The U.S. China science and technology pact is on the brink now – IP protection key to continuation.

SINGAPORE—When a landmark science and technology agreement between the U.S. and China reached its expiration in late February without an extension, it plunged the academic community in both countries into uncertainty. Neither country confirmed an extension for nine days. Had it lapsed? Not really, it turns out. But the extension was made so quietly as to be imperceptible, without an official statement published online. And for a second time in a row, it would only keep the agreement alive for another six months while Washington and Beijing continue negotiations. The U.S.-China Science and Technology Agreement was the first bilateral deal signed after Washington formally recognized the Communist-ruled People’s Republic of China in 1979. At the time, China was a scientific laggard and the U.S. saw the pact as a way to influence China’s behavior and developmental trajectory. Nowadays, each country is simultaneously the other’s biggest research partner and its biggest rival, as the world’s two largest economies compete for global leadership in areas such as quantum computing, biotechnology and nanoscience. Over the decades, the agreement was renewed as a matter of course, for five-year extensions, even as more U.S. institutions grew increasingly wary of collaborating with Chinese counterparts. Then in August of last year, with bilateral tensions at a boil, the two sides could manage only a six-month extension—just enough to keep the landmark deal from collapsing. As the next deadline approached in February this year, the tone of bilateral ties was better—though not enough for a full renewal. The stealthiness of the latest move, and the prolonged nature of the deeper discussions, highlight the complex state of U.S.-China relations, as both countries try to work out new parameters of engagement and rivalry while vying for global technological and military supremacy. “The two sides have to figure out how to operate and engage with each other as peer colleagues and peer competitors,” said Deborah Seligsohn, an assistant professor of political science at Villanova University. Both proponents and critics say the agreement hasn’t kept up with changes in bilateral ties and the two countries’ respective strategic priorities. Critics of the deal say that in fields such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing, clearer distinctions are needed between military and civilian uses. Trade tensions over clean technologies such as electric vehicles, solar panels and batteries have also been growing. The U.S. and China agreed in a separate deal last year to hold talks aimed at addressing the risks of artificial intelligence. Both sides have also collaborated on international climate diplomacy and say cooperation is necessary in areas such as public health and food security. “Strengthened protections in the agreement will be essential for any longer-term extension,” the State Department wrote in response to a request for comment on the deal, adding that officials were realistic about China’s national priorities and domestic legal landscape.