-reaching implications for businesses, consumers, and the global economy.

The Strategic Addition of Commerce Secretary to Negotiations

The inclusion of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in high-level US-China talks marks a significant departure from previous negotiation structures. Unlike his predecessors, Lutnick brings a distinct focus to the table, overseeing the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)—the primary agency responsible for implementing and enforcing export controls.

Lutnick's department implemented over 1,244 export control listings targeting China in 2024 alone, according to the BIS Annual Report. His reputation as one of the most hawkish figures on China in the Trump administration signals a deliberate strategy shift.

"Strategic export controls are non-negotiable for national security," Lutnick stated in a White House briefing on May 30, 2025, highlighting the administration's hardline stance.

This expansion of the negotiation team beyond traditional Treasury and Trade representatives reflects a recognition that today's US‑China trade war impact transcend conventional trade issues and are increasingly focused on technological competition and national security concerns.

The Post-Geneva Truce Reality

The May 2025 Geneva agreement, which resulted in a 90-day tariff reduction deal, initially appeared to signal a thaw in relations. However, the reality proved quite different:

• Both nations maintained stringent export restrictions despite the tariff reductions
• The deal conspicuously excluded technology controls from its scope
• Export restrictions on advanced semiconductors actually increased by 18% month-over-month in June 2025
• Strategic technology sectors saw continued or intensified restrictions following the temporary trade truce

As researcher Xu Weijun from South China University of Technology observed, "Tariffs will no longer grab much of the limelight; it will be tech." This insight, shared in a South China Morning Post interview on June 6, 2025, encapsulates the fundamental shift in US-China relations.

The failure of the temporary tariff reduction agreement to address underlying technology tensions reveals that both nations view technology competition as a separate, more strategic domain than traditional trade disputes.

Why Is Technology Now at the Center of US-China Tensions?

The prioritization of technology in bilateral relations stems from a recognition of its fundamental role in economic and national security. Unlike traditional trade issues that primarily affect market access and trade balances, technology competition cuts to the heart of future economic competitiveness and military capabilities.

Critical Chokepoints in Global Supply Chains

Both nations have identified and begun leveraging strategic "chokepoints" in global technology supply chains:

• The US has targeted semiconductor manufacturing equipment, with restrictions on ASML's EUV lithography machines to China creating significant barriers to advanced chip production
• China's dominance in rare earth processing (controlling approximately 85% of global capacity according to USGS data) creates potential vulnerabilities for US defense and clean energy sectors
• Software export controls have created challenges for Chinese firms developing AI and other advanced systems
• Restrictions on knowledge transfer through academic and research channels have limited collaboration in emerging technologies

These chokepoint strategies have cascading effects across multiple industries, from telecommunications to automotive manufacturing. For companies like Huawei, US entity list designation in 2019 (expanded in 2024 to block 5nm chip access) transformed their business model and global position.

The strategic importance of maintaining technological self-sufficiency has driven major policy initiatives on both sides, including China's $143 billion semiconductor self-sufficiency drive and the US CHIPS Act allocating $50 billion for domestic production.

The Evolution Beyond Tariff-Based Confrontation

Traditional tariffs, once the primary economic tool in bilateral disputes, have diminished in relative importance as both nations pursue more targeted and strategic approaches:

1. Technology transfer and intellectual property concerns have superseded market access issues
2. National security considerations increasingly drive economic policy decisions
3. The focus has shifted from trade deficits to technological sovereignty
4. Both nations are prioritizing control of critical technologies over short-term economic gains

This evolution reflects a deeper understanding that future economic and geopolitical power will derive more from technological leadership than from trade balances or traditional economic metrics.

Which Key Technologies Are Battlegrounds in the Tech War?

The technology competition between the US and China spans numerous sectors, but certain areas have emerged as particularly critical battlegrounds due to their strategic importance and potential for dual-use applications.

Semiconductor Industry as Primary Flashpoint

The semiconductor industry has become the most visible and contentious arena in the US-China tech war:

• Advanced chip manufacturing technologies (below 14nm) face strict export controls from the US and allies
• China's semiconductor imports declined 12% year-over-year in Q1 2025 according to Chinese Customs data
• Chip design software (EDA tools) restrictions have created significant bottlenecks for Chinese firms
• Manufacturing equipment limitations, particularly for extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography machines, have constrained China's advanced node production capabilities

Huawei's continued struggles under US restrictions highlight the semiconductor industry's centrality to this conflict. Despite investing heavily in domestic alternatives, Chinese firms face significant challenges in matching the capabilities of leading global semiconductor companies without access to key foreign technologies.

The competition for semiconductor manufacturing capacity and talent has intensified globally, with both nations offering substantial incentives to attract investment and expertise. Taiwan's position as home to TSMC, the world's leading contract chipmaker, has elevated the island's geopolitical significance in this technological rivalry.

Critical Minerals and Rare Earth Elements

The supply chains for critical minerals and rare earth elements represent another key battleground:

• China processes approximately 85% of the world's rare earth elements, creating a strategic advantage
• The US has designated 35 minerals as "critical" for economic and national security
• Export restrictions on minerals used in advanced electronics and green technology have increased
• Both nations are racing to secure processing capabilities and diversify supply sources

"Whoever controls the supply chain for critical minerals will have significant leverage in the tech competition of the coming decade," noted Dr. Melissa Chen, materials science expert at MIT, in her testimony to Congress in March 2025.

This mineral dependence creates particular vulnerabilities for the US defense industrial base and clean energy transition. Rare earth elements are essential components in everything from precision-guided missiles to wind turbines and electric vehicles, making raw materials supply chain security a national priority.

Emerging Aviation and Aerospace Technology

The aviation and aerospace sectors have become increasingly contentious areas in the tech war:

• Export controls affecting commercial and military aircraft components have expanded
• Restrictions on advanced navigation systems and materials have impacted development timelines
• Competition in satellite technology and space-based capabilities has intensified
• Dual-use technologies create particular tension in negotiation frameworks

The Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC) has faced challenges in developing its C919 passenger jet due to restrictions on avionics and other key components, highlighting how technology controls impact even civilian aerospace projects.

What Are the Economic Implications of This Tech-Focused Confrontation?

The shift from trade to tech war carries profound economic implications that extend far beyond bilateral relations, reshaping global supply chains and investment patterns.

Impact on Global Technology Companies

Multinational technology firms find themselves increasingly caught between competing regulatory regimes:

• Supply chain restructuring costs have reached an estimated $250 billion globally according to Boston Consulting Group analysis
• Timeline challenges for developing alternative suppliers or technologies typically range from 3-7 years
• Market access limitations have affected revenue projections for firms on both sides
• Strategic repositioning to navigate dual technology ecosystems has become a board-level priority

Companies like Apple have begun diversifying manufacturing away from China, with India and Vietnam becoming increasingly important production hubs. This "China+1" strategy represents a significant shift in global manufacturing patterns that had been stable for decades.

For Chinese technology giants, the restrictions have accelerated efforts to develop domestic alternatives to US technologies, creating new competitive dynamics in global markets. Huawei's HarmonyOS, developed in response to Google service restrictions, exemplifies this trend toward technological divergence.

Investment Patterns and Market Responses

Capital flows have shifted dramatically in response to the tech war:

• Venture capital investment in semiconductor startups increased 47% year-over-year in 2024
• Market volatility has spiked following announcements of new tech restrictions, with affected sectors seeing price swings of up to 15%
• Premium valuations are emerging for companies offering technology sovereignty solutions
• Cross-border investment in sensitive technologies has declined by approximately 35% since 2022

"We're seeing a fundamental reorientation of investment priorities toward technological self-sufficiency and supply chain security," explained Sarah Marten, Chief Investment Officer at Global Technology Partners, in her April 2025 investor letter.

This shift has created both challenges and opportunities for investors. While some sectors face increased uncertainty and compliance costs, others—particularly those providing alternatives to restricted technologies or helping companies navigate the new landscape—have seen significant growth. Furthermore, understanding the tariffs and investment impact has become essential for global investors.

How Are Both Nations Positioning for Technology Dominance?

As the tech war intensifies, both the United States and China are implementing comprehensive strategies to secure technological advantages and reduce vulnerabilities.

China's Self-Sufficiency Drive

China has responded to US technology restrictions with an aggressive self-sufficiency campaign:

• The "Big Fund" (National Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund) has allocated over $50 billion to domestic semiconductor development
• Strategic investments in alternative technology ecosystems span AI, quantum computing, and advanced materials
• Policy support for homegrown technology champions includes tax incentives, preferential procurement, and regulatory advantages
• China is leveraging its massive market size to develop parallel technology standards that could reshape global industries

The results of these efforts have been mixed. While China has made significant progress in some areas, such as 5G infrastructure and basic semiconductor manufacturing, it continues to face challenges in the most advanced technologies. The gap in cutting-edge semiconductor production remains substantial, with Chinese firms still several generations behind industry leaders despite massive investments.

China's approach emphasizes patience and long-term planning, with government strategies typically operating on five to ten-year horizons. This contrasts with the more market-driven US approach, creating different strengths and vulnerabilities on each side.

US Strategic Technology Protection Measures

The United States has implemented a multi-faceted strategy to maintain technological advantages:

• Expanded export control mechanisms now target emerging technologies like AI, quantum computing, and biotechnology
• Coalition-building with allies through mechanisms like the Chip 4 Alliance (US, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan) creates coordinated technology restrictions
• Investment restrictions on critical technology sectors limit Chinese access to US innovation
• Domestic manufacturing initiatives, anchored by the $50 billion CHIPS Act, aim to reshore strategic technology components

The US approach combines defensive measures to protect existing technological advantages with proactive investments to strengthen domestic capabilities. This two-pronged strategy recognizes that maintaining leadership requires both protecting intellectual property and accelerating innovation.

A key strength of the US approach has been its ability to coordinate with allies, creating a more comprehensive technology control regime than would be possible unilaterally. However, maintaining this coalition requires balancing diverse economic interests and security priorities among partner nations.

What Can We Expect from Future US-China Technology Negotiations?

As both nations adjust to the new reality of tech-based competition, the framework for managing this rivalry continues to evolve.

Potential Negotiation Frameworks

Future negotiations are likely to follow new patterns distinct from traditional trade talks:

• Sector-by-sector approaches to technology restrictions may replace comprehensive agreements
• Limited technology cooperation in non-sensitive areas (like climate technology) could provide common ground
• Verification mechanisms for technology transfer agreements will require unprecedented transparency
• Graduated restriction systems based on technology sensitivity levels might offer a middle path between unrestricted trade and complete decoupling

The EU-US Trade and Technology Council provides one potential model for structured dialogue on technology issues, though adapting this approach to US-China relations would require significant modifications to address the deeper strategic competition.

Negotiations will likely focus initially on establishing clearer rules of engagement rather than removing existing restrictions. Both sides recognize that some level of technology competition is inevitable, making the management of this rivalry more realistic than its elimination.

Long-Term Strategic Considerations

Several fundamental challenges will shape the long-term trajectory of US-China technology relations:

• Balancing economic interdependence with technology competition requires nuanced policies
• Managing escalation risks in strategic technology sectors demands clear communication channels
• Creating sustainable frameworks for coexistence in dual technology ecosystems will be necessary to avoid severe economic disruption
• Addressing third-country impacts of bilateral technology restrictions has become a diplomatic priority

The potential bifurcation of global technology standards represents a particularly significant risk. As Professor Ming Li of Tsinghua University noted in a recent policy paper: "Divergent technology standards would impose enormous costs on the global economy and potentially lock in technological divisions for decades."

Finding the right balance between competition and cooperation will require creative diplomacy and a clear-eyed assessment of core interests on both sides. While complete technological integration appears increasingly unlikely, managing the competition to prevent dangerous escalation remains possible.

FAQ: Understanding the US-China Tech War

How does the tech war differ from the previous trade war?

The tech war represents a fundamental shift from the trade disputes that dominated US-China relations in previous years:

• It focuses on long-term strategic capabilities rather than short-term trade balances
• National security considerations are more central to policy decisions
• Resolution through traditional trade negotiation mechanisms is more difficult
• The implications for global innovation and technology development are more profound
• Technology restrictions typically outlast tariff measures, creating more persistent economic effects

While the trade war primarily concerned market access and trade deficits, the tech war reflects a deeper competition for future economic and military advantage. This makes compromise more difficult but also raises the stakes for finding sustainable approaches to managing the rivalry.

What industries beyond technology are affected by these restrictions?

The impacts of technology restrictions extend far beyond the tech sector:

• The automotive sector faces challenges with electric vehicle components and autonomous driving systems
• Renewable energy development is impacted by restrictions on advanced materials and control systems
• Medical technology advancement has slowed in areas affected by AI and semiconductor limitations
• Consumer electronics companies face redesign requirements and supply constraints that affect product roadmaps

This broad impact reflects the increasingly central role of advanced technology in virtually all industries. As digital transformation continues across the economy, the effects of technology restrictions become more widespread and significant.

How might the tech war impact global technology standards?

The potential bifurcation of global technology standards represents one of the most consequential risks of the tech war:

• Industry bodies like IEEE and ITU face challenges maintaining global standards amid geopolitical tensions
• Competing certification and compatibility requirements could fragment global markets
• International technology governance organizations risk becoming battlegrounds for influence
• Compliance costs for global technology implementations would increase substantially in a bifurcated standards environment

According to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), technical standards underpin approximately 80% of global trade. Any significant fragmentation of these standards would create enormous economic inefficiencies and potentially lock in technological divisions for generations.

Navigating the New Reality of Tech-Based Competition

The Long-Term Nature of Technology Competition

Unlike traditional trade disputes, which can often be resolved through tariff adjustments or market access concessions, technology competition between the US and China appears to be a long-term structural feature of their relationship:

• Technology restrictions are likely to outlast traditional trade disputes
• Strategic rather than tactical considerations drive policy decisions
• Fundamental restructuring of global technology supply chains is already underway
• The implications for innovation and economic development will unfold over decades

This competition reflects deeper questions about technological leadership, economic models, and security priorities that cannot be easily resolved through negotiation. Both nations view technology leadership as essential to their future prosperity and security, making compromise on core capabilities unlikely.

Finding Balance Between Competition and Cooperation

Despite the intensifying rivalry, both nations have compelling reasons to find workable approaches to managing their technology competition:

• Identifying potential areas for continued technology collaboration, particularly on global challenges like climate change
• Creating frameworks for managing competition in strategic sectors to avoid dangerous escalation
• Developing transparent rules for technology transfer and protection to provide predictability
• Building resilient global innovation systems that can accommodate strategic competition while preserving beneficial collaboration

"The challenge is not eliminating competition, which is impossible, but making it predictable and bounded," observed former US Trade Representative Katherine Tai in a June 2025 speech at the Council on Foreign Relations.

The shift from trade war to tech war represents a fundamental evolution in US-China relations with profound implications for the global economy. While managing this competition will be challenging, the costs of failure—technological fragmentation, economic inefficiency, and heightened security risks—provide powerful incentives for both sides to find sustainable approaches to their technological rivalry. Additionally, initiatives like Trump's critical minerals order and the broader US critical minerals strategy will continue to shape this evolving landscape.

Want to Stay Ahead of Major Market-Moving Discoveries?

Discovery Alert's proprietary Discovery IQ model provides instant notifications when significant mineral discoveries are announced on the ASX, giving you a crucial market advantage before the broader market reacts. Visit the Discovery Alert discoveries page to see how past mineral discoveries have generated substantial returns for early investors.