• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Michael D. Swaine"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie China"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "China’s Foreign Relations",
    "U.S.-China Relations"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "AP",
  "programs": [
    "Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "China",
    "Japan"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Military",
    "Security",
    "Technology"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Chinese Views on Cybersecurity in Foreign Relations

The apparent unanimity of viewpoints within China on cybersecurity suggests that this issue will remain a major source of tension and differences in the Sino-U.S. relationship.

Link Copied
By Michael D. Swaine
Published on Sep 20, 2013
Program mobile hero image

Program

Asia

The Asia Program in Washington studies disruptive security, governance, and technological risks that threaten peace, growth, and opportunity in the Asia-Pacific region, including a focus on China, Japan, and the Korean peninsula.

Learn More

Source: China Leadership Monitor

During the past few years, cybersecurity has become a major concern among many countries, as a result of the continued rapid expansion and deepening technological sophistication of the Internet, alongside the growing reliance of governments and societies on cyberbased systems for everything from communications and information storage to military operations and commercial activities.

In recent months, this issue has become a major source of both tension and potential cooperation for the U.S.-China relationship in particular.  Stemming from a Western (and especially U.S.) assessment that a growing number of destructive cyberattacks on commercial enterprises and government institutions originate not only from Chinese individuals, but also most likely from Chinese government (and especially military) sources, Washington has greatly intensified its expression of concern to Beijing.

Beijing has repeatedly denied carrying out cyberattacks against any other country, while calling for both bilateral and multilateral cooperation, free from accusations, to formulate agreed-upon norms for the operation of the global Internet as well as place its oversight in the hands of a broadly representative international structure.  The United States has resisted the latter proposal.

These developments have elevated the issue of cybersecurity to a top priority within the overall bilateral relationship.  In response to the importance and urgency of the issue, Washington and Beijing recently agreed to form a Cyber Working Group (CWG) as part of the bilateral Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED),  with the first Bilateral Cybersecurity Working Group Dialogue held in Washington D.C. on 8 July.

Thus far, however, little progress has occurred in reducing suspicion and developing cooperation in this area.  To the contrary, the United States and presumably China are strengthening their capacity to engage in both defensive and offensive cyber actions against each other, presenting the prospect of a cyber arms race while potentially intensifying the already high level of distrust between the two countries.

To understand the challenges and opportunities presented to the Sino-U.S. relationship by the cybersecurity issue, it is important to examine in some detail the views, beliefs, and apparent assumptions of Chinese observers toward the subject.  This article addresses Chinese thinking on four basic aspects of the issue:

The Definition of Cybersecurity and the Challenge It Presents

The Cybersecurity Threat Posed by the United States and Other Countries

The Origins and Motives Behind Foreign Cybersecurity Threats

Chinese Preferences for Mitigating Cybersecurity Threats


As they have in several previous editions of CLM, our examination of Chinese views on these topics will distinguish between three basic types of Chinese sources: authoritative; quasi-authoritative; and non-authoritative.

For each area, particular attention is given to: a) the authoritative PRC government viewpoint (if publicly available); b) views toward the United States in particular; and c) any variations that might exist among Chinese commentators, in both substance and tone.  The article addresses several specific questions: to what extent and in what manner do Chinese definitions of cybersecurity and Chinese views on the cybersecurity threat differ from those of the United States and other countries?  How do Chinese sources respond to U.S. and Western accusations against China?  In all these areas, can one discern any significant differences: among authoritative Chinese sources, between military and civilian sources (of all types), and among authoritative, quasi-authoritative, and non-authoritative sources in general?

The article concludes with a summary and some implications for the future. 

This article was originally published in the China Leadership Monitor.

About the Author

Michael D. Swaine

Former Senior Fellow, Asia Program

Swaine was a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and one of the most prominent American analysts in Chinese security studies.

    Recent Work

  • Other
    What Kind of Global Order Should Washington and Beijing Strive For?

      Michael D. Swaine

  • Commentary
    A Smarter U.S. Strategy for China in Four Steps

      Michael D. Swaine

Michael D. Swaine
Former Senior Fellow, Asia Program
Michael D. Swaine
MilitarySecurityTechnologyChinaJapan

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Trump and Netanyahu speaking
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Diverging U.S. and Israeli Goals in Iran Are Making the Endgame Even Murkier

    The cracks between Trump and Netanyahu have become more pronounced, particularly over energy and leadership targets.

      • Eric Lob

      Eric Lob

  • Seoul traffic at night
    Commentary
    Emissary
    How the Hormuz Closure Is Testing the Korean President’s Progressive Agenda

    The crisis is not just a story of energy vulnerability. It’s also a complex, high-stakes political challenge.

      Darcie Draudt-Véjares

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Why Did Messaging App Telegram Fall From Grace in Russia?

    The history of Telegram’s relations with the Russian state offers a salutary lesson for international platforms that believe they can reach a compromise with the Kremlin.

      Maria Kolomychenko

  • apan's Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi (L) reacts as US President Donald Trump delivers a speech in front of US Navy personnel on board the US Navy's USS George Washington aircraft carrier at the US naval base in Yokosuka on October 28, 2025.
    Article
    Takaichi’s Security Agenda After the Landslide Election

    Backed by a new LDP supermajority, Prime Minister Takaichi aspires to revise Japan’s long-standing security doctrine. Ahead of her visit to Washington, she faces fiscal hurdles for her proposed defense spending while needing to navigate President Trump’s request for naval assets to the Strait of Hormuz.

      • Harukata Takenaka

      Harukata Takenaka

  • Mourners hold up their phones showing images of Ali Khamenei during a memorial vigil after Iranian state media confirmed the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on March 1, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.
    Article
    Iran Wields Wartime Internet Access as a Political Tool

    In an effort to disseminate its preferred message, the Iranian regime is offering a simple transaction: connectivity for amplification.

      Mahsa Alimardani

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.