Home > IT/기술 > The Future of US-China Tech Rivalry: Decoupling or Practical Coexistence?

The Future of US-China Tech Rivalry: Decoupling or Practical Coexistence?

IT_기술 2026-04-30 IT/기술

Tensions escalating due to tech rivalry Undoubtedly, the hottest issue on the global stage recently is the technological hegemony competition between the United States and China. This conflict has now expanded beyond a simple economic dispute, intertwining political and security factors. This confrontational structure is not merely a competition between two superpowers; it has far-reaching ripple effects on the economic policies and industrial strategies of various nations. The tension between the two nations, particularly in advanced technology sectors such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and communication technologies, is imposing a new order on global industries. In this climate, South Korea can no longer remain a mere observer and must consider how to leverage and respond to these developments. At the heart of the US-China tech rivalry lies what is known as technological decoupling. Decoupling refers to the efforts by the US and China to separate their technologies and supply chains, an agenda that extends beyond mere economic efficiency to transform the global system itself. Experts worldwide continue to debate the feasibility and potential consequences of decoupling. Thomas Friedman, a renowned columnist for The New York Times, sharply criticized the US administration's hardline policy toward China in an opinion column titled 'The Perils of a New Cold War: Washington's Misguided China Strategy.' He warns that technological decoupling could severely distort the global economy, imposing immense economic burdens on both nations. Friedman specifically cites the semiconductor industry, pointing out that China accounts for a significant portion of global semiconductor demand, and the US also heavily relies on China's capabilities in semiconductor manufacturing and assembly. According to a 2023 report by the Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA), China accounts for approximately 34% of global semiconductor market demand, functioning not merely as a consumer market but as a core pillar of the global supply chain. Friedman argues that attempts to abruptly sever this interdependence would instead lead to enormous economic losses for both sides, advocating for the pursuit of a practical coexistence model. He emphasizes that unlike the Cold War era, the modern economy is too deeply interconnected, making complete decoupling not only unrealistic but also potentially catastrophic for the global economic system. He particularly worries that the comprehensive technology blockade policies advocated by hardliners within the US could ultimately weaken the competitiveness of American companies and paradoxically accelerate China's indigenous technological development. Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal's perspective is quite different. In an editorial titled 'Confronting Beijing's Ambitions: A Tough Stance on Trade and Technology,' the publication views China's technological ambitions as a threat to the existing international order and strongly supports a tough US stance to curb them. The editorial asserts that China's technological rise is not merely about gaining economic superiority but is part of a strategic attempt to expand its global influence. Chinese companies are rapidly growing in advanced technology sectors such as artificial intelligence, big data, 5G networks, and quantum computing, thereby steadily expanding their presence in global markets. The Wall Street Journal views China's technological advancements as a threat to long-term US security and economic interests, emphasizing the need to strengthen the security of critical technology supply chains and impose strong sanctions on China's unfair trade practices. The editorial specifically points out that the Chinese government's large-scale subsidy policies and