Science & Technology
Wed, November 19, 2025
Tue, November 18, 2025
Mon, November 17, 2025
White House Seeks to Extend US-China Science Pact Amid Security Concerns
//science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. s-china-science-pact-amid-security-concerns.html
Published in Science and Technology on Wednesday, November 19th 2025 at 17:38 GMT by Wall Street Journal- 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
- 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source
White House Seeks Extension of US‑China Science and Technology Pact: What It Means for the Bilateral Relationship
The Biden administration has announced a bid to extend the Science and Technology Cooperation Agreement (STCA) it signed with China earlier this year—a move that underscores the U.S. government’s ongoing struggle to balance cooperation with competition in a high‑stakes relationship. The proposal, released by the White House and pitched to both Congress and Beijing, would prolong the pact’s limited one‑year duration and expand its scope to cover emerging technologies, climate research, and public‑health collaboration. While the extension is framed as a pragmatic step toward joint problem‑solving, critics warn that it could inadvertently facilitate technology transfer that the United States has long deemed a national‑security risk.
A Brief History of the STCA
The STCA, signed in June 2023, was a first‑of‑its‑kind U.S. policy that signaled a thaw in an otherwise friction‑filled science corridor. In a departure from the Trump administration’s hard‑line approach—characterized by bans on semiconductor research and a sharp curtailment of academic exchanges—the Biden administration opted for a framework that encouraged “mutual advancement in science, technology, and innovation while protecting intellectual property and national security.” The pact was intended to create a mechanism for joint research in areas such as clean‑energy technology, AI ethics, and pandemic‑preparedness, and to institutionalize regular dialogue through a joint science council.
However, the agreement was short‑lived. The White House set a sunset clause for the STCA to expire at the end of 2024, a period that many analysts said was meant to allow a reassessment of the balance between cooperation and competition. In the months since, lawmakers from both parties have called for a review. A handful of Republican senators, citing concerns about the “China threat,” argued that the pact was a “gateway” for China to acquire U.S. technologies that could undermine American advantage in the technology sector. Conversely, several Democratic legislators praised the agreement as a “smart, pragmatic approach” that could help the United States confront global challenges that transcend borders, such as climate change and pandemics.
What the Extension Proposal Entails
According to the White House briefing, the extension would not simply renew the existing terms; it would also “update and broaden the areas of collaboration.” The new agreement would add a clause on dual‑use technology oversight, ensuring that joint research involving AI, quantum computing, or biotechnology would be subject to stricter export‑control reviews. It would also propose a “science innovation fund” that would allocate up to $100 million per year to joint projects, with the caveat that all funded research must undergo a joint vetting process with the Department of Commerce and the Department of Defense.
In addition, the White House has signaled a willingness to incorporate a “science‑exchange protocol” that would allow temporary visa programs for scientists and engineers to move between the two countries more fluidly. The administration insists that such exchanges would not be “unrestricted” but would follow a “robust security screening” regime, echoing the language used in other bilateral science agreements such as the U.S.‑Japan Science and Technology Agreement.
The proposal was framed in the context of President Biden’s broader policy of “engagement‑with‑caution.” “We are not in a position to give the Chinese access to everything,” the White House said in a statement. “But we do recognize that we are sharing a planet, and that many challenges require joint solutions.”
Political Dynamics: A Tug‑of‑War in Washington
The extension is set against a backdrop of a deeply divided Congress. While some Democrats see the pact as an essential bridge to address global problems, many Republicans view it as a concession that could erode U.S. technological superiority. In the Senate, a coalition of Republicans—including Senators Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, and John Cornyn—has publicly called for a “comprehensive review” of the STCA, citing “the risk that China could use this platform to acquire critical U.S. technologies.”
On the other side, a group of Democrats, led by Senator Chris Van Hollen, has pledged to negotiate a “more robust framework” that could keep the science collaboration alive while instituting tighter export‑control measures. The debate has spilled over into the House, where the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology has scheduled a hearing on the STCA’s future, with industry lobbyists, think‑tank experts, and academics expected to testify.
The political divide is further complicated by the growing bipartisan consensus on the need for a clear policy on emerging technologies such as AI, quantum computing, and biotechnology. While the STCA could provide a formal channel for dialogue, it also raises concerns that the U.S. might inadvertently provide China with insights into the world’s most advanced research.
Implications for U.S.–China Relations
If the extension goes through, it could serve as a barometer for the broader U.S.–China strategic relationship. The administration’s emphasis on “science diplomacy” may provide a foothold to negotiate more expansive agreements on trade, climate policy, and even defense cooperation. In the longer term, the extension could signal that the U.S. is willing to pursue “win‑win” outcomes with China on issues that are too global to be handled by a single nation.
Conversely, the extension could backfire. Critics argue that it would legitimize the Chinese government's ongoing surveillance and espionage activities within the scientific community. Moreover, by embedding the U.S. in a framework that explicitly facilitates cross‑border collaboration, the U.S. may find it harder to later roll back access to sensitive research. This potential for “mission creep”—the gradual expansion of the scope of cooperation beyond the original intent—has been cited by former national‑security officials as a key risk.
Looking Ahead
The White House has set a deadline of 60 days for congressional approval of the extension, though the process is likely to be protracted. The policy’s success will hinge on whether the administration can satisfy both the bipartisan coalition that seeks a robust defense posture against China and the technocratic wing that sees science cooperation as essential to global welfare.
In the months to come, policy makers will have to navigate a complex landscape where technology, national security, and diplomacy intersect. Whether the U.S. will be able to extend a science and technology pact with a country that remains a strategic competitor remains to be seen, but the conversation itself underscores the delicate balancing act that defines the contemporary U.S.–China relationship.
Read the Full Wall Street Journal Article at:
[ https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/white-house-seeks-extension-to-science-and-technology-pact-with-china-5c61bcac ]
