Pentagon's Section 1260H List Expands to 188 Chinese Firms: Legitimate Security or Economic Containment?
The U.S. Department of Defense has expanded its Section 1260H list under the National Defense Authorization Act to include 188 Chinese companies — among them BYD, Alibaba, and Baidu — flagging them as allegedly linked to China's military. The move raises serious questions about whether Washington is pursuing genuine national security policy or using security framing as a tool of economic competition.
Highlights
- The U.S. DoD expanded its NDAA Section 1260H list to 188 Chinese companies, including BYD, Alibaba, and Baidu, flagging them as allegedly linked to China's military.
- Inclusion on the Section 1260H list does not constitute a sanction; it is a risk-flagging mechanism signaling potential dual-use or civil-military fusion concerns.
- Nanyang Technological University analyst Stefanie Kam noted that many firms were designated for participating in state programs, not for verifiable military contracts, raising due-process concerns.
- BYD has surpassed Tesla in global EV sales, prompting questions about whether U.S. national security designations are being conflated with industrial competitiveness.
- Beijing is expected to retaliate asymmetrically, with potential measures including equivalent blacklists, regulatory pressure on U.S. firms in China, and diplomatic signaling.
Pentagon Expands Section 1260H List to 188 Chinese Firms, Sparking Controversy
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has significantly expanded its Section 1260H list under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), adding 188 Chinese companies — including BYD, Alibaba, and Baidu — to a roster of firms allegedly linked to China's military. The move marks another sharp escalation in the technology and economic rivalry between Washington and Beijing. This analysis draws on BBC correspondent Osmond Chia's report, "US adds BYD to list of companies allegedly tied to Chinese military."
What the List Actually Does: Risk Flagging, Not Sanctions
A critical distinction must be made upfront: inclusion on the Section 1260H list does not constitute a formal sanction. The list functions primarily as a risk-flagging mechanism, alerting U.S. government agencies and contractors to potential dual-use concerns. That said, the strategic signal it sends is unambiguous — Washington is attempting to map the full landscape of China's civil-military fusion (军民融合) across its commercial sector.
Civil-Military Fusion Is Real, but Evidentiary Standards Matter
Nanyang Technological University analyst Stefanie Kam notes that many of the flagged companies were designated because of participation in state-level programs, not because of verifiable military contracts. This approach raises legitimate due-process concerns. The credibility of the designation mechanism depends entirely on whether its criteria are defensible and transparent. Without that, the list risks devolving from a genuine national security tool into a weapon of economic warfare.
Beijing Is Expected to Respond Asymmetrically
Analysts widely anticipate that Beijing will retaliate through asymmetric means. Potential responses include blacklisting U.S. companies on equivalent Chinese lists, imposing regulatory friction on American firms operating in China, or signaling displeasure through diplomatic channels.
The Core Question: Security Policy or Industrial Competition?
The broader context deserves scrutiny. BYD has now overtaken Tesla in global electric vehicle sales. That fact alone invites the question: has U.S. anxiety moved beyond the realm of pure defense considerations? Conflating legitimate national security concerns with industrial competitiveness risks undermining the credibility and legal standing of genuinely security-driven policy instruments.
This article was originally published in Small Wars Journal and distributed by Arizona State University.
原文來源： 查看原文
FAQ
Newsletter
Subscribe to our Low-Altitude Industry Newsletter
Daily curated news on low-altitude economy and drone industry, delivered to your inbox.
Reviewed and published by the LAETimes editorial desk ·
