2026.01.28
On the afternoon of January 27, 2026, the Grandview Institution(GVI) hosted a thematic seminar offering an in-depth analysis of its 2025 independent research report, The History of U.S. Export Controls and an Assessment of Policy Trends in U.S. Semiconductor Export Controls on China.
The seminar was delivered by Zhang Yi, Senior Research Fellow at the GVI and author of the report. Dr. Zhao Hai, Director of the Department of International Politics at the National Institute for Global Strategy, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences(NIGS, CASS), was invited to provide commentary. The event attracted representatives from relevant enterprises as well as researchers in the field.
In his report, Zhang Yi systematically reviewed the evolution of U.S. semiconductor export controls on China. He noted that the systematic escalation of these controls began with the enactment of the Export Control Reform Act in 2018. Since then, the United States has sought to build a more targeted and dynamic control regime by expanding the use of “long-arm jurisdiction” in 2020, restricting the participation of “U.S. citizens” in 2022, and promoting the so-called “small yard, high fence” approach.
Notably, Zhang Yi put forward three key trend assessments. First, excessive controls will undermine the profit base of American companies and, in turn, affect their technological iteration capabilities, necessitating a rebalancing of security and returns. Second, the Trump administration views controls as a negotiation tool, which creates a clear divergence in objectives with administrative agencies seeking to expand their authority; third, following China’s introduction of countermeasures on critical minerals, a "deterrence balance" has formed between China and the United States, marking the beginning of a dynamic adjustment period for control policies, with the goal shifting toward maintaining a technological gap rather than imposing comprehensive embargoes.
In this regard, Dr. Zhao Hai noted in his comments that the U.S. semiconductor controls on China are a concrete manifestation of the fundamental shift in its strategic positioning toward China. He analyzed that the "small yard, high fence" strategy is based on the assumption of continuous U.S. technological leadership, while the technological breakthroughs by Chinese enterprises have rendered this strategy less effective than anticipated. Dr. Zhao Hai particularly emphasized that the current control policies are driving the formation of two parallel technological systems between China and the United States. He pointed out that the U.S. has recently established AI alliances through initiatives such as "Pax Silica," indicating that competition has extended from the chip sector to the domains of AI ecosystem dominance and data sovereignty. However, he also noted that China's countermeasures in the field of critical raw materials, coupled with its market capacity, provide significant strategic leverage in responding to these controls.
At the seminar, participants also held in-depth discussions on practical issues of concern to businesses. Addressing the issue of supply chain circumvention, Zhang Yi noted that as long as regulatory measures severely undermine commercial interests, the market will inevitably seek ways to circumvent such restrictions. This, he argued, fundamentally reflects the fact that China’s status as a major market remains unchanged.
Zhao Hai advised companies to exercise caution in pursuing cooperation in the Middle East and other regions, as the United States is intensifying efforts there to exclude Chinese technologies.
Looking ahead to policy trends, Zhao Hai observed that it will take the United States several years to substantially reduce its reliance on China for critical minerals. During this transitional period, he suggested, a Trump administration may seek to maintain relative stability in the Western Pacific.
Regarding North American supply chain arrangements, Zhang Yi anticipated that the USMCA would remain in place, but that the United States would likely tighten rules of origin in order to restrict the transshipment of Chinese goods.
The seminar offered an in-depth, multi-dimensional analysis of the policy logic and market outlook shaping major-power technological competition, providing valuable reference for relevant companies as they seek to track industry trends and formulate development strategies. The experts’ assessments suggest that, under the current state of “deterrence balance,” companies need to pursue more flexible and viable development pathways that strike a balance between regulatory compliance and technological autonomy.