CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Authored by Benjamin Weingarten via RealClearWire,

At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 - with face masks, gloves, and other basic protections in high demand - Chinese leaders threatened to plunge America into the "mighty sea of coronavirus" by withholding essential medical supplies in retaliation for measures such as the U.S. travel ban on visitors from China.

The threat, issued through a Chinese Communist Party organ, brought into stark relief China's strategy to subdue would-be foes by rendering them reliant on its exports for life's necessities - prompting a pledge from U.S. policymakers to address supply chain issues that made the country vulnerable to a hostile power.

Six years later, despite a raft of initiatives - including tariffs, made-in-America requirements, and the makings of a responsive U.S. industrial policy embraced by the Biden and Trump administrations - America's effort to reduce dependence on China in pivotal sectors has been slow and faces a slew of challenges.

Headlines heralding the decline in U.S. imports from China to levels not seen since the depths of the pandemic mask the fact that America's chief rival continues to control chokepoints in supply chains that provide urgent military assets, key technologies, and important medicines.

The Chinese government recently demonstrated its ability to weaponize critical sectors when it responded to U.S. tariffs by restricting exports of rare earth materials and magnets that are critical to American defense systems and weapons. War-gamers have indicated that the control over those supply chains may become paramount should China invade Taiwan or engage in other hostilities that might draw an American military response. Some estimates have indicated that such a struggle could wipe out 10% of global GDP - albeit damaging China and the U.S. alike.

Some experts say the major stumbling block is the private sector, which remains at odds with policymakers in tilting away from China, and has long relished its large market and cheap labor pool. Isaac Stone Fish, the CEO of Strategy Risks, a China-focused business risk analysis firm, told RealClearInvestigations that "Despite all the tough talk," and economic and geopolitical tensions, his firm's analysis shows that dozens of major U.S. companies have increased their engagement with China during 2026.

To treat supply chain threats as an economic problem and leave it to be addressed by free enterprise - rather than as a national security challenge requiring whole-of-society mobilization - is a fatal error, according to Leland Miller, a U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission member.

"[A]s long as you allow market dynamics to dictate what the U.S. is doing...you're going to lose," Miller said.

China's Commanding Position

The Trump and Biden administrations have both highlighted the significance of the supply chain challenge to our national security, economic security, and public health. These include China's commanding positions in:

• Global rare earth materials, where China controls more than 60% of production and nearly 90% of refining capacity, giving it a chokehold on inputs vital to the manufacturing of everything from automobiles and medical equipment to defense products and spacecrafts;
• Components or materials key to U.S. military hardware, ranging from U.S. aircraft carriers to missile defense systems and tanks, which are produced in or sourced from China;
• Foundational semiconductors, used in practically all applications that include advanced chips from vehicles to medical devices and military systems, where China is the global production leader;
• Printed circuit board fabrication, a core component in modern electronics, from telecommunications satellites to ventilators and smartphones, where Chinese firms control more than two-thirds of the global market;
• Medicine, a field in which China controls approximately 90% of the global supply of key starting materials in active pharmaceutical ingredients in generic drugs, with over 60% of U.S. drugs containing key inputs from China and India.

To attain these positions, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission wrote in its 2025 annual report, "China has deliberately pursued a strategy of expanding production and deepening global dependence on Chinese exports while reducing its own reliance on imports. This strategy builds on decades of industrial policy that led to a concentration of supply chains in China and undercut competitors by flooding global markets with subsidized, underpriced goods."

China's tactics in pursuit of this strategy have ranged from government subsidies and currency manipulation to intellectual property theft and industrial espionage, forced labor, and product "dumping at artificially low prices - and, as it has increasingly been met with resistance, export controls."

Tariffs and Stockpiles

The tariff regime, enacted during the first Trump administration and mostly continued under the Biden administration, is one key tactic the U.S. government has used to counter China's playbook. Other policies have included directly stockpiling critical resources; securing strategic sectors through fostering international alliances and public-private partnerships; permitting reform; trade enforcement actions; incentives for re-shoring; and export controls.

"This is a whole-of-government effort across key industry sectors including critical minerals, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, autos, steel, aluminum, and copper," White House spokesman Kush Desai told RCI. "Hundreds of billions of dollars in private investment commitments across these sectors reflects how the administration's long-term agenda continues to bear fruit."

Still, experts remain concerned that the U.S. is ill-equipped to solve the complex problem.

Ideally, experts say, the U.S. government would comprehensively map the supply chain risks and work with all relevant stakeholders to mitigate them. The Trump administration has focused in particular on rare earth minerals and artificial intelligence technologies. Similarly, the Biden administration laid out a number of areas of concern from batteries to biotech as detailed in its Quadrennial Supply Chain Review. And, to varying degrees, both administrations attempted to coordinate their risk-mitigation efforts with foreign governments and the private sector.

Yet experts lamented that the government lacks the information necessary to comprehensively identify and attack supply chain vulnerabilities - rendering policies to date "ad hoc," according to Meg Reiss, a former national security staffer on Capitol Hill and founder of SolidIntel, which uses AI to identify supply chain risks.

Leland Miller, who was appointed to the USCC by Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, told RCI that the U.S. still has to do a lot of foundational work to to "map the [various] supply chains" and to identify "the vulnerabilities."

Miller pins the slow progress to the lack of data from an often resistant private sector.

USCC Vice Chair Mike Kukien, an appointee of Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, concurred, asserting that "anytime Congress has attempted to wade into this space of...pulling information out of the supply chain, the first people to come and bang on your door and say, 'Don't do it,' is industry."

Pushback From Business

Companies argue that identifying areas where they are reliant on China and transitioning operations elsewhere would threaten their business models. They also claim it is costly and onerous to collect information on the multiple tiers of suppliers on whom they rely, and in some cases, they lack the wherewithal to do so. For its part, China has sought to impose costs - including ending market access - on companies that cooperate with supply chain transparency efforts.

Miles Yu, who served as principal China policy planner on strategy at the State Department during the first Trump administration, identified "Wall Street and Silicon Valley globalists" as influential opponents of Washington's efforts to combat China's supply chain chokepoints more broadly.

The task is further complicated by China's efforts to avoid Trump's tariffs by routing their products through more U.S.-friendly countries as a workaround.

"China's ability to sort of hide its hand from a manufacturing perspective, unless there's a real attempt to do country of origin work, is pretty strong," Joshua Hodges, a former senior director at the National Security Council, told RCI. "And you're seeing that in the defense industrial complex. You're seeing it in cell phones. You're seeing it really in any place where there are parts of a supply chain that have become commodities."

Miles Yu concurs. "[T]oo many opportunistic allies and partners in EU and Asia [are] not in sync with Washington," as well, making grappling with the global nature of the problem even harder, he said.

On the U.S. side, basic problems of coordination within the government threaten even the most comprehensive effort to take on the supply chain challenge. The National Defense Authorization Act is perhaps the seminal bill aligning the executive and legislative branches on China policy. Reiss notes that "the way...the legislative cycle works," when it comes to mitigating supply chain risk, "everything's based on NDAA timing."

Should one NDAA cycle pass in which vulnerabilities go unaddressed, then remedies will not be included for the next "year and a half for beginning implementation, much less being fully implemented. So the timelines start becoming significant if we don't have movement."

Bright Spots

Despite their bearish conclusions, experts did note some bright spots. Stone Fish called tariffs "the biggest forcing mechanism yet - high enough costs might finally do what politics couldn't. But China controls critical minerals that American factories can't do without, so escalation cuts both ways."

Miller noted that tariffs may be an effective defensive tool for protecting industries under attack from a China that often floods the market with goods to undercut foreign competitors. Tariffs, he says, should be used to ringfence critical sectors as their participants shift to alternative suppliers and rebuild their domestic production capacities. "But you can't just throw around a tariff wall and expect industry to miraculously develop domestically as a result of that," he says.

Miles Yu has a more sanguine view. He said that in the areas of defense, automobiles, and telecommunications services, the U.S. has been making progress on mitigating supply chain risk from China. And he believes that prohibitive tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum, automobiles, including electronic vehicles, green products, and "enhanced SEC scrutiny" on publicly traded Chinese companies in the U.S. have borne fruit. Conversely, he argued that pharma and bio product restrictions remain wanting.

While concerned about the lack of strategic coherence in America's risk mitigation efforts to date, Reiss hopes that efforts from the Defense Department reflect increasing strategic discipline. She cites, for example, initiatives out of the Office of Strategic Capital - which has backed domestic processing of rare earth minerals - as positives.

In the long term, Miller says, the U.S. only has to modify, not reinvent, the supply chain. "It's not that we have to go back and figure out where every single input to every single supply chain is," he says. "We have to make sure that enough of it comes from outside of China... so that China doesn't have a stranglehold over any particular supply chain no matter what happens."

In the interim, in the wake of the May 2026 summit between President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, the American side touted China's stated commitment to "address U.S. concerns regarding supply chain shortages related to rare earths and other critical minerals," as well as "prohibitions or restrictions on the sale of rare earth production and processing equipment and technologies."

Still, the conflict between the two nations continues. Earlier this month, the Department of War added nearly two dozen Chinese companies to its blacklist. In apparent response, Chinese authorities imposed trade restrictions on dozens of U.S. defense companies, including barring exports to two American rare earth producers.

Authored by Arthur Zhang via The Epoch Times,

The United States has taken coordinated action against a Southeast Asia-based scam and money-laundering network that officials say used forced-labor compounds and online investment fraud to steal billions of dollars from Americans.

The Treasury Department on June 23 sanctioned 35 individuals and entities linked to the Prince Group Transnational Criminal Organization, a Cambodia-based network that U.S. authorities say operated scam compounds and laundered illicit proceeds through shell companies and financial channels.

Huione Group is a Cambodia-based conglomerate that U.S. authorities say provided laundering services for scam proceeds, including through Huione Guarantee, also known as Haowang Guarantee.

The Justice Department separately announced the seizure of a cloud-computing account it says helped run Huione-linked laundering services used by scam operations.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, also proposed extending a section 311 anti-money-laundering measure against Huione Group to H-Pay Service PLC and successor entities.

Together, the actions target three parts of a scam-and-laundering ecosystem: the Prince Group network, accused of running scam compounds; Huione-linked services, accused of moving illicit proceeds; and online infrastructure, allegedly used to support laundering services.

Treasury said U.S. authorities estimate that Americans lost at least $10 billion in 2024 to Southeast Asia-based scam operations, a 66 percent increase from the prior year.

"Scam centers in Southeast Asia steal billions of dollars from American victims each year," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in the announcement. "Treasury will continue using its tools to disrupt the networks behind this egregious fraud and protect Americans."

Prince Group Network

Prince Group is a Cambodia-based conglomerate led by Chen Zhi, also known as Vincent, whom U.S. authorities have accused of directing forced-labor scam compounds across Cambodia.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) unsealed an indictment against Chen in October 2025, charging him with wire fraud conspiracy and money laundering conspiracy. Prosecutors alleged that people held against their will in Prince Group-linked compounds were forced to carry out cryptocurrency investment scams. Chen remains at large, according to the DOJ.

Concurrently with the DOJ indictment, the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, FinCEN, and the UK Foreign Office imposed coordinated sanctions on 146 targets tied to the Prince Group network. It alleged at the time that Prince Group operated online investment scams targeting Americans and others worldwide and used a web of businesses and shell companies to launder illicit proceeds.

The June 23 action expands that pressure. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctioned nine individuals and 26 entities linked to Prince Group, including people it described as leaders, scam-compound investors, and front companies.

The Treasury said the new targets include Hu Xiaowei, whom it described as Prince Group TCO's "second-in-command," as well as several people it said were involved in investment, management, payment-gateway, or company-director roles tied to the network.

The Epoch Times could not contact Prince Group for comment.

DOJ Seizes Cloud Account

In a concurrent action, the DOJ said it seized a cloud computing account used by Huione Group's subsidiaries that allegedly facilitated the movement of proceeds from cryptocurrency investment fraud, cyber scams, and other criminal activity across blockchains and into the banking system.

Huione Guarantee allegedly operated Telegram channels that included discussions about stolen credit card and identity information, malware-enabled theft proceeds, the procurement of individuals for human trafficking schemes, and the laundering of proceeds from romance and investment scams.

The department said the seizure is part of Operation Riptide, an FBI campaign targeting the actors, infrastructure, and financial networks behind cybercrime, cyber-enabled crime, and fraud against Americans.

"The FBI is committed to disrupting the infrastructure and services that cybercriminals rely on to profit from their illegal activity," said Brett Leatherman, assistant director of the FBI's Cyber Division, according to the DOJ's June 23 press release. "Today's action targets a key enabler of cyber-enabled fraud and money laundering schemes."

DOJ said the FBI's San Francisco Field Office and IRS Criminal Investigation are investigating the seizure case.

FinCEN Moves Against H-Pay

FinCEN's notice of proposed rulemaking says Huione Group remains a foreign financial institution of primary money-laundering concern and that the existing section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act targeting Huione Group remains in effect.

The proposed amendment would add H-Pay Service PLC and any successor entity to the Huione Group definition.

FinCEN said the proposal is intended to address what it described as Huione Group's effort to circumvent the earlier measure by continuing to operate under a different name. The agency said H-Pay has effectively assumed Huione Pay PLC's business role within Huione Group.

The proposal is not final. Written comments on the H-Pay proposal must be submitted within 30 days after the NPRM is published in the Federal Register.

Scam Operations Target Americans

The Treasury said one common scheme involves digital-asset investment fraud. Citing FinCEN's 2023 alert, Treasury said perpetrators often contact targets by text message, build trust through claims of friendship or romance, and steer victims into purported digital-asset investments on websites controlled by scammers.

Southeast Asia-based criminal organizations often recruit workers under false pretenses, including fake technology or customer-service jobs tied to casinos, resorts, and front companies. Once workers arrive at the compounds, operators confiscate passports and use debt bondage, physical violence, threats of forced prostitution, and other methods to coerce them into scamming people online, the Treasury said.

The Justice Department said reports of cyber-enabled fraud involving cryptocurrency continue to rise, with complainants reporting more than $7.2 billion in losses to the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center in 2025 from cryptocurrency investment fraud alone.