Understanding the debate in U.S. foreign policy regarding the benefits of multilateralism and China

Advocates of multilateralism in the U.S. contend that it serves to manage conflicts, prevent escalation, and promote peaceful resolution of disputes. Detractors point to national security concerns and unfair economic competition. In the case of multilateralism and China, critics argue that China’s technological advancements, particularly in areas such as 5G, artificial intelligence, and cybersecurity, pose risks to U.S. national security. Critics further point to China’s state-led industrial policies and practices, such as subsidies, market access restrictions, and forced technology transfers, as unfair. Differing views lead to three coalitions vying for policy adoption: one arguing for continued engagement, believing that integration and collaboration can lead to shared benefits, improved global standards, and the diffusion of technological advancements. A second group wants to weaponize strategic technologies to gain advantages in the great power competition with a Communist China that is intent on subverting the U.S.-led liberal global order. The third coalition advocates somewhere in between—a flexi-lateral approach—that employs selective decoupling to limit technological interdependence and reduces reliance on Chinese critical supply chains. This paper utilizes the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to identify policy beliefs held by these coalitions in the current U.S. dialogue. It uses media and document analyses to examine specific policy positions and goals. It will also assess the levels of potential influence of each advocacy coalition involved in shaping U.S.-China strategic technology policy.