The United States is at grave risk of losing global leadership to China in a strategically vital group of advanced, traded-sector industries that provide the foundation for economic strength and national security in the 21st century. ITIF calls them “national power industries.” China’s coordinated long-term campaign to dominate these industries is not a normal economic competition; it is nothing short of techno-economic-trade war designed to put the United States and the West generally in a subservient position. Avoiding defeat for America and its allies will require policymakers in Washington to make fundamental policy changes.

Please register now to join ITIF for an important policy conference. Leading experts will consider the findings of an 18-month research effort that ITIF is conducting with support from the Smith Richardson Foundation, and discuss what U.S. policymakers must do to prevent America from suffering a catastrophic defeat in its techno-economic-trade war with China.

Agenda

Additional speakers to be announced.

Open

8:30–9:00 a.m. — Registration & Coffee

9:00–9:30 a.m. — Welcome: Remarks by Dr. Robert D. Atkinson, Founder and Senior Fellow, ITIF

China is on the march to dominate the advanced industries that underpin economic strength and national power in the 21st century. It is already the world’s leading producer in industries ranging from computers and electronics to motor vehicles, and it is rapidly becoming a leading innovator in cutting-edge industries from robotics to AI and quantum. This represents an existential threat to U.S. technological leadership, power, and security. To avoid defeat, Washington must jettison old techno-economic and trade policy doctrines and adopt a new national power industry strategy.

Part 1: The Threat Landscape

9:30–10:00 a.m. — China Is a Gigantic Asian Tiger, Specializing in Everything

China has leveraged the same bottom-up approach of the original Asian Tigers (attacking industry leaders from below), but at an unprecedented scale. Imagine Taiwan with 60 times its current population. China is now the world’s largest supplier, often the world’s largest market, America’s toughest power-industry competitor, and its only geopolitical rival. U.S. policymakers must balance these four, often-conflicting dimensions.

• Remarks by David Moschella, Nonresident Senior Fellow, ITIF, and author of A Concise History of the Global Information Technology Business (forthcoming)
• Discussion with Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF

10:00–11:15 a.m. — Panel: Over-the-Horizon Attacks

Washington has a hard time acting until it “sees the whites of their eyes.” By then it’s too late. What techno-industrial attacks are coming from the PRC but are not yet fully recognized in Washington? The next fronts are already taking shape in biopharmaceuticals, commercial aviation, and robotics, among many other advanced industries.

• Caitlin Frazer, Executive Director, National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology (NSCEB)
• Stephen Ezell, Executive Vice President, Global Innovation Policy, ITIF
• William Hannas, Lead Analyst, Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET)
• Mina Kim, Nonresident Senior Fellow, ITIF (moderator)

11:15–11:20 a.m. — Break

Part 2: The Political Challenge for Washington

11:20 a.m.–12:20 p.m. — Panel: Why So Little Appetite for National Economic Power Capitalism?

For half a century, American “financial capitalism” has rewarded short-term shareholder payouts over long-term reinvestment—starving the industries that underpin national power. To avoid losing the techno-economic trade war with China, policymakers must now rewrite that social contract by providing the incentives and public backing necessary to drive long-term investments in national power industry capabilities at home. So why the resistance? The free market Right calls it picking winners; the redistributionist Left wants profits going to workers instead. Washington has embraced a capitalism of investor freedom and of personal security—but not one built for economic power and national security.

• Ely Ratner, Principal, The Marathon Initiative
• Liza Tobin, Managing Director, Garnaut Global
• Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF (moderator)

12:20–12:30 p.m. — Lunch Break

12:30–1:30 p.m. — Lunch Discussion: Building Momentum for a Comprehensive Response

Diagnosing the China challenge is the easy part; summoning the political will to act is much harder. A comprehensive response requires treating some industries as strategic—a break from a bipartisan Washington reflex against “picking winners.” Yet there are signs that there may be some appetite for change. The bipartisan China Select Committee has produced a detailed competition strategy and numerous research-security reports and bills, and a recent Senate subcommittee hearing asked whether the U.S. government is even measuring what matters when it comes to science, technical standards, and strategic competition with China. Is there a chance of building political momentum for a comprehensive response before it’s too late?

Part 3: What an Effective Response Looks Like

1:30–2:00 p.m. — Beyond More Money: Structural Fixes for U.S. Science and Innovation Funding

The U.S. R&D funding system is still guided by the model Vannevar Bush laid out in 1945, “Science, the Endless Frontier”: strong decentralized federal support for research, with comparatively little attention to the mechanisms that convert research into innovation, growth, and competitiveness. What is the link between America’s declining R&D productivity and the dramatic shifts in the allocation of federal R&D that emerged under the Bush model? Reversing the decline requires greater centralization of federal R&D decision-making, while also identifying specific reforms that could improve the system.

• Remarks by Anne Marie Knott, Robert and Barbara Frick Professor of Business, Washington University and author of The US Innovation War with China (forthcoming, Cambridge University Press)
• Discussion with Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF

2:00–2:30 p.m. — Beyond Free Trade and Protectionism: Strategic Trade Partnerships

With the rise of mercantilist China, the longstanding free trade model is bankrupt. But across-the-board domestic protectionism is not the answer. The only way for the West to have the scale needed to avoid losing the techno-economic war to China is through deep strategic trade partnerships that incorporate not just trade policy, but also a host of other measures, including joint R&D, coordinated export and import controls, and commercial intelligence sharing.

• Remarks by Peter Harrell, Visiting Scholar, Georgetown Institute for International Economic Law
• Discussion with Rodrigo Balbontin, Associate Director, Trade, IP, and Digital Technology Governance, ITIF

2:30–2:40 p.m. — Break

2:40–3:00 p.m. — An Institutional Framework for a National Techno-Economic and Trade Policy

Ask who in Washington is the one to see about the China techno-economic challenge, and the answer is: no one. No office owns it, no hub coordinates it, no agency runs a coherent strategy. The U.S. government was built to referee process and smooth the business cycle—not to win a techno-industrial war. Doing that requires new machinery: hard data and “net-assessment”-grade analysis of where U.S. industries stand against China, coordinating bodies in Congress and the White House, and a lead agency to hold the strategy together.

• Remarks by Monica Gorman, Managing Director, Crowell Global Advisors
• Discussion with Stephen Ezell, ITIF

3:00–3:45 p.m. — 1948 Redux: Crafting the National Techno-Economic War Establishment

To mobilize for the Cold War, U.S. leaders built a national security establishment from 1948 onward—yet anti-statist instincts restrained it, harnessing America’s economic might without letting the country harden into a centralized “garrison state.” That restraint proved to be a source of strength, helping a freer America outlast a statist rival. In China, the United States now faces a far more formidable techno-economic competitor than the Soviet Union ever was. What can the post-1948 mobilization teach U.S. policymakers today about building a durable strategy without sacrificing what makes America strong?

• Remarks by Aaron Friedberg, Professor Emeritus of Politics and International Affairs, Princeton University
• Discussion with Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF

Close

3:45–4:00 p.m. — Closing Remarks by Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF

4:00 p.m. — Adjourn