By Paolo von Schirach

President, Global Policy Institute; Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Bay Atlantic University, both in Washington, DC

Here is the hard truth. China is massively ahead of the U.S. in the number of schools, research centers, scientists, and university graduates involved in the STEM disciplines. STEM includes Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. This did not happen overnight. This significant advantage for China is the tangible outcome of an investment policy ordered years ago by President Xi Jinping.

As a result of this deliberate prioritization, a majority of Chinese students these days choose STEM university degrees, often supported by state-of-the-art laboratories and research facilities. In contrast, in America, only a small percentage of students prefer STEM disciplines. By the same token, the U.S. public education system lags behind its peers in other developed countries when it comes to quality science secondary education.

Undoubtedly, the U.S. still has some, if not most, of the highly prestigious “super universities” that are often world leaders in cutting-edge science research. But the number of U.S. graduates is small, while most of the foreign students who earn science doctorates in the U.S. cannot be employed in America due to absurd and counterproductive immigration law restrictions.

In recent years, Washington launched ambitious plans (first and foremost, the CHIPS and Science Act, August 2022) to massively increase investments in R&D and production of microchips and other sophisticated high-tech components that will power future industries.

Washington also encouraged partnerships between U.S. entities and Taiwanese leading producers of sophisticated tech components (for instance, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., TSMC) so that they would establish new production facilities on U.S. soil. All this is good. But where are the American engineers needed to run these new facilities? Not enough of them, say the Taiwanese. It is obvious that a massive national effort needs to be undertaken to bridge this talent gap.

There is a precedent for such an effort. In the middle of the Cold War, when the USSR was the recognized existential threat, the U.S. faced a similar predicament. It happened on October 4, 1957. The Soviets announced that they had launched Sputnik, a satellite, into space.

This was shocking for American leaders. Sputnik successfully orbited the Earth for several months. The military implications of Moscow’s ability to launch objects into space were obvious. If you can launch a satellite, soon enough you will be able to launch a nuclear warhead. The Soviets were ahead. America was stunned.

However, the cold shower did not induce panic. It prompted instead a forceful all-hands-on-deck reaction. Soon thereafter, America launched Explorer, its own satellite. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, was established in 1958. Under NASA’s auspices and led by Wernher von Braun, once the father of Nazi Germany’s rockets, the massive U.S. space program was launched. And – most significantly – in 1958, Congress passed, and President Dwight Eisenhower signed, what was appropriately named the National Defense Education Act, NDEA. This legislation was aimed at beefing up the science curricula at all levels of the U.S. education system via huge government grants and loans.

By linking education to national defense, Washington managed to impose its new education efforts, standards, and federal funding on all localities, something that ordinarily would be impossible in the United States, since public education is jealously managed by local authorities.

In order to regain its global leadership position, America needed to massively increase the quality of its science programs and the number of highly qualified scientists that could be engaged in civilian and military technologies and space programs. According to a U.S. Senate historic account, “The results were conspicuous: in 1960 there were 3.6 million students in college, and by 1970 there were 7.5 million. Many of them got their college education only because of the availability of NDEA loans, thanks to Sputnik and to Senator Hill’s readiness to seize the moment.” [Senator Hill was the sponsor of the legislation].

The current situation is different. Sputnik was a sudden event that shocked Washington. Chinese investments in STEM, while massive, occurred gradually, over a period of time. This allowed complacency in America. However, now we see the results of Beijing’s focus on STEM.

China leads the world in critical renewable energy technologies, including solar panels and batteries. Chinese auto manufacturers are rolling out inexpensive electric vehicles. Chinese military technologies are becoming competitive, while China can rely on a gigantic manufacturing base to scale up production. We do not have a “Sputnik Moment,” but America should think and behave as if we did.

Legal Disclaimer:
PressLink distributes this news content on an “as-is” basis, without any express or implied warranties of any kind. PressLink expressly disclaims all responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented in this article. Any complaints, copyright issues, or concerns regarding this article should be directed to the author.

Note: This content is not authored by, nor does it reflect the endorsement of, PressLink, its advertisers, or any affiliated entities. For inquiries or corrections related to press releases, please contact PressLink directly.