The Diplomat author Mercy Kuo regularly engages subject-matter experts, policy practitioners, and strategic thinkers across the globe for their diverse insights into U.S. Asia policy. This conversation with Rosie Levine – executive director of the U.S.-China Education Trust and member of the USCET Working Group Report “America’s China Talent Challenge: Investing in Deeper American Understanding of China” (2026) – is the 507th in “The Trans-Pacific View Insight Series.”
Why will the United States face a shortage of China expertise in the next decade and what are the potential consequences?
Through this project’s consultation with over 50 organizations with a stake in the pipeline for generating U.S. expertise on China, we found that the number of Americans studying in China is in freefall and unlikely to bounce back without targeted intervention. This year around 2,000 Americans are estimated to be studying in China — a fraction of the 11,000 U.S. students studying in China in 2019. Since the pandemic, the number of Americans in China has hovered in the mid-hundreds to low-thousands, and most are there for short-term visits rather than serious long-term study.
The challenges are emanating from both sides: China’s academic environment has grown more restrictive and securitized, while the U.S. has reduced funding and limited engagement with China on campuses. If these trends continue, when the current generation of China hands retire from the field, the majority of their successors will not have had substantive first-hand exposure to China.
The potential consequences are huge. China’s actions affect an enormous range of U.S. interests, from geopolitics and security to trade and supply chains. Much can be learned about China through remote data collection, but without firsthand exposure, Americans risk missing new developments and could become over-reliant on faulty information or out-of-date assessments. This will lead to significant miscalculations in areas ranging from military signaling to trade negotiations in the years ahead.
Identify the top five takeaways of USCET’s report on America’s China talent challenge.
Our main takeaways from the report are the following:
America needs a steady supply of China experts with on-the-ground experience to meet tomorrow’s challenges and opportunities, but this pipeline is under serious strain. Today, many rising scholars on China assume that time in-country will be seen as a mark against them in future careers in government or in the private sector.
China-focused programs in the United States are under enormous pressure – federal funding has declined sharply, many long-standing programs have closed or relocated to Taiwan, and U.S. institutions are encouraged to reduce their engagements with China. These developments leave students and scholars with few options if they do want to pursue on-the-ground research in the mainland.
Despite many challenges to academic work in China, we found that meaningful research on the ground continues to be possible: there is much to be learned about today’s China that is best understood through direct access. Research from abroad and language study in Taiwan add enormously to our understanding but cannot replace first-hand exposure to understanding the country.
American academic institutions that retain educational outposts in China (joint campuses, academic centers, and study abroad programs) face mounting budget pressures and institutional uncertainty. Yet, it is underappreciated how these institutions are critical footholds for academic access and can serve as outposts for international researchers.
Lastly, we found there is an enormous need for information sharing, coordination, and support for the academic institutions and scholars that remain involved in China. New funding should support scholars to deepen their understanding of China, and new programs should nurture the next generation of students who have an interest in the field. These efforts would reduce uncertainty and ensure a robust pipeline in the years ahead.
Examine the impact of stricter U.S. national security measures on China-U.S. cooperation in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields.
Our report found that as U.S. campuses respond to concerns about STEM collaborations with China, new research security protocols are impacting much more than just STEM fields. In some cases, increased restrictions and reviews have been important interventions to stop technology leaks. However, these efforts to protect sensitive research are increasingly affecting a range of stakeholders on campus — including historians, political scientists, researchers in low-risk scientific fields, scholars of Chinese heritage, and in some cases, even study abroad programs in China. As academic collaboration becomes harder, fewer and fewer scholars are willing to go through bureaucratic hurdles to gain approvals, even when their research is low risk.
One important takeaway from our work is that STEM research and social sciences/humanities research shouldn’t be managed the same way. The report recommends increased coordination between university leadership, compliance officers, faculty, and government agencies to develop security protocols that protect U.S. research without creating unhelpful barriers to academic work or travel to China.
Explain the correlation between American competitiveness and China expertise.
“Knowledge is power,” after all, and that remains true today – the more that the United States understands about China, the more accurate, updated, and attuned our assessments of the country will be. It’s extremely hard to compete with – or manage a relationship with – a country you do not understand.
Our report argues that China expertise must be considered a national resource. Since the early 1970s, Americans with on-the-ground experience in China have played critical roles in the U.S. government, business, media, academia, and the bilateral relationship. Some of these individuals have a direct role in bilateral diplomacy and have used that knowledge to manage military or security crises. Others use their understanding of China to spark innovation and inform financial decisions to drive American growth. An accurate assessment of China is critical to American competitiveness across a wide range of fields.
What are the report’s recommendations for cultivating and educating America’s future China experts?
Based on our assessment of the challenges, our report recommends the following steps:
The U.S. government should publicly recognize the need to sustain America’s expertise on contemporary China and signal support for educational exchanges, with senior officials reassuring students and administrators that China study serves the national interest. U.S. government agencies need to make it clear that in-country training does not disqualify students from future government work, including by providing more detailed guidance on the security clearance process.
Policymakers and academic leaders should support existing American academic centers in China – recognizing them as unique platforms to host Americans for on-the-ground access – and encourage those with capacity to expand their role in hosting American scholars and researchers on the ground.
China should provide a welcoming environment that supports access for U.S. researchers.
Higher education leaders should work with policymakers to develop more targeted policies to manage U.S.-China academic connectivity on campus, which allows for non-sensitive academic work to continue.
Federal funding and opportunities for Chinese-specific language and research – including U.S. government-funded programs for study in the PRC – should be restored, and a new U.S. fellowship program for American scholars in China should be established.
