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 economic 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 in a subservient position. To avoid a catastrophic defeat, policymakers in Washington will need to make fundamental policy changes.

Register now to join ITIF for an important policy conference. Leading experts will delve into the findings of an 18-month research effort that ITIF has conducted with support from the Smith Richardson Foundation, discuss policy reforms that are needed for America to avoid losing to China, and consider what the recent midterm elections portend for these issues in the years ahead.

Agenda

Last updated on November 10.

Open

8:00–9:00 a.m. — Registration and Breakfast

9:00–9:25 a.m. — Welcome and Framing: 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: Factoring Techno-Economic Security Into National Security

9:30–10:10 a.m. — The War Department’s Role in Techno-Economic Security

America needs a whole-of-government approach to techno-economic defense. That requires institutional coordination under a lead agency. But which agency? The Commerce Department is one possibility. Alternatively, ITIF has recommended establishing a new, quasi-public National Advanced Industry and Technology Agency (NAITA) organized like the Ex-Im Bank, but with greater flexibility. But no matter how the effort is organized, the War Department will need to play a central role—after all, it is the one place in U.S. politics and government where “industrial policy” is seen as acceptable, if not necessary. What should the War Department’s role look like?

• Michael P. Cadenazzi, Assistant Secretary of War for Industrial Base Policy
• Michael Brown, Partner, Shield Capital, and former director of the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) at the U.S. Department of Defense
• Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF (moderator)

10:15–11:00 a.m. — 1948 Redux: Crafting the National Techno-Economic Security 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, and author of Getting China Wrong (Polity Books, 2022)
• Discussion with Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF

11:00–11:10 a.m. — Break

Part 2: The Threat Landscape

11:10 a.m.–12:10 p.m. — Panel: Over-the-Horizon Techno-Economic 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 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, Chief Economist and Director, Hamilton Center on Industrial Strategy, ITIF (moderator)

12:10–12:50 p.m. — Lunch Break

Part 3: What an Effective Response Looks Like

12:50–1:20 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, and former Senior Director for International Economics in the Biden White House
• Discussion with Rodrigo Balbontin, Associate Director, Trade, IP, and Digital Technology Governance, ITIF

1:25–1:55 p.m. — Beyond More Money: Structural Fixes for U.S. Science and Innovation Funding

For decades, America has assumed ideas flow naturally from basic research into commercialization. That assumption no longer holds. Indeed, the U.S. innovation system is no longer fit for purpose in an age of great-power rivalry with the PRC. The two countries operate from fundamentally different models of innovation. The United States follows a “river” logic: Produce frontier science and trust the market to carry discoveries downstream. China follows a “lake” logic: Absorb, develop, diffuse, and capture value. Professor Knot will draw on findings from her forthcoming book The US Innovation War with China to discuss seven myths shaping U.S. innovation policy what a reform agenda should look like.

• 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

1:55–2:05 p.m. — Break

Part 4: The Political Challenge for Washington

2:05–2:45 p.m. — Beyond Financial Capitalism: National Power Capitalism

The single most important factor that will determine the outcome of the techno-economic-trade war with China is how U.S. firms make long-term investment decisions. The problem is that America’s current system of financial capitalism prioritizes paying profits to shareholders more than reinvesting earnings. To avoid losing to China, U.S. policymakers will need to rebalance that equation by ushering in a new system of “national power capitalism” that aligns shareholder interests with the national interest. That will require enacting major tax reforms to incentivize retained earnings and investment, and to disincentivize profit payouts; spurring “double bottom line” investment behavior that values national power; and creating targeted public sector investment vehicles.

• Sree Ramaswamy, Chief Innovation Officer, NobleReach; former Senior Policy Analyst, U.S. Department of Commerce
• Aniket Shah, PhD, Managing Director, Global Head of Washington, Sustainability & Transition Strategy, Jefferies Group LLC
• Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF (moderator)

2:50–3:50 p.m. — Why So Little Appetite for National Economic Power Strategy?

For half a century, America led in technology and relied on process-based, free-market economics and unfettered globalization. The result was innovation and productivity, but serious loss of techno-industrial global competitiveness. China, in contrast, follows a goal-oriented system designed to dominate advanced industries that underpin national power. To avoid losing the techno-economic trade war with China, U.S. policymakers must now go beyond the “Overton window” and embrace bold new approaches to policy. Why has this been so hard? Why are China engagers regaining the high ground? Why has President Trump appeared to move from confrontation to détente? What will it take to get China back on the agenda as fundamental issue to national power? Is Washington capable of building a system that effectively promotes economic power and national security?

• Ely Ratner, Principal, The Marathon Initiative, and former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs in the Biden Administration
• Liza Tobin, Managing Director, Garnaut Global, and former Director of China, National Security Council in the first Trump Administration
• Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF (moderator)

Close

3:50–4:00 p.m. — Summation by Robert D. Atkinson, ITIF

4:00 p.m. — Adjourn