Analysts are raising concerns about a shift in the United States’ approach to export controls, a tool traditionally used for national security, not economic bargaining. The Trump administration had previously used these measures to tighten control over technology exports, mainly targeting Chinese companies. This move introduced a precedent that some experts now say may come at a cost.
Wendy Cutler, vice president at the Asia Society and a former US trade negotiator, noted that the US may have compromised too much to regain access to key Chinese minerals and magnets. She said the US had long kept national security issues out of trade discussions to avoid turning them into negotiation points. Changing this approach, she warned, might open the door for China to demand future concessions on issues once considered non-negotiable.
Cutler explained that the longstanding US position has helped maintain a clear line between security and trade. Reversing that position, even slightly, could allow China to reshape the conversation and push for more balanced trade-offs. She said the latest talks under the London framework might mark a turning point in how the two countries manage economic disagreements.
This development is being closely watched by international trade experts, especially given the rising tension and rivalry between the two powers. Critics say the shift risks eroding US influence over supply chains, particularly in sectors like critical minerals and technology components that are essential for both national defense and economic leadership.
Trade journalist Ana Swanson, based in Washington, has followed the story closely. The broader context includes a number of recent flashpoints in US-China relations. These include battles over talent recruitment, control of global supply chains, and the treatment of foreign business professionals in China. The export policy reversal could shape how those and future issues unfold.
