Recently, the United States House of Representatives has been passing a series of bills to counter the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), including a revised version of the “Biosecurity Act” draft which will prohibit contracts with certain Chinese biotech companies. Beijing has strongly objected to this move. Experts note that concerns about the CCP have increased significantly following the outbreak of the CCP virus (COVID-19) pandemic, and the decoupling between the U.S. and China in technology will further expand.
Before the U.S. presidential election, the House is dedicating this week as “China Week” with plans to swiftly approve a range of bills related to the CCP threat. Among them is the revised version of the “Biosecurity Act” (H.R.8333), initially proposed by former Republican Congressman Mike Gallagher and Democratic Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi.
The bill aims to prevent the U.S. federal government from entering into commercial contracts with Chinese biotech companies deemed to be national security threats.
The revised version of the “Biosecurity Act” was approved by the House Oversight and Reform Committee with significant support on May 15. This progress has captured widespread attention.
The bill specifically names five Chinese companies – BGI Group, MGI, Complete Genomics (MGI’s U.S. subsidiary), WuXi AppTec, and WuXi Biologics. These companies hold leading positions in the field of biotechnology, particularly in genetic sequencing and biopharmaceutical services.
U.S. lawmakers believe that these companies are part of the CCP’s strategy of military-civil fusion, posing a threat to U.S. national security.
Supporters also argue that this bill is necessary to protect the personal health, genetic information, and pharmaceutical supply chain of Americans. There are concerns that the CCP may develop biological weapons or exploit biological data collected from around the world.
Professor Sun Guoxiang from the Department of International Affairs and Business at South China University of Technology told Epoch Times that the passage of the “Biosecurity Act” draft is indirectly related to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in China. The pandemic revealed the vulnerability of global supply chains and heightened concerns about biosecurity, prompting the U.S. government to give more attention to the issue.
Sun Guoxiang explained that medical data, especially genetic data, is highly sensitive. The U.S. government is concerned that domestic companies may collaborate with the CCP to collect genetic data of American citizens for military, espionage, or national security threats.
“National security also involves the security of the supply chain because the epidemic exposed America’s reliance on Chinese companies in the field of biotechnology. Through the Biosecurity Act, the U.S. hopes to reduce its dependence on Chinese companies in critical areas like biotechnology and pharmaceuticals, promote investment and development by domestic or allied biotech companies, avoid the expansion of Chinese companies in the U.S. market, and mitigate economic risks arising from geopolitical tensions.”
Harvard Medical School researcher and former Chinese military doctor Wang Zhiyuan told Epoch Times that the passage of this bill indicates a deeper understanding of the nature of the CCP and a heightened awareness of the threat it poses, not only in the U.S. but globally. This is partly due to the CCP’s performance during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“With the massive outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic over the past three years, there is widespread suspicion of the CCP. For example, the CCP’s concealment of the origins of the virus led to a global pandemic, and many things still remain unclear.”
Wang Zhiyuan stated that the CCP has engaged in unrestricted warfare in the field of bioengineering. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, people have come to realize that the CCP has no moral bottom line. If the U.S. does not take preventive measures, the CCP’s unscrupulous behavior threatens U.S. national security and global security.
He also pointed out that the CCP’s use of bioengineering and biotechnology for military purposes is no longer a secret, as many companies serve both military and civilian functions. While appearing as private companies on the surface, they are ultimately backed by the CCP, a consensus that is held widely.
Yao Yuan, a professor at the University of St. Thomas specializing in international studies, stated that the core of U.S. action is to prevent any collaboration with the CCP in biotechnology and to block the CCP from stealing biotech technology. This is a product of U.S. technological competition.
He believes that the COVID-19 pandemic, which originated in Wuhan, has indeed raised concerns about biosecurity in the U.S. However, this bill primarily aims to sever collaboration between the U.S. and China in biotechnology and is not directly targeting the Wuhan virus.
“The main issue is the theft of U.S. technology. The CCP uses tactics such as bribing foreign scholars or collaborating with U.S. institutions through its state-owned enterprises to move technology back to China, damaging U.S. economic interests or technology.”
On September 10, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maoming strongly objected to the U.S. House of Representatives’ approval of the bill, demanding the U.S. to “stop abusing various excuses to suppress Chinese companies,” among other claims. The named Chinese companies also released statements defending that they pose no threat to U.S. national security. On that day, shares of related Chinese companies experienced heavy losses.
According to a report by Jiemian News, WuXi AppTec, one of the named companies, generates 65% of its global revenue from the U.S. market in 2023. The company has numerous production bases and research centers in the U.S., with several projects slated to commence operation in the coming years. If the bill is passed, these projects may be delayed or even canceled.
Regarding the strong reaction from China, Yao Yuan said that once these bills pass through the Senate and are signed by the President, in the following years, they will rapidly decouple U.S.-China cooperation in these technologies, dealing a significant blow to China’s technological development and innovation.
A survey conducted by LEK Consulting showed that the confidence of U.S. biotech companies and their Chinese partners has declined by 30% to 50% since the introduction of the “Biosecurity Act” draft. Many businesses have begun seeking diversification of supply chains, enhancing compliance and legal protections, and some have already canceled projects involving collaboration with Chinese companies.
Yao Yuan believes that the prospects for U.S.-China technological cooperation are dim, especially in cutting-edge technologies. Discussions in the near future may only revolve around basic industries where cooperation may still exist.
Sun Guoxiang noted that the impact of this U.S. bill on Chinese companies in the future will involve restricting access to international markets. Allied countries may also follow suit, and supply chains in biopharmaceuticals and genomics will be reconfigured.
He believes that the decoupling of U.S.-China technology will begin with biotechnology, as shown by the U.S. biosecurity legislation. This decoupling is likely to expand to other sectors such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and beyond, triggering a chain reaction.
Wang Zhiyuan stated that once this bill is implemented, it will have a significant impact on related CCP companies, as other countries may adopt similar measures against the CCP. “It’s not just restrictions or sanctions, but the creation of laws, indicating how serious the problems the CCP is facing.”
The mass approval of these bills just before the U.S. election carries significant political implications.
Yao Yuan expressed that strong competition with the CCP or hastening decoupling is already a consensus among the two parties in the U.S., making the mass approval of these bills a natural progression. As for whether it will affect the election, it depends on which specific bill appeals to which segment of voters. However, it should benefit both the Democratic and Republican parties as it reflects a consensus between them.