트럼프 2.0 시대, 미국이 188개 중국 기업을 군사 블랙리스트에 추가
US-China Relations in the Trump 2.0 Era: A Timeline - China Briefing
미국이 중국의 주요 테크 기업들을 군사적 흑명단에 추가함에 따라 중미 관계 악화와 관련된 리스크가 증가하고 있습니다.
핵심 요약
2026년 6월, 미국은 알리바바와 바이두를 포함한 188개 중국 기업을 군사 블랙리스트에 추가했습니다.
US-China Relations in the Trump 2.0 Era: A Timeline - China Briefing
핵심요약
- 2026년 6월, 미국이 188개 중국 기업을 군사 블랙리스트에 추가
- 알리바바, 바이두, 중국 이동통신 등 주요 기업 포함
- 2026년 2월 처음 발표 후 철회된 명단 재공개
- 2030년까지 매년 명단 갱신 의무화
도입
미국이 중국 기업 188개에 대한 군사 블랙리스트 추가 조치는 투자자에게 중요한 신호입니다. 이 조치는 중국 기업의 미국 시장 진출을 제한하고, 기술 경쟁력에 대한 미국 정부의 강력한 대응을 보여줍니다. 투자자들은 관련 기업의 재무 상태와 시장 전략을 재평가해야 할 필요가 있습니다.
본문 1: 미국 군사 블랙리스트의 영향
미국이 188개 중국 기업을 군사 블랙리스트에 추가한 조치는 중국 기업의 미국 시장 진출을 크게 제한할 전망입니다. 특히 알리바바와 바이두와 같은 글로벌 기업들은 미국 시장에서의 운영에 큰 어려움을 겪을 가능성이 있습니다. 이는 중국 기업의 수익성과 시장 점유율에 부정적인 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다. 투자자들은 관련 기업의 재무 상태와 시장 전략을 재평가해야 할 필요가 있습니다.
본문 2: 기술 경쟁력과 정책적 대응
이번 조치는 미국이 중국과의 기술 경쟁에서 더 강력한 입장을 취하고 있음을 보여줍니다. 중국 정부는 이에 대응하여 기술 자립과 국내 시장 보호에 더 많은 노력을 기울일 가능성이 있습니다. 이는 중국 기업의 글로벌 진출 전략에 변화를 가져올 수 있습니다. 투자자들은 중국 정부의 정책 변화와 기업의 대응 전략을 주목해야 합니다.
결론
미국이 중국 기업을 군사 블랙리스트에 추가한 조치는 중장기적으로 중국 기업의 글로벌 시장 진출에 큰 영향을 미칠 전망입니다. 투자자들은 관련 기업의 재무 상태와 시장 전략을 재평가하고, 중국 정부의 정책 변화와 기업의 대응 전략을 주목해야 합니다. 향후 미국과 중국 간의 기술 경쟁이 더욱 치열해질 가능성에 대비해야 합니다.
Original Article
US-China Relations in the Trump 2.0 Era: A Timeline - China Briefing
This timeline was created on January 21, 2025, and was last updated on June 17, 2026.
This timeline tracks the developments in the US-China relationship during President Donald Trump’s second term in office.
Previously, China Briefing tracked and documented the US-China trade war in the Trump era and the evolution of US-China relations in the Biden Era . We also track current tariff rates in our article: Breaking Down the US-China Trade Tariffs: What’s in Effect Now?
US-China relations in the Trump 2.0 era
June 8 to 13, 2026: US Adds Top Chinese Tech Firms to Military Blacklist
The US Department of Defense (DoD) has designated a slew of top Chinese tech companies as military companies, adding a total of 188 new entities to the List of Chinese Military Companies (the 1260H List).
The new additions include Alibaba, Baidu, BGI Group, BYD, COSCO Shipping, China Mobile, and China Telecom.
Alibaba and Baidu are “indirectly affiliated with SASAC [State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission]” and a “military-civil fusion contributor to the Chinese defense industrial base” through their affiliation with the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), according to the DoD.
Other companies, such as COSCO, are designated as being directly controlled by SASAC and acting officially on behalf of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
A previous update to the list, which included the addition of these companies, was announced in February, but the DoD withdrew the document shortly after release without explanation at the request of the Pentagon.
Under Section 1260H of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2021, the Secretary of Defense is required to identify and publish a list of “Chinese military companies” annually until 2030. Inclusion on this list does not result in immediate sanctions in the same way that the Commerce Department’s Entity List does, but it prohibits the companies from entering into US defense contracts and sends a signal to investors that they may be subject to regulatory scrutiny and possible restrictions in the future.
The military blacklist will have a more direct impact on biotechnology companies. Under the BIOSECURE Act, which was passed through the NDAA 2026 in December, Chinese biotechnology companies included on the list will be restricted from entering into federal contracts for biotechnology equipment or services. The 2025 update already included three subsidiaries of the Chinese biotech company BGI Group, while WuXi AppTec Co. has been added to the latest update.
Speaking to reporters on June 13, a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Commerce stated that “China expresses its strong dissatisfaction and firm opposition” to the move, adding that the US had “disregarded the consensus reached at the Beijing meeting between the two heads of state” and “unreasonably suppressed Chinese companies”. They also urged the US to withdraw the measures immediately, and warned that China would otherwise “resolutely and forcefully retaliate”.
June 2, 2026: USTR proposes 12.5 percent tariff on goods from the Chinese mainland and Hong Kong
The US Trade Representative (USTR) has proposed a tariff ranging from 10 to 12.5 percent on 60 economies, including China, as a result of a Section 301 investigation into forced labor.
The investigation, one of two launched on March 12, seeks to reinstate tariffs on trading partners following the Supreme Court’s decision striking down tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a core tenet of Trump’s tariff regime.
The USTR alleges that all 60 countries under investigation have “failed both to impose a forced labor import prohibition and to effectively enforce such a prohibition”.
The USTR has proposed a lower 10 percent tariff on countries that already impose or have taken steps to impose a forced labor import prohibition. However, China falls outside this scope and would therefore be subject to the higher 12.5 percent tariff.
A range of items would be exempt from the tariff, including all goods currently subject to the Section 232 tariffs, as well as commodities that cannot be produced in sufficient quantities in the US, such as tea, coffee, and tropical fruits. These goods were previously exempt from the IEEPA tariffs.
The USTR is collecting comments on the proposal until July 6, before a hearing on July 7.
A spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry condemned the move, telling reporters that “China opposes all forms of unilateral tariff measures”, adding that “There is no such thing as ‘forced labor’ in China, and we oppose using it as a pretext for political manipulation”. However, China has thus far stopped short of announcing any counter-measures. This may be due to an agreement reached between the two sides during Trump’s recent visit to Beijing that the US could reinstate tariffs, provided they do not surpass the rate negotiated as part of the Busan agreement.
However, another Section 301 investigation into excess capacity is still ongoing, and any additional tariffs proposed as a result could exceed this threshold.
May 20, 2026: US and China agree to tariff terms but delay extension to one-year truce
China and the US appear to have agreed on terms for the restoration of the US’s now-voided tariffs on China, but have not yet agreed on an extension to the one-year trade truce negotiated in October last year.
In an interview with Reuters on May 19, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he believed that China would accept the restoration of the prior tariff rates through the Section 301 investigations, “as long as they don’t go higher”. The two investigations are set to be concluded this summer.
The Chinese side has obliquely confirmed this. In a May 20 press briefing , the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) told reporters that it hoped the US would “honor its commitments” and ensure that “the level of US tariffs on China will not exceed the level” agreed upon following the Trump-Xi meeting in Busan in October. This meeting resulted in the two sides agreeing to cut two-way tariffs and suspend a range of other trade barriers.
This suggests that the two Section 301 tariff investigations, initiated in March following the Supreme Court’s decision to remove the two tariff lines imposed on China under IEEPA, will each result in a 10 percent duty on Chinese goods, replacing the 10 percent “fentanyl” and 10 percent reciprocal tariff imposed under IEEPA.
It remains unclear whether this means China will rescind the investigations launched in retaliation for the two Section 301 investigations.
While this is not a final resolution to the trade dispute, agreeing on the terms of the tariff restorations reduces the risk that the Section 301 investigations instigate another tariff war.
When asked whether the one-year truce negotiated in Busan would be extended, Bessent said that the US was “not in a rush to extend it”, adding that “Things are stable”.