'China Week' will be bitter pill to swallow for the U.S.

Editor's note: John Gong is a professor at the University of International Business and Economics (UIBE) and vice president for research and strategy at the UIBE-Israel. The article reflects the author's views and not necessarily those of CGTN.

As the first in a series of the 20-odd bills brewing in the U.S. Congress, the House of Representative passed the Biosecure Act on September 9 by a vote of 306 to 81. The legislation imposes penalties on U.S. pharmaceutical companies that receive federal funding for working with five Chinese drug services firms — WuXi AppTec, WuXi Biologics, BGI Group, MGI, and Complete Genomics, citing concerns over national security. According to the text of this piece of legislation, the impacted U.S. pharmaceutical companies have until 2032 to totally decouple from their Chinese suppliers. It is reported that the Senate version will be passed as well so that it is most likely to be made into law.

But this is just the beginning of a hysterical blitz of unprecedented anti-China moves from the U.S. Congress. Reportedly the ensuing acts waiting to be voted upon on the House floor cover a wide range of areas, from alleged China's political influence to "petty things" like drones and batteries. China is effectively becoming a punching bag hanging right in front of the podium in the House chamber.

Let's look at what this Biosecure Act is supposed to do and whether it resonates with the realities that it proclaims to head off. The Act intends to achieve two purposes. One is to whip American pharmaceutical companies into decoupling from their Chinese compound suppliers. Medical compounds are the basic integrated ingredients of making drugs. Once exported to the U.S., drug companies can easily process them into pills that go into prescriptions or over-the-counter markets. China has a comparative advantage in making these compounds.

But when products like vitamins become national security level concerns, it's no surprise that other drugs fall into the national security category. The argument here is that too much reliance on China is dangerous, especially in times of political tension. That is OK, maybe for some drugs. But why extending to such a large set of drugs, and particularly shutting the Chinese companies out? This is certainly not the "diversification" argument anymore.

The other purpose is to sever ties between the American and Chinese pharmaceutical companies in areas of cooperation such as clinical trials, joint research and other mutually beneficial activities. The Act sponsor said that "[the Bill] is a necessary step toward protecting Americans' sensitive health-care data from the CCP before these companies become more embedded in the U.S. economy." Again the argument of national security is a tenuous one, as the targeted companies have made it clear that they do not have access to Americans' personal data in their operations. For instance, WuXi AppTec has publicly stated that it "does not have a human genomics business or collect human genomic data in the U.S., China or anywhere else."

The real purpose is very clear: it is to attempt to maintain American pharmaceutical industry's lead and hinder China's development. Washington sees that China is gradually closing the gap in several technology areas and is actually leading in batteries and electric cars for instance. The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are a few remaining bastions of America dominance and politicians in Washington don't want to see them go.

But the question is why should politicians in Washington make decisions on behalf of company executives, who arguably have an even more pertinent interest in keeping their technology edge? They would be the first ones to take actions to safeguard their corporate interests. This would reflect the ultimate tenet of free market competition that America cherishes so much.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter to discover the latest commentaries on CGTN Opinion Section.)