In a recent development, White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan voiced his views on China’s planned restrictions on exporting two crucial metals used in the semiconductor, telecommunications, and electric vehicle sectors. His take? China’s new policy may end up backfiring, causing more harm than good to its own interests.

Labeling the move as “self-defeating,” Sullivan shared his belief that such restrictions will only bolster the determination of nations worldwide to reduce their dependencies and enhance the resilience of their supply chains. This would be particularly true for the minerals involved in this situation, according to Sullivan’s interview on CBS’s Face the Nation.

So, what exactly is China planning? Effective August 1, the Asian giant intends to impose export controls on gallium and germanium, including their chemical compounds, in an attempt to safeguard Chinese national security. This decision emerges as the latest chapter in an escalating trade face-off over technology supremacy between China and the Western powers, primarily the U.S. and Europe.

The Biden administration, meanwhile, has been intensifying its diplomatic efforts, conveying a clear message to Beijing. The U.S., it clarifies, doesn’t wish to “decouple” trade relations with China, but will nonetheless stand up for its national security interests.

This fresh development comes on the heels of U.S.-led initiatives aimed at limiting exports of advanced chip-making technology to China. On top of this, it’s rumored that the Biden administration is considering blocking the sales of specific chips integral to running artificial intelligence programs. It’s important to note that China is the global powerhouse in the production of gallium and germanium.

Sullivan reiterated the overarching U.S. position, which was earlier communicated to Chinese authorities by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen during a visit to Beijing.

“Our goal isn’t to terminate all trade with China,” Sullivan clarified. The U.S. envisions a tightly regulated area around technology with national security implications, encapsulated by a sturdy fence – a small yard with a high fence, so to speak.

This approach, he stated, will be upheld, leaving China to chart its own course in response. The underlying message here is clear: despite the expanding realms of technology and their entanglement with national security, nations must strive for fair trade practices while ensuring their own safety. It remains to be seen how this intricate dance of tech, trade, and security will unfold in the global arena.