BGI’s Mei Yonghong: decoupling won’t end, but neither should openness

Senior executive of Chinese biotech giant argues U.S.-led tech controls have exposed China's vulnerabilities, yet says Beijing must remain open & aim to move beyond a follower role in global science.

We have published quite a few articles by Mei Yonghong. This long-time government official turned biotech executive sits at a rare and interesting intersection of Beijing’s science bureaucracy and China’s private genomics sector, giving him an unusually system-wide view of how China’s S&T ambition collides with U.S.-led tech controls, seen not from academia but from inside a company under intense external pressure.

Before becoming director and executive vice-president of China’s private BGI Group, one of the world’s leading genomics organisations and a “biotechnology company of concern” in Washington’s parlance, Mei served as mayor of Jining in Shandong province from 2010 to 2015, and earlier, held senior posts at China’s Ministry of Science and Technology, including deputy director-general of the General Office, director-general of the Research Office, and director-general of the Department of Policy, Regulation, and System Reform.

Mei delivered the following remarks on 1 December during the 2025 Understanding China Conference, an annual forum held under the auspices of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and convened each year after the conclusion of a plenary session of the CPC Central Committee or a CPC National Congress.

In his speech, Mei argued that U.S.-led decoupling has exposed how dependent China remains on Western tools, equipment, and data, turning the tech stand-off into a structural clash “unseen in a century” between American technological hegemony and China’s sovereign right to develop. Yet he insists China should neither retreat from global engagement nor accept a permanent follower role, arguing instead that it can now act as a major contributor of knowledge, a transferor of technology to the Global South and an organiser of “big science” projects that will help shape the next phase of global innovation.

—Yuxuan Jia

These remarks were originally published on 4 November on the official WeChat blog of Huagu Biotechnology and Bioindustry Research Institute, a non-governmental, non-profit think tank set up in 2023 by biotech and agricultural companies in China, including BGI’s affiliates.

梅永红：坚持科技对外开放——在2025读懂中国国际会议上的演讲

Mei Yonghong: Stay Committed to S&T Opening Up—Speech at the 2025 Understanding China Conference

China’s scientific and technological development is facing profound changes. Domestically, S&T capabilities are improving, and the demands of economic and social development are becoming more urgent. Externally, China is confronted with S&T decoupling efforts led by the United States and its Western allies. I remain convinced that opening up is the only viable path for China’s S&T advancement, and that there must be no backtracking at any time.

First, Open Exchange is Intrinsic to S&T Progress

In physics, there is the principle of increasing entropy, also known as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. It states that in an isolated system, without any input of external energy, the evolution from order to chaos is irreversible. Modern S&T development follows a similar principle: openness is the driving force of S&T progress and the source of its vitality.

If you are familiar with the history of science and technology, you will likely know that world-class academic institutions such as the Royal Society in the UK, the “Mersenne” Academy in France, the Max Planck Society in Germany, the Cavendish Laboratory in the UK, and Bell Labs in the United States all share a defining feature: a high degree of openness. Their researchers come from all over the world, with diverse disciplines that intersect and converge, and vigorous academic debate is the norm. In contrast, isolation leads S&T to a dead end.

Most notably, the knowledge created by humanity over the past 30 years has surpassed the sum of all the knowledge accumulated in the previous 2 millennia. This period aligns precisely with the fastest and most expansive phase of globalisation. The easing of geopolitical tensions and the rise of the internet have given birth to an unprecedented “global village” of scientific research. This is a tremendous boon for S&T and a great fortune for humanity.

It is especially important to note that, with rapid breakthroughs in large AI models, the decentralisation of science is set to accelerate even further. This signals the dawn of a new paradigm in global cooperation, where no single country can fully control the future trajectory of S&T. The United States has already launched the “Genesis Mission”—a Manhattan Project–style initiative to mobilise national resources to build “AI for Science” foundational models—but even such an ambitious program cannot succeed in isolation. In this new landscape, nations will have to work together to address global challenges such as climate change, ecological conservation, biodiversity loss, major diseases, and food security.

Second, Decoupling Poses Serious Challenges to China’s S&T Development

For China, modern S&T has essentially been an “imported good”; accordingly, catching up through tracking and learning has been the main trajectory of its S&T progress over the past century. In fact, this has been the path followed by all latecomer countries. Germany in relation to the United Kingdom and the United States in relation to Germany are classic national cases of catching up and overtaking through learning. The same holds for China’s neighbours, Japan and South Korea, where “introduction, digestion, and absorption” remained core national S&T policies for more than half a century.

However, in recent years, the United States has pushed for S&T decoupling from China. To date, more than 2,600 Chinese entities have been placed under U.S. sanctions. Before these measures, about 75 per cent of Huawei’s suppliers were based overseas; now the company has been forced to turn inward and rebuild its entire supplier network. The organisation where I work, BGI, has been hit by seven rounds of U.S. sanctions, leaving us no choice but to withdraw completely from the U.S. market and suspend numerous collaborative projects. Against the backdrop of China’s previous S&T policies, it was almost unimaginable that such a situation would ever arise. Although Western technological restrictions on China have never entirely disappeared, their escalation to today’s level since the 1990s has gone far beyond what many had anticipated.

Much like its industrial structure, China’s S&T system is not yet “generative” in the sense of being self-originating; it is built on foundations largely laid in the West. China’s own system remains far from complete and has many weak links. For example, when it comes to scientific research instruments and equipment, China still rely heavily on Western countries, leaving the country highly exposed to “chokepoints.” In biology, Western countries have built biological databases as S&T infrastructure, whereas China still operates in fragmented silos, with uneven data quality and a pronounced “siloed data island” problem. Gaps in tools and data go a long way in determining the quality and level of scientific research.

Taken together, these factors suggest that S&T decoupling is unlikely to ease in the short term and may even prove irreversible. The tensions between China and the United States are no longer just about ordinary commercial interests, but increasingly about deep structural contradictions. The United States is unwilling to relinquish its S&T hegemony, and China cannot give up its sovereign right to develop its own S&T. This is a clash unseen in a century that will not be resolved through routine business deals or diplomatic compromises. China cannot afford to harbour any illusions and must instead be prepared for a “protracted war.”

Third, China Has the Capacity to Play a New Role in S&T

Despite the many difficulties and pressures it faces, China’s S&T sector must remain firmly committed to openness to the world, and it has the capacity to assume a new role in this new historical era.

First is the role of a knowledge contributor. China now ranks among the global leaders in full-time researchers and R&D spending, and its output of SCI-indexed papers and number of PCT patent filings have both risen to first in the world. In 5G and new energy, China has become a front-runner; in AI, biomedicine, high-speed rail, shipbuilding, and aerospace, it has entered the top tier. All this shows that China is no longer merely a recipient and user of advanced technologies, but an important creator and contributor of new technologies, new knowledge, and new industries. This shift in roles benefits not only China itself but the wider world.

Second is the role of a technology transferor. In African countries, China’s hybrid rice technologies have benefited local populations on a wide scale; in Southeast Asia, China’s genetic testing technologies have been applied to the prevention and control of birth defects and infectious diseases; in Central Asia, China’s ecological restoration and desertification control technologies have helped bring back blue skies and clear waters to many areas.

Across Belt and Road countries, China is not only an investor and developer, but also a disseminator of advanced technologies. As the saying goes, “Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; teach him how to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.” Increasingly, the transfer of knowledge and technology originating from China is opening up new pathways both for the grand goal of building a community with a shared future for mankind and for the continued advancement of Chinese S&T.

Third is the role of an organiser of major science projects. The United States’ leading position in nuclear energy, aerospace, communications, semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and bioengineering is closely tied to its successive organisation of landmark projects such as the Manhattan Project, the Apollo Program, and the Human Genome Project. The recently launched flagship initiatives, “Stargate Project” and the “Genesis Mission”, are likewise expected to have a profound impact on AI and related fields.

Chinese S&T have already entered uncharted territory in areas such as genomics in the life sciences and controlled nuclear fusion in new energy. China is fully capable of breaking out of the long-standing “follower” mindset and stepping into the role of organiser and leader. The new scientific civilisation should bear the latest imprint of the Chinese people.

Big Science, Chinese Style: BGI’s Mei Yonghong on Reshaping the Research Paradigm from Govt Grant-guzzling to Profit-making Businesses