Proposed drones ban shows extreme irrationality of US politics

The US House of Representatives passed the "Countering CCP Drones Act" legislation this week. It asserts, without offering any evidence, that all Chinese-made drones, particularly those manufactured by the popular company DJI, pose a "national security threat," and hence seeks a blanket ban through the Federal Communications Commission.

Industry experts say there is little reason why such a law will not pass the Senate at this time, as it is simply the latest in a long line of attacks by the United States against Chinese technology, which is supported by a bipartisan majority in Washington. However, this bill will have far-reaching implications, perhaps causing enormous harm to American amateurs, professionals and organizations, as well as the collapse of an entire domestic market with no viable replacement.

The current state of American politics is one of widespread frenzy surrounding China. Chinese tech products, such as electric cars, Huawei and TikTok, are unfairly labeled as a "national security threat" and targeted. Despite being presented as legitimate "concerns" in the mainstream media, the attacks lack serious evidence and are based on McCarthyist hypotheses, which imply that the target will "spy" on behalf of China, leading to outright bans.

This global frenzy peaked in early 2023 when the United States unilaterally declared a high-altitude metrological balloon a "spy balloon." However, it has been applied to almost everything else, resulting in a media echo chamber that provides no opposing viewpoints, balance, or explanation.

Despite this, business insiders have overwhelmingly rejected the planned ban, recognizing the politically motivated intentions behind it and the harm it will do.

In one piece published on the news site TechRadar, a columnist notes: "In much the same way that no one has yet definitively proved how TikTok is stealing our data and putting us at risk, I can find no proof that DJI drones are putting the US at risk." The writer continues with the following observation: "My frustration level with a US government that's sliding Chinese technology companies from safe and acceptable to dangerous and bannable like so many beads on an abacus is at an all-time high."

He then accuses the US government of acting capriciously, with little input from US citizens and organizations that are using these technologies. "DJI drones remain the best in the business, and I have no idea what the [party] might do with my flight plan over a crevasse in upstate NY or Jones Beach. I'm not sure I care. It's not actionable information. Most US social media companies have far more information about me and have shown less care with it than foreign entities."

Furthermore, the article states that DJI currently accounts for 70 percent of the American market, with its devices being utilized by researchers, police, photographers and hobbyists, among other things.

The article asserts that US-built drones are "mediocre" and that there are no suitable replacements, implying that the prohibition will destroy the entire domestic market. It goes on to say, "If DJI is prohibited, which is not yet clear, I'm not sure what would fill the void. No other drone company in the United States has the same level of recognition. In all honesty, most drone startups pale in comparison to DJI's publicly available flyers. The six top goods on our best drone list are all DJI models.

Thus, what distinguishes the DJI ban from other US attacks on Chinese products is that it represents the most extreme example to date of the United States imposing economic and technological backwardness on itself in the name of opposing China, motivated by spite, opportunistic paranoia, and small-minded protectionism. Of course, as with Huawei 5G and electric cars, among other things, US lawmakers consider it perfectly okay to stymie progress, raise consumer costs, and inconvenience people because they have completely and unequivocally lost their minds about everything related to China.

(The author, a postgraduate student of Chinese studies at Oxford University, is an English analyst on international relations. The views are his own.)