Assessing the Biden Administration’s China Strategy: Outcomes and Challenges in the Shadow of Trump’s Second Term
Introduction
The Biden administration entered office in 2021 with a clear mandate to recalibrate U.S. strategy toward China, emphasizing a three-pronged approach of domestic investment, alliance coordination, and targeted competition.
Four years later, as Donald Trump begins his second term, the legacy of Biden’s policies—and their resilience in the face of a shifting geopolitical landscape—demands scrutiny.
The article evaluates Biden’s “invest, align, compete” framework's successes and shortcomings, analyzes its impact on U.S.-China relations, and examines how Trump’s renewed agenda is reshaping the trajectory of great-power rivalry.
Drawing on economic data, policy documents, and expert assessments, the analysis reveals that while Biden’s strategy strengthened America’s technological and diplomatic posture, structural challenges in bilateral relations persist, exacerbated by Trump’s return to unilateralism and tariff-centric tactics.
Strategic Foundations of Biden’s China Policy
From Engagement to Systemic Competition
The Biden administration inherited a U.S.-China relationship that was fundamentally transformed by the Trump era.
Where previous administrations had pursued engagement to integrate China into the global order, Biden’s team adopted a paradigm of systemic competition, framing the 2020s as the “decisive decade” to outcompete China.
This shift was formalized in the 2022 National Security Strategy, which identified China as “the only competitor with both the intent and capability to reshape the international order.” The strategy’s emphasis on limiting China’s technological ascent while bolstering U.S. innovation marked a departure from Trump’s transactional focus on trade deficits.
The “Invest, Align, Compete” Framework
Biden’s approach rested on three pillars
Domestic Investment
Legislation like the CHIPS and Science Act ($52 billion for semiconductor manufacturing) aimed to reduce reliance on Asian supply chains and counter China’s subsidized industries.
Alliance Coordination
Revitalizing partnerships through initiatives like the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) to counterbalance China’s regional influence.
Asymmetric Competition
Export controls on advanced semiconductors and AI technologies to almost dismantle China’s military-civil fusion programs.
This framework addressed vulnerabilities exposed during Trump’s tenure, particularly overreliance on Chinese manufacturing and fragmented global alliances.
By 2024, the Commerce Department had disbursed $38 billion under the CHIPS Act, attracting firms like TSMC and Samsung to build fabs in Arizona. However, critics argue that these measures merely accelerated the trends set in motion by Trump’s initial tariffs and Huawei sanctions.
Economic Measures: Tariffs, Subsidies, and Decoupling
Continuity and Expansion of Trump-Era Tariffs
Contrary to expectations of a détente, Biden retained Trump’s Section 301 tariffs on $370 billion of Chinese imports while expanding restrictions to emerging sectors.
The administration imposed new tariffs on solar panels, EVs, and critical minerals, arguing they were necessary to counter China’s “non-market practices.” By 2024, the average tariff rate on Chinese goods under Biden reached 19.3%, slightly above Trump’s 19%.
This continuity reflected a bipartisan consensus on confronting China’s state-led economic model, though Biden’s team framed tariffs as one tool among many rather than a centerpiece.
The CHIPS Act and Industrial Policy
The CHIPS Act epitomized Biden’s industrial strategy, targeting China’s dominance in semiconductor manufacturing (92% of advanced U.S. chips came from Taiwan). Grants to Intel, TSMC, and Samsung aimed to rebuild U.S. capacity, with the first Arizona fab operational by 2025.
While this reduced immediate supply chain risks, experts noted China’s parallel $150 billion semiconductor investment meant the technological gap would take decades to close.
Escalating Tech War: Export Controls and Investment Restrictions
In October 2022, Biden escalated the tech conflict with sweeping export controls, cutting China off from advanced chips and manufacturing equipment. Expanding in 2023–2024, these measures marked a “strategic decoupling” in critical sectors, slowing China’s AI and supercomputing progress by an estimated 5–7 years.
The Commerce Department also restricted U.S. venture capital in Chinese AI, quantum computing, and biotech firms, affecting $42 billion in annual investments.
Diplomatic Strategy: Alliance Building vs. Unilateralism
Rebuilding Trans-Pacific Partnerships
Biden’s emphasis on multilateralism yielded mixed results. The IPEF secured agreements on supply chain resilience and clean energy with 14 nations but lacked market access provisions, limiting its appeal compared to China’s Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).
Quad (U.S., Japan, India, Australia) cooperation deepened on maritime security and infrastructure, yet India’s reluctance to openly counter China highlighted alignment challenges.
Europe’s Reluctant Alignment
In Europe, Biden persuaded the EU to adopt its first economic security strategy in 2023, restricting exports of advanced machinery to China. However, divisions persisted, with Germany resisting broader decoupling to protect its $200 billion annual trade with China.
Despite U.S. pressure, the Netherlands’ ASML, a key semiconductor equipment maker, continued selling older lithography systems to China, underscoring alliance friction.
Trump’s Return to Unilateralism
Trump’s 2025 policy reversals—inviting Xi Jinping to his inauguration, lifting the TikTok ban, and floating a 10% “universal tariff”—signaled a shift from strategic competition to transactional dealmaking.
His February 2025 memo directing CFIUS to block Chinese investments in tech, energy, and ports marked a harsher stance. Still, erratic tariff threats (e.g., linking fentanyl to trade) risked alienating allies pursuing “China+1” supply chain diversification.
Technological Competition: Gains and Setbacks
Semiconductor Leadership Reclaimed?
Biden’s tech controls achieved short-term wins. China’s chip import bill fell 18% in 2024 as U.S.-allied firms like ASML and Applied Materials halted advanced equipment sales. SMIC, China’s top foundry, struggled to mass-produce chips below 7nm, delaying AI ambitions.
However, Chinese firms adapted by stockpiling chips and developing mature-node (28nm) applications, maintaining a 65% global market share in legacy semiconductors.
AI and Quantum Computing Race
U.S. export restrictions slowed but did not halt China’s AI progress. Beijing redirected $30 billion to domestic GPU development, producing the Hygon Dhyana II, which achieved 80% of NVIDIA A100 performance.
China’s Jiuzhang 3.0 prototype in quantum computing claimed a “quantum advantage” in 2024, though practical applications remained years behind U.S. and European projects.
Green Tech: A Looming Battleground
Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act ($369 billion for clean energy) spurred a 210% increase in U.S. EV battery production but failed to displace China’s dominance. Chinese firms like CATL and BYD controlled 68% of global battery output in 2025, leveraging Indonesia’s nickel reserves and European joint ventures to bypass U.S. tariffs.
Trump’s Second-Term Policies: Disruption and Continuity
Tariff Escalation and Supply Chain Shock
Within weeks of taking office, Trump doubled down on tariffs:
February 2025
20% across-the-board tariffs on Chinese goods, up from Biden’s 19.3%.
March 2025
Proposed 25% levies on Chinese-built ships and Mexican imports with Chinese components.
These measures disrupted multinationals' “China+1” strategies, such as Apple and Tesla, which had shifted assembly to Vietnam and Mexico.
In response, the Shanghai Composite Index fell 9%, while U.S. inflation ticked up to 4.2%.
Investment Restrictions and Tax Treaty Suspension
Trump’s February 2025 executive order expanded Biden’s outbound investment curbs to include public equities, forcing pension funds to divest $156 billion in Chinese tech stocks. The administration also moved to suspend the 1984 U.S.-China Tax Treaty, threatening double taxation for U.S. firms in China.
Taiwan and Military Posturing
Contrary to expectations of a softer line, Trump approved a $2 billion F-16V sale to Taiwan in January 2025, prompting China to sanction Lockheed Martin and Raytheon.
The PLA’s 2025 military budget, unveiled at the National People’s Congress, rose 9.8% to $280 billion, emphasizing hypersonic and cyber capabilities.
Assessing Outcomes: Did Biden’s Strategy Succeed?
Strengthened U.S. Capacity, Fragile Alliances
Biden’s industrial policies revitalized strategic sectors:
Semiconductors
U.S. share of global advanced chip production rose from 12% (2020) to 18% (2025).
Critical Minerals
Domestic lithium mining surged 300%, reducing reliance on China from 80% to 65%.
However, Trump’s tariff-centric approach risks undermining these gains by alienating allies. Mexico’s refusal to impose secondary tariffs on Chinese goods in March 2025 exposed cracks in the hemispheric front.
China’s Resilience and Adaptation
Beijing responded to U.S. pressures with:
“Dual Circulation” Strategy
Boosting domestic consumption (75% of GDP growth in 2024) while deepening ties with the Global South via BRICS+.
Tech Self-Sufficiency
R&D spending will hit $620 billion in 2025 (2.6% of GDP), focusing on mature-node chips and open-source AI models.
Despite Biden’s efforts, China’s economy is projected to overtake the U.S. in PPP terms by 2027, though nominal GDP parity remains distant.
Conclusion
A Foundation Undermined?
The Biden administration’s China strategy achieved measurable progress in rebalancing technological and economic power, yet Trump’s disruptive second-term agenda imperiled its legacy.
Biden’s focus on alliance-building and domestic investment addressed structural weaknesses that were neglected during Trump’s first term. Still, the lack of bipartisan consensus on long-term competition left the strategy vulnerable to reversal.
As Trump prioritizes short-term economic nationalism over coordinated containment, China exploits divisions to advance its “strategic patience” doctrine.
The coming years will test whether Biden’s foundational investments in chips, clean energy, and alliances can withstand the turbulence of renewed unilateralism—or whether the “decisive decade” will slip into an era of fragmented globalization and unmanaged rivalry.
Our future updates will be linked to the implementation of Trump’s second-term policies and their global ramifications.
