In a recent investigation, the Associated Press revealed how American technology companies have played a significant role in enabling China's extensive surveillance state. Tens of thousands of individuals labeled as troublemakers are effectively trapped by a digital system that restricts their movements within provinces and even within their homes. This pervasive surveillance framework is largely supported by technologies developed by firms in the United States, a country that professes to champion global freedoms.
Over the past 25 years, American tech companies have contributed billions of dollars to the Chinese police and government, significantly facilitating human rights abuses within the country. Despite numerous warnings from U.S. Congressional bodies and the media about the potential misuse of these technologies to suppress dissent and persecute religious and ethnic minorities, these companies continued their engagements in China. Many of the companies defended their actions, claiming compliance with existing laws, sanctions, and export controls.
One critical area of concern is the introduction of predictive policing technologies by U.S. companies, which measure a broad spectrum of personal data—such as texts, calls, payments, and even utility usage—to identify individuals perceived as threats. This technology enables Chinese authorities to intimidate and preemptively detain individuals for uncommitted offenses. For example, the defense contractor Huadi collaborated with IBM in 2009 to develop a policing system focused on internet censorship and crackdowns on dissenting elements like the Falun Gong sect. IBM has since described any previous ties to Chinese governmental projects as "old" and claimed any misuse was beyond its control.
American tech advancements have been pivotal in the dark human rights crisis occurring in the Xinjiang region of China, characterized by a mass detention campaign against the Uyghur population. Reports suggest that IBM's i2 software was utilized by the Xinjiang police and other security entities throughout the 2010s, with leaked emails indicating its deployment in a predictive policing framework that flagged countless individuals as potential terrorists. IBM has refuted these claims, asserting they have no records linking their software directly to the region's police.
Some companies, like Dell, have promoted products specifically designed for surveillance purposes, including "military-grade" AI laptops capable of all-race recognition, advertised via their official channels. Thermo Fisher Scientific even marketed DNA kits tailored for use by Chinese police on various ethnic groups like the Uyghurs and Tibetans until an inquiry from the press instigated a change. The Xinjiang government defended the use of these technologies as anti-terrorism measures, pointing a finger at Western countries for employing similar tools.
Moreover, marketing efforts by American tech firms to Chinese authorities often cited Communist Party slogans related to suppressing protests. IBM, Cisco, Dell, and Seagate have been accused of framing their products as instruments to maintain stability and control over the citizenry. They maintain that they abide by all relevant laws, yet their marketing practices suggest complicity in human rights violations.
American companies laid the groundwork for this extensive surveillance apparatus, which Chinese firms are now enhancing and expanding upon. Major tech companies like Intel and NVIDIA contributed significantly, not only developing surveillance systems but also supplying the AI capabilities that empower them. The ongoing sales of technology by American firms to China stir concern among former U.S. officials and security experts regarding the potential military and intelligence applications of this technology.
While some companies like IBM, NVIDIA, and Intel have ceased operations in sensitive areas like Tibet and Xinjiang due to human rights issues, experts highlight that significant loopholes remain in U.S. sanctions that allow such technologies to be misused. Current export laws are often outdated and do not account for recent developments in surveillance technology.
The situation in China serves as a cautionary tale, especially as global surveillance technology use is on the rise, including within the United States. U.S. tech companies have grown increasingly powerful, and current government policies reflect a retreat from safeguarding civil rights in the face of advancing surveillance capabilities. As these technologies proliferate, concerns continue to mount about their impact on freedom and privacy, both domestically and globally.
