Related:
John Bolton vs Donald Trump
Thank you, Andrew for that very kind introduction and for
the excellent work that you and your team have done in protecting the people of
the Western District of Michigan. I would like to thank the leadership
and staff of the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Museum — especially Director
Elaine Didier — for hosting today’s event. I’d also like to offer a
special thanks to the Ford Presidential Foundation and Executive Director Joe
Calvaruso. Even under normal circumstances, hosting an event can be a
challenge, but these days, I know it is especially challenging. Thank you
for accommodating us. I am also grateful to you, the audience, for
honoring me with your presence today.
It is a privilege to be here to speak about what may prove
to be the most important issue for our nation and the world in the twenty-first
century — that is, the United States’ response to the global ambitions of the
Chinese Communist Party. The CCP rules with an iron fist over one of the
great ancient civilizations of the world. It seeks to leverage the
immense power, productivity, and ingenuity of the Chinese people to overthrow
the rules-based international system and to make the world safe for
dictatorship. How the United States responds to this challenge will have
historic implications and will determine whether the United States and its
liberal democratic allies will continue to shape their own destiny or whether
the CCP and its autocratic tributaries will control the future.
Several weeks ago, National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien
spoke about the CCP’s ideology and global ambitions. He declared, and I
agree, that “[t]he days of American passivity and naivety regarding the
People’s Republic of China are over.”[1] Last week, FBI Director Chris
Wray described how the CCP pursues its ambitions through nefarious and even
illegal conduct, including industrial espionage, theft, extortion,
cyberattacks, and malign influence activities.[2] In the coming days, you will hear
from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who will sum up what is at stake for the
United States and the free world. I hope these speeches will inspire the
American people to reevaluate their relationship with China, so long as it
continues to be ruled by the Communist Party.
It is fitting that we are here today at the Ford
Presidential Museum. Gerald Ford served at the highest echelons of our
government at the dawn of America’s reengagement with the People’s Republic of
China, which began with President Nixon’s historic visit in 1972. Three years
later, in 1975, President Ford visited China for a summit with PRC leaders,
including Mao Zedong.
At the time, it was unthinkable that China would emerge
after the Cold War as a near-peer competitor of the United States. Yet
even then, there were signs of China’s immense latent power. In the joint
report of their visit to China in 1972, House Majority Leader Hale Boggs and
then-Minority Leader Ford wrote: “If she manages to achieve as she
aspires, China in the next half century can emerge a self-sufficient power of a
billion people …. This last impression—of the reality of China’s colossal
potential—is perhaps the most vivid of our journey. As our small party
traveled through that boundless land, this sense of a giant stirring, a dragon waking,
gave us much to ponder.”[3] It is now nearly fifty years later,
and the prescient ponderings of these two congressmen have come to pass.
Deng Xiaoping, whose economic reforms launched China’s
remarkable rise, had a famous motto: “hide your strength and bide your time.”[4] That is precisely what China has
done. China’s economy has quietly grown from about 2 percent of the
world’s GDP in 1980 to nearly 20 percent today. By some estimates, based
on purchasing power parity, the Chinese economy is already larger than
ours. The General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, Xi Jinping,
who has centralized power to a degree not seen since the dictatorship of Mao
Zedong, now speaks openly of China moving “closer to center stage,” “building a
socialism that is superior to capitalism,” and replacing the American Dream
with the “Chinese solution.”[5] China is no longer hiding its
strength, nor biding its time. From the perspective of its communist
rulers, China’s time has arrived.
The People’s Republic of China is now engaged in an economic
blitzkrieg—an aggressive, orchestrated, whole-of-government (indeed,
whole-of-society) campaign to seize the commanding heights of the global
economy and to surpass the United States as the world’s preeminent
superpower. A centerpiece of this effort is the Communist Party’s “Made
in China 2025” initiative, a plan for PRC domination of high-tech industries
like robotics, advanced information technology, aviation, and electric vehicles.
Backed by hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies, this initiative poses a
real threat to U.S. technological leadership. Despite World Trade
Organization rules prohibiting quotas for domestic output, “Made in China 2025”
sets targets for domestic market share (sometimes as high as 70 percent) in
core components and basic materials for industries such as robotics and
telecommunications. It is clear that the PRC seeks not merely to join the
ranks of other advanced industrial economies, but to replace them
altogether.
“Made in China 2025” is the latest iteration of the PRC’s
state-led, mercantilist economic model. For American companies in the
global marketplace, free and fair competition with China has long been a
fantasy. To tilt the playing field to its advantage, China’s communist
government has perfected a wide array of predatory and often unlawful tactics:
currency manipulation, tariffs, quotas, state-led strategic investment and
acquisitions, theft and forced transfer of intellectual property, state
subsidies, dumping, cyberattacks, and espionage. About 80% of all federal
economic espionage prosecutions have alleged conduct that would benefit the
Chinese state, and about 60% of all trade secret theft cases have had a nexus
to China.
The PRC also seeks to dominate key trade routes and
infrastructure in Eurasia, Africa, and the Pacific. In the South China
Sea, for example, through which about one-third of the world’s maritime trade
passes, the PRC has asserted expansive and historically dubious claims to
nearly the entire waterway, flouted the rulings of international courts, built
artificial islands and placed military outposts on them, and harassed its
neighbors’ ships and fishing boats.
Another ambitious project to spread its power and influence
is the PRC’s “Belt and Road” infrastructure initiative. Although billed
as “foreign aid,” in fact these investments appear designed to serve the PRC’s
strategic interests and domestic economic needs. For example, the PRC has
been criticized for loading poor countries up with debt, refusing to
renegotiate terms, and then taking control of the infrastructure itself, as it
did with the Sri Lankan port of Hambantota in 2017. This is little more
than a form of modern-day colonialism.
Just as consequential, however, are the PRC’s plans to
dominate the world’s digital infrastructure through its “Digital Silk Road”
initiative. I have previously spoken at length about the grave risks of
allowing the world’s most powerful dictatorship to build the next generation of
global telecommunications networks, known as 5G. Perhaps less widely
known are the PRC’s efforts to surpass the United States in other cutting-edge
fields like artificial intelligence. Through innovations such as machine
learning and big data, artificial intelligence allows machines to mimic human
functions, such as recognizing faces, interpreting spoken words, driving
vehicles, and playing games of skill such as chess or the even more complex
Chinese strategy game Go. AI long ago outmatched the world’s chess
grandmasters. But the PRC’s interest in AI accelerated in 2016, when
AlphaGo, a program developed by a subsidiary of Google, beat the world champion
Go player at a match in South Korea. The following year, Beijing unveiled
its “Next Generation Artificial Intelligence Plan,” a blueprint for leading the
world in AI by 2030. Whichever nation emerges as the global leader in AI
will be best positioned to unlock not only its considerable economic potential,
but a range of military applications, such as the use of computer vision to
gather intelligence.
The PRC’s drive for technological supremacy is complemented
by its plan to monopolize rare earth materials, which play a vital role in
industries such as consumer electronics, electric vehicles, medical devices,
and military hardware. According to the Congressional Research Service,
from the 1960s to the 1980s, the United States led the world in rare earth
production.[6] “Since then, production has shifted
almost entirely to China,” in large part due to lower labor costs and lighter
environmental regulation.[7]
The United States is now dangerously dependent on the PRC
for these materials. Overall, China is America’s top supplier, accounting
for about 80 percent of our imports. The risks of dependence are
real. In 2010, for example, Beijing cut exports of rare earth materials
to Japan after an incident involving disputed islands in the East China
Sea. The PRC could do the same to us.
As China’s progress in these critical sectors illustrates,
the PRC’s predatory economic policies are succeeding. For a hundred
years, America was the world’s largest manufacturer — allowing us to serve as
the world’s “arsenal of democracy.” China overtook the United States in
manufacturing output in 2010. The PRC is now the world’s “arsenal of
dictatorship.”
How did China accomplish all this? No one should
underestimate the ingenuity and industry of the Chinese people. At the
same time, no one should doubt that America made China’s meteoric rise
possible. China has reaped enormous benefits from the free flow of
American aid and trade. In 1980, Congress granted the PRC
most-favored-nation trading status. In the 1990s, American companies
strongly supported the PRC’s accession to the World Trade Organization and the
permanent normalization of trade relations. Today, U.S.-China trade
totals about $700 billion.
Last year, Newsweek ran a cover story titled “How America’s
Biggest Companies Made China Great Again.”[8] The article details how
China’s communist leaders lured American business with the promise of market
access, and then, having profited from American investment and know-how, turned
increasingly hostile. The PRC used tariffs and quotas to pressure
American companies to give up their technology and form joint ventures with
Chinese companies. Regulators then discriminated against American firms,
using tactics like holding up permits. Yet few companies, even Fortune
500 giants, have been willing to bring a formal trade complaint for fear of
angering Beijing.
Just as American companies have become dependent on the
Chinese market, the United States as a whole now relies on the PRC for many
vital goods and services. The COVID-19 pandemic has thrown a spotlight on
that dependency. For example, China is the world’s largest producer of
certain protective equipment, such as face masks and medical gowns. In
March, as the pandemic spread around the world, the PRC hoarded the masks for
itself, blocking producers — including American companies — from exporting them
to countries in need. It then attempted to exploit the shortage for
propaganda purposes, shipping limited quantities of often defective equipment
and requiring foreign leaders to publicly thank Beijing.
China’s dominance of the world market for medical goods goes
beyond masks and gowns. It has become the United States’ largest supplier
of medical devices, while at the same time discriminating against American
medical companies in China. China’s government has targeted foreign firms
for greater regulatory scrutiny, instructed Chinese hospitals to buy products
made in China, and pressured American firms to build factories in China, where
their intellectual property is more vulnerable to theft. As one expert
has observed, American medical device manufacturers are effectively “creating
their own competitors.”[9]
America also depends on Chinese supply chains in other vital
sectors, especially pharmaceuticals. America remains the global leader in
drug discovery, but China is now the world’s largest producer of active
pharmaceutical ingredients, known as “APIs.” As one Defense Health Agency
official noted, “[s]hould China decide to limit or restrict the delivery of
APIs to the [United States],” it “could result in severe shortages of
pharmaceuticals for both domestic and military uses.”[10]
To achieve dominance in pharmaceuticals, China’s rulers went
to the same playbook they used to gut other American industries. In 2008,
the PRC designated pharmaceutical production as a “high-value-added-industry”
and boosted Chinese companies with subsidies and export tax rebates.[11] Meanwhile, the PRC has
systematically preyed on American companies. American firms face
well-known obstacles in China’s health market, including drug approval delays,
unfair pricing limitations, IP theft, and counterfeiting. Chinese nationals
working as employees at pharma companies have been caught stealing trade
secrets both in America and in China. And the CCP has long engaged in
cyber-espionage and hacking of U.S. academic medical centers and healthcare
companies.
In fact, PRC-linked hackers have targeted American
universities and firms in a bid to steal IP related to coronavirus treatments
and vaccines, sometimes disrupting the work of our researchers. Having
been caught covering up the coronavirus outbreak, Beijing is desperate for a
public relations coup, and may hope that it will be able to claim credit for
any medical breakthroughs.
As all of these examples should make clear, the ultimate
ambition of China’s rulers isn’t to trade with the United States. It is
to raid the United States. If you are an American business leader,
appeasing the PRC may bring short-term rewards. But in the end, the PRC’s
goal is to replace you. As a U.S. Chamber of Commerce report put it,
“[t]he belief by foreign companies that large financial investments, the
sharing of expertise and significant technology transfers would lead to an ever
opening China market is being replaced by boardroom banter that win-win in
China means China wins twice.”[12]
Although Americans hoped that trade and investment would
liberalize China’s political system, the fundamental character of the regime
has never changed. As its ruthless crackdown of Hong Kong demonstrates
once again, China is no closer to democracy today than it was in 1989 when
tanks confronted pro-democracy protesters in Tiananmen Square. It remains
an authoritarian, one-party state in which the Communist Party wields absolute
power, unchecked by popular elections, the rule of law, or an independent
judiciary. The CCP surveils its own people and assigns them social credit
scores, employs an army of government censors, tortures dissidents, and
persecutes religious and ethnic minorities, including a million Uighurs
detained in indoctrination and labor camps.
If what happened in China stayed in China, that would all be
bad enough. But instead of America changing China, China is leveraging
its economic power to change America. As this Administration’s China
Strategy recognizes, “the CCP’s campaign to compel ideological conformity does
not stop at China’s borders.”[13] Rather, the CCP seeks to extend
its influence around the world, including on American soil.
All too often, for the sake of short-term profits, American
companies have succumbed to that influence—even at the expense of freedom and
openness in the United States. Sadly, examples of American business
bowing to Beijing are legion.
Take Hollywood. Hollywood actors, producers, and
directors pride themselves on celebrating freedom and the human spirit.
And every year at the Academy Awards, Americans are lectured about how this
country falls short of Hollywood’s ideals of social justice. But
Hollywood now regularly censors its own movies to appease the Chinese Communist
Party, the world’s most powerful violator of human rights. This
censorship infects not only versions of movies that are released in China, but
also many that are shown in American theaters to American audiences.
For example, the hit movie World War Z depicts a
zombie apocalypse caused by a virus. The original version of the film
reportedly contained a scene with characters speculating that the virus may
have originated in China. (In the novel, Patient Zero is a boy from Chongqing.)
But the studio, Paramount Pictures, reportedly told producers to delete the
reference to China in the hope of landing a Chinese distribution deal.
The deal never materialized.
In the Marvel Studios blockbuster Dr. Strange,
filmmakers changed the nationality of a major character known as the “Ancient
One,” a Tibetan monk in the comic books, from Tibetan to Celtic. When
challenged about this, a screenwriter explained that “if you acknowledge that
Tibet is a place and that he’s Tibetan, you risk alienating one billion
people.”[14] Or, he continued, the Chinese
government might say “[w]e’re not going to show your movie because you decided
to get political.”[15]
These are just two examples of the many Hollywood films that
have been altered, one way or another, to conform to CCP propaganda.
National Security Advisor O’Brien offered even more examples in his
remarks. But many more scripts likely never see the light of day, because
writers and producers know not to even test the limits. Chinese
government censors don’t need to say a word, because Hollywood is doing their
work for them. This is a massive propaganda coup for the Chinese
Communist Party.
The story of the film industry’s submission to the CCP is a
familiar one. In the past two decades, China has emerged as the world’s
largest box office. The CCP has long tightly controlled access to that
lucrative market—both through quotas on American films, imposed in violation of
China’s WTO obligations, and a strict censorship regime. Increasingly,
Hollywood also relies on Chinese money for financing. In 2018, films with
Chinese investors accounted for 20 percent of U.S. box-office ticket sales,
compared to only 3.8 percent five years earlier.
But in the long run, as with other American industries, the
PRC may be less interested in cooperating with Hollywood than co-opting
Hollywood—and eventually replacing it with its own homegrown productions.
To accomplish this, the CCP has been following its usual modus operandi.
By imposing a quota on American films, the CCP pressures Hollywood studios to
form joint ventures with Chinese companies, who then gain access to U.S.
technology and know-how. As one Chinese film executive recently put it,
“[e]verything we learned, we learned from Hollywood.”[16] Notably, in 2019, eight of the 10
top-grossing films in China were produced in China.
Hollywood is far from alone in kowtowing to the PRC.
America’s big tech companies have also allowed themselves to become pawns of
Chinese influence.
In the year 2000, when the United States normalized trade
relations with China, President Clinton hailed the new century as one in which
“liberty will be spread by cell phone and cable modem.”[17] Instead, over the course of the
next decade, American companies such as Cisco helped the Communist Party build
the Great Firewall of China—the world’s most sophisticated system for Internet
surveillance and censorship.
Over the years, corporations such as Google, Microsoft,
Yahoo, and Apple have shown themselves all too willing to collaborate with the
CCP. For example, Apple recently removed the news app Quartz from its app
store in China, after the Chinese government complained about coverage of the
Hong Kong democracy protests. Apple also removed apps for virtual private
networks, which had allowed users to circumvent the Great Firewall, and eliminated
pro-democracy songs from its Chinese music store. Meanwhile, the company
announced that it would be transferring some of its iCloud data to servers in
China, despite concerns that the move would give the CCP easier access to
e-mails, text messages, and other user information stored in the cloud.
The CCP has long used public threats of retaliation and
barred market access to exert influence. More recently, however, the CCP
has also stepped up behind-the-scenes efforts to cultivate and coerce American
business executives to further its political objectives — efforts that are all
the more pernicious because they are largely hidden from public view.
As China’s government loses credibility around the world,
the Department of Justice has seen more and more PRC officials and their
proxies reaching out to corporate leaders and inveighing them to favor policies
and actions favored by the Chinese Communist Party.
Their objective
varies, but their pitch is generally the same: the businessperson has economic
interests in China, and there is a suggestion that things will go better (or
worse) for them depending on their response to the PRC’s request.
Privately pressuring or courting American corporate leaders to promote policies
(or politicians) presents a significant threat, because hiding behind American
voices allows the Chinese government to elevate its influence and put a
“friendly face” on pro-regime policies. The legislator or policymaker who
hears from a fellow American is properly more sympathetic to that constituent
than to a foreigner. And by masking its participation in our political
process, the PRC avoids accountability for its influence efforts and the public
outcry that might result, if its lobbying were exposed.
America’s corporate leaders might not think of themselves as
lobbyists. You might think, for example, that cultivating a mutually
beneficial relationship is just part of the “guanxi” — or system of influential
social networks—necessary to do business with the PRC. But you should be alert
to how you might be used, and how your efforts on behalf of a foreign company
or government could implicate the Foreign Agents Registration Act. FARA
does not prohibit any speech or conduct. But it does require those who
are acting as the “agents” of foreign principals to publicly disclose that
relationship and their political or other similar activities by registering
with the Justice Department, allowing the audience to take into account the
origin of the speech when evaluating its credibility.[18]
These requirements are designed not to stifle your rights to
free expression, which are protected by the First Amendment, but rather to
ensure that the American public and their legislators can discern what or who
is the true source of speech on matters of public concern.
By focusing on American business leaders, of course, I don’t
mean to suggest that they are the only targets of Chinese influence
operations. The Chinese Communist Party also seeks to infiltrate, censor,
or co-opt American academic and research institutions. For example,
dozens of American universities host Chinese government-funded “Confucius
Institutes,” which have been accused of pressuring host universities to silence
discussion or cancel events on topics considered controversial by
Beijing. Universities must stand up for each other; refuse to let the CCP
dictate research efforts or suppress diverse voices; support colleagues and
students who wish to speak their minds; and consider whether any sacrifice of
academic integrity or freedom is worth the price of appeasing the CCP’s
demands.
In a globalized world, American corporations and universities
alike may view themselves as global citizens, rather than American
institutions. But they should remember that what allowed them to succeed
in the first place was the American free enterprise system, the rule of law,
and the security afforded by America’s economic, technological, and military
strength.
Globalization does not always point in the direction of
greater freedom. A world marching to the beat of Communist China’s drums
will not be a hospitable one for institutions that depend on free markets, free
trade, or the free exchange of ideas.
There was a time American companies understood that.
They saw themselves as American and proudly defended American values.
In World War II, for example, the iconic American company,
Disney, made dozens of public information films for the government, including
training videos to educate American sailors on navigation tactics. During
the war, over 90 percent of Disney employees were devoted to the production of
training and public information films. To boost the morale of America’s
troops, Disney also designed insignia that appeared on planes, trucks, flight
jackets, and other military equipment used by American and Allied forces.
I suspect Walt Disney would be disheartened to see how the
company he founded deals with the foreign dictatorships of our day. When
Disney produced Kundun, the 1997 film about the PRC’s oppression of the
Dalai Lama, the CCP objected to the project and pressured Disney to abandon
it. Ultimately, Disney decided that it couldn’t let a foreign power
dictate whether it would distribute a movie in the United States.
But that moment of courage wouldn’t last long. After
the CCP banned all Disney films in China, the company lobbied hard to regain
access. The CEO apologized for Kundun, calling it a “stupid
mistake.”[19] Disney then began courting the PRC
to open a $5.5 billion theme park in Shanghai. As part of that deal,
Disney agreed to give Chinese government officials a role in management.
Of the park’s 11,000 full-time employees, 300 are active members of the
Communist Party. They reportedly display hammer-and-sickle insignia at
their desks and attend Party lectures during business hours.
Like other American companies, Disney may eventually learn
the hard way the cost of compromising its principles. Soon after Disney
opened its park in Shanghai, a Chinese-owned theme park popped up a couple
hundred miles away featuring characters that, according to news reports, looked
suspiciously like Snow White and other Disney trademarks.
American companies must understand the stakes. The
Chinese Communist Party thinks in terms of decades and centuries, while we tend
to focus on the next quarterly earnings report. But if Disney and other
American corporations continue to bow to Beijing, they risk undermining both
their own future competitiveness and prosperity, as well as the classical
liberal order that has allowed them to thrive.
During the Cold War, Lewis Powell — later Justice Powell —
sent an important memorandum to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He noted
that the free enterprise system was under unprecedented attack, and urged American
companies to do more to preserve it. “[T]he time has come,” he said,
“indeed, it is long overdue—for the wisdom, ingenuity and resources of American
business to be marshaled against those who would destroy it.”[20]
So too today. The American people are more attuned
than ever to the threat that the Chinese Communist Party poses not only to our
way of life, but to our very lives and livelihoods. And they will
increasingly call out corporate appeasement.
If individual companies are afraid to make a stand, there is
strength in numbers. As Justice Powell wrote: “Strength lies in
organization, in careful long-range planning and implementation, in consistency
of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing
available only through joint effort, and in the political power available only
through united action and national organizations.”[21] Despite years of acquiescence to
communist authorities in China, American tech companies may finally be finding
their courage through collective action. Following the recent imposition
of the PRC’s draconian national security law in Hong Kong, many big tech
companies, including Facebook, Google, Twitter, Zoom, and LinkedIn, reportedly announced
that they would temporarily suspend compliance with governmental requests for
user data. True to form, communist officials have threatened imprisonment
for noncompliant company employees. We will see if these companies hold
firm. I hope they do. If they stand together, they will provide a
worthy example for other American companies in resisting the Chinese Communist
Party’s corrupt and dictatorial rule.
The CCP has launched an orchestrated campaign, across all of
its many tentacles in Chinese government and society, to exploit the openness
of our institutions in order to destroy them. To secure a world of
freedom and prosperity for our children and grandchildren, the free world will
need its own version of the whole-of-society approach, in which the public and
private sectors maintain their essential separation but work together
collaboratively to resist domination and to win the contest for the commanding
heights of the global economy. America has done that before. If we
rekindle our love and devotion for our country and each other, I am confident
that we—the American people, American government, and American business
together—can do it again. Our freedom depends on it.
[1] Robert C. O’Brien, National Security
Advisor, “The Chinese Communist Party’s Ideology and Global Ambitions,” June
24, 2020,
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/chinese-communist-partys-ideology-global-ambitions.
[2] Christopher A. Wray, Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, “The Threat Posed by the Chinese Government
and the Chinese Communist Party to the Economic and National Security of the
United States,” July 7, 2020,
https://www.fbi.gov/news/speeches/the-threat-posed-by-the-chinese-government-and-the-chinese-communist-party-to-the-economic-and-national-security-of-the-united-states.
[3] Hale Boggs & Gerald R. Ford,
“Impressions of the New China,” H.R. Doc. No. 92-337, at 3 (1972), https://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/document/0358/035800376.pdf.
[4] Evan Osnos, “Making China Great Again,”
January 1, 2018,
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/01/08/making-china-great-again.
[5] Id.; Department of Justice,
“Attorney General William P. Barr Delivers the Keynote Address at the
Department of Justice’s China Initiative Conference,” February 6, 2020, https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-william-p-barr-delivers-keynote-address-department-justices-china.
[6] Valerie Bailey Grasso, “Rare Earth
Elements in National Defense: Background, Oversight Issues, and Options for
Congress,” at 1 (2013), https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R41744.pdf.
[8] Bill Powell, “How America’s Biggest
Companies Made China Great Again,” June 24, 2019,
https://www.newsweek.com/how-americas-biggest-companies-made-china-great-again-1445325.
[9] Rosemary Gibson et al., “China Rx:
Exposing the Risks of America’s Dependence on China for Medicine,” at 124
(2018).
[10] Hearing Exploring the Growing U.S.
Reliance on China’s Biotech and Pharmaceutical Products Before the U.S.-China
Economic and Security Review Comm., 116 Cong., at 25 (2019) (written testimony
of Christopher Priest, Principal Deputy, Deputy Assistant Director, Healthcare
Operations Defense Health Agency), https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/July%2031,%202019%20Hearing%20Transcript.pdf.
[11] U.S.-China Economic and Security
Review Comm., “2019 Report to Congress,” 116 Cong., at 253 (2019),
https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/2019%20Annual%20Report%20to%20Congress.pdf.
[12] James McGregor, “China’s Drive for
‘Indigenous Innovation’—A Web of Industrial Policies,” at 6 (2010), https://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/documents/files/100728chinareport_0_0.pdf.
[13] White House, “United States Strategic
Approach to the People’s Republic of China,” at 5 (2020), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/U.S.-Strategic-Approach-to-The-Peoples-Republic-of-China-Report-5.24v1.pdf.
[14] Edward Wong, “‘Doctor Strange’ Writer
Explains Casting of Tilda Swinton as Tibetan,” April 26, 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/27/world/asia/china-doctor-strange-tibet.html.
[16] Sean O’Connor & Nicholas
Armstrong, Esq., “Directed by Hollywood, Edited by China: How China’s
Censorship and Influence Affect Films Worldwide,” at 6 (2015),
https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/Directed%20by%20Hollywood%20Edited%20by%20China.pdf.
[17] James Griffiths, “The Great Firewall
of China: How to Build and Control an Alternative Version of the Internet,” at
42 (2019).
[18] Department of Justice, “The Scope of
Agency Under FARA,” May 2020,
https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/page/file/1279836/download.
[19] David Barboza & Brooks Barnes,
“How China Won the Keys to Disney’s Magic Kingdom,” June 14, 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/business/international/china-disney.html.
[20] Lewis F. Powell, Jr., “Attack on
American Free Enterprise System,” at 9 (August 23, 1971), https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/assets/usa-courts-secrecy-lobbyist/powell-memo.pdf.
[21] Id. at 11.