The Pentagon abruptly withdraws an updated blacklist of Chinese firms allegedly aiding Beijing’s military, raising questions about U.S.-China policy under President Donald Trump.
 |
| The sudden withdrawal of a Pentagon blacklist update — adding major Chinese tech firms and removing chipmakers — highlights tensions between security hawks and trade diplomacy. Image: CH |
Washington, USA — February 14, 2026:
The United States’ abrupt withdrawal of an updated list of Chinese companies allegedly aiding Beijing’s military has exposed a delicate balancing act inside the Trump administration — between hardline national security policy and a fragile trade détente with China.
The document, briefly posted Friday, expanded the Pentagon’s roster to include some of China’s most prominent technology players, such as Alibaba and Baidu. But it also removed two of China’s top memory chipmakers, CXMT and YMTC — a move that immediately alarmed China hawks in Washington.
Within about an hour, the Pentagon asked the Federal Register to withdraw the notice from publication, without explanation. The Defense Department and the White House declined immediate comment.
The timing is politically sensitive. Since the October trade truce between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, Washington has adopted a noticeably softer tone toward Beijing.
The administration recently allowed Nvidia to resume exports of its second-most advanced AI chips to China and delayed rules that would have restricted thousands of Chinese firms from purchasing U.S. technology. Reuters also reported that several national security measures — including a potential ban on China Telecom’s U.S. operations — were shelved.
Against that backdrop, the rapid posting and removal of the Pentagon’s list suggests internal friction over how aggressively to confront China’s technological rise while maintaining diplomatic momentum ahead of Trump’s expected April visit to China.
The removal of CXMT and YMTC was particularly controversial. Both firms are central to China’s push for semiconductor self-sufficiency — a cornerstone of its military-civil fusion strategy.
Critics argue that advanced domestic memory production could accelerate China’s artificial intelligence and defense capabilities. Chris McGuire, a former National Security Council official under President Joe Biden, said removing the chipmakers would make little sense if the administration is simultaneously adding other pillars of China’s AI ecosystem, such as Alibaba and Baidu.
That apparent inconsistency has fueled speculation that the withdrawal was driven by procedural disagreements rather than a strategic reversal. Eric Sayers of the American Enterprise Institute suggested the episode may reflect unresolved interagency debates over which companies should remain on or off the list.
Although inclusion on the Pentagon list does not automatically impose sanctions, it carries significant consequences. Under a new law, the Defense Department will eventually be barred from contracting with listed firms. The designation also sends a broader signal to U.S. agencies and defense suppliers about companies viewed as linked to China’s military.
Some firms have challenged their inclusion in court. Alibaba, for instance, rejected any connection to China’s military and threatened legal action.
The now-withdrawn document also added electric vehicle maker BYD, biotech firm WuXi AppTec and robotics company RoboSense — underscoring how concerns extend beyond chips to the broader advanced technology ecosystem.
Major Chinese companies such as Tencent and battery giant CATL were already on the list.
The episode illustrates a deeper tension in U.S. policy: how to constrain China’s military-linked technology ambitions without derailing economic stabilization efforts.
For security hawks, easing pressure on Chinese semiconductor champions risks accelerating Beijing’s AI-enabled military modernization. For trade pragmatists, aggressive blacklisting could jeopardize fragile negotiations and inflame markets.
The Pentagon’s fleeting publication — and swift withdrawal — of the updated list suggests that, at least for now, that debate remains unresolved.
As Washington prepares for high-level diplomacy in Beijing, the question is not simply which companies appear on a list, but whether U.S. strategy toward China’s technology rise is entering a period of recalibration — or confusion.