From tanks to microchips: how the CIA is rethinking espionage in the new war with China

A rapidly changing world requires intelligence agencies to adapt. While the idea of ​​espionage is often associated with classic Cold War operations aimed at military and political secrets, modern realities dictate different priorities. Today, against the backdrop of intensifying geopolitical rivalry, the United States openly declares the expansion of its espionage activities, focusing on economic and technological aspects, especially with regard to China. This is not just a change of tactics, but a fundamental rethinking of the concept of national security, where innovation and economic advantage become as critical as military doctrines.

A new intelligence paradigm: from military threats to economic competition

The Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Michael Ellis, clearly outlined a new strategic line during his public speech at a cybersecurity conference in Washington on September 8, 2026. According to him, China poses a “fundamentally different kind of threat” to the United States compared to previous geopolitical rivals such as the Soviet Union. This difference lies primarily in the economic nature of the competition. While during the Cold War the main focus was on tanks, missiles and submarines, now the battlefield has shifted to the areas of artificial intelligence, semiconductors and biotechnology.

This transformation is not sudden. As early as January 2025, the new CIA director, Ratcliffe, emphasized the need to better use AI to counter Russia and China, as well as to expand the use of human intelligence collection. The changes in the nature of intelligence collection reflect the realization that valuable information about advanced technologies is no longer concentrated exclusively in government or military structures. It is located “in the private sector or in structures that in China can be characterized as something like the private sector.” This is forcing the CIA to expand its espionage powers, as traditional methods are no longer effective enough to obtain critical data.

China as a “legitimate target”: blurring the lines between public and private

A key aspect of the new American strategy is the perception of Chinese companies as “legitimate targets” for espionage. Western officials argue that under the rule of the Communist Party, China lacks an independent business environment similar to that found in the United States or most of Europe. This means that, in Washington’s view, any Chinese company operating in strategically important industries could be an instrument of the state, and therefore its activities fall under the scope of US national security.

This approach is a significant departure from precedents set by previous US administrations. Washington has previously sought to draw a clear line between espionage aimed at national defense and foreign policy and espionage with economic motivation. For example, the Obama administration signed an agreement with Beijing in 2015, where the parties agreed not to engage in economic espionage, after regular revelations of Chinese hacking attacks on the intellectual property of American companies. However, the US later accused China of violating this agreement.

Accusations of industrial espionage and technology theft against Chinese companies are not new. For example, on September 8, 2026, the trial of the Chinese technology giant Huawei began in New York on charges of industrial espionage, including the theft of a robotic arm from American developers. Huawei, in turn, rejects these accusations. In April 2026, the Trump administration issued a public warning that Chinese companies working in the field of artificial intelligence were stealing trade secrets from their American counterparts on an “industrial scale.” In particular, Google reported more than 100 thousand queries to its Gemini assistant, which could be used to create cheaper analogues by Chinese companies.

The race for artificial intelligence and technological warfare

Artificial intelligence (AI) is at the epicenter of this new technological war. Michael Ellis has emphasized that China’s victory in the AI ​​race will have profound consequences, and “nothing else will matter.” Indeed, the battle for technological supremacy between the United States and China reached a strategic turning point in early 2026. Washington’s new export restrictions and Beijing’s push for domestic production have transformed the AI ​​competition into a power struggle that is shaping the global economy.

Stanford University’s 2026 AI Index study found that the gap in AI between the best neural networks in the US and China has narrowed to 2,7%, down from more than 30% in 2023. While the US model Claude Opus 4.6 (later Opus 4.7) leads the rankings, China’s Dola-Seed-2.0 is only slightly behind. Notably, China is achieving these results while spending significantly less: in 2025, private investment in AI in the US was $285,9 billion, while in China it was $12,4 billion. Beijing is compensating for this with a systemic approach, registering almost 70% of the world’s AI patents and deploying industrial robots 9 times faster than the US.

Tensions are rising. In February 2026, the U.S. Commerce Department was working on new controls that would cover indirect exports to China of high-performance graphics processors used to train artificial intelligence. The move is aimed at limiting the ability of Chinese technology companies to develop large-scale language models and military applications. In response, Beijing is expanding its state-owned semiconductor funds to reduce its reliance on foreign suppliers, providing billions of dollars in incentives to domestic manufacturers.

The technological divergence is becoming increasingly apparent. In August 2026, the US was preparing to tell 35 countries that they must choose sides in the US-China AI race, threatening to be kicked out of the US-led coalition if they cooperated with either side. The initiative, known as Pax Silica, aims to protect the supply chains needed to develop AI, including semiconductors, critical minerals, energy, and the AI ​​models themselves. In response, in July 2026, China created a rival “World AI Cooperation Organization,” promoting its own technologies and offering partners shared infrastructure and training.

Cyber ​​threats and critical infrastructure

Cyberspace is also a field of intense confrontation. Michael Ellis mentioned the threats to US critical infrastructure from hackers from foreign countries, in particular from China and Iran. These concerns are confirmed by numerous reports. In August 2026, the US Department of Justice reported that Chinese hackers, starting in 2018, had been conducting a coordinated campaign to penetrate the networks of various departments, including the Department of Energy, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the US Senate. These attacks were aimed at gaining and maintaining access to critical US networks.

The Chinese government has strongly rejected the allegations, calling them a US attempt to justify its own cybersecurity problems and a political disinformation campaign. However, according to the FBI, the tools used by the Chinese-backed hackers were aimed at attacking critical US infrastructure and concealing the source of those attacks.

Geopolitical context and policies of the Trump administration

Michael Ellis’s speech comes at a crucial time. In September 2026, US President Donald Trump is set to host Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Washington, where AI competition and trade are expected to be among the topics discussed at the summit. The meeting comes against the backdrop of the Trump administration’s complex and controversial China policy.

The updated US National Security Strategy, released in December 2025, identifies China as a major strategic challenge. This document sets out Washington’s political and defence priorities for the coming years, with an emphasis on domestic security and economic autonomy. However, in January 2026, the Pentagon removed the designation of China as the main threat to the US in the new National Defence Strategy, and instead focused on the defence of the US territory and the Western Hemisphere. This reflects a shift in rhetoric and approaches, perhaps aimed at stabilising relations ahead of the summit.

Despite Trump’s public statements about “very good” trade relations with China, the reality is more complicated. The US continues to expand its “blacklist” of Chinese companies that it believes are helping the Chinese military. In June 2026, Alibaba, Baidu, BYD and other tech giants were added to this list. In response, China imposed sanctions on American companies, including units of Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and General Dynamics.

Global consequences and future confrontation

The US-China standoff has far-reaching global implications. A July 2026 Pew Research Center poll found that the world increasingly favors China over the US, which the FT called a “wake-up call” for Washington. The trend could indicate that the US strategy of “containment” of China is not always gaining support among the international community.

The tech war has already led to global tech giants increasingly moving their manufacturing centers to alternative regions such as Southeast Asia and India due to rising geopolitical risks. Moreover, US sanctions, which were intended to block the development of Chinese technology, have had an unexpectedly beneficial effect for China. According to Morgan Stanley, Chinese companies have used the last four years (2022-2026) to close gaps in semiconductor supply chains and eliminate technological dependence on the West.

The future of this relationship remains uncertain. On the one hand, the Trump administration is trying to combine hard and soft tools: personal diplomacy with Xi Jinping to stabilize relations while strengthening American positions through defense investments and reducing economic dependence. On the other hand, fundamental contradictions over Taiwan, trade, technology, and global security remain.

The expansion of US espionage activities against Chinese companies is a clear signal that Washington is ready to use all available tools to protect its economic and technological interests. It is a sign of a new era of geopolitical rivalry, where the lines between war and peace, politics and economics, public and private sectors are becoming increasingly blurred.

Sources

1. Current time information in the United States of America.
2. Current time information in China.
3. Is the US-China rivalry in artificial intelligence turning into a new global technology war? – İndigo Dergisi (February 11 2026)
4. The Updated US National Security Strategy: What's in it and how does it affect Ukraine (December 05 2025)
5. The Pentagon in the new National Defense Strategy removed the definition of China as the main threat to the United States – Espreso.TV (January 24 2026)