Oren Cass, founder of the Washington-based think tank American Compass, has built a reputation as one of the right’s most outspoken advocates for economic nationalism and “strategic decoupling” from Beijing. His organization, American Compass, has long promoted a hardline stance against China, arguing that the United States must take a tougher stance to protect its industrial base and reduce reliance on Chinese supply chains.
In a 2023 Foreign Affairs essay, Cass and a colleague warned that the U.S. “must break from China or else become irrevocably corrupted by it,” asserting that economic interdependence had already weakened America’s industrial base and constrained its political will. They called for legal restrictions on U.S. institutions engaging with China-based entities and urged lawmakers to change U.S. law to prevent such partnerships.
Yet recent details about the group’s corporate partnerships and staff affiliations raise questions about the consistency between its rhetoric and its operations. For instance, American Compass has received funding from companies like Qualcomm, BlackRock, and Google — all of which maintain significant business operations in China. These financial ties appear to contradict Cass’s public advocacy for economic nationalism and decoupling from Beijing.
Additionally, the think tank’s staffing and advisory relationships have also prompted questions. The organization’s director of events and operations previously worked for Alibaba Group, one of China’s largest tech companies. An economist on the group’s advisory board is also a professor at Peking University’s Guanghua School of Management, a leading university with close ties to China’s Communist Party. These associations have sparked debates about the feasibility of advocating for decoupling while maintaining financial ties to Chinese entities.
Cass’s stance on China has also extended to broader policy discussions. In a letter to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in July 2025, he joined other national security experts in expressing deep concerns over the Trump administration’s decision to resume exporting Nvidia’s H20 chips to China. He argued that this move could jeopardize the United States’ economic and military dominance in artificial intelligence. However, critics argue that his advocacy for a hard break from China appears inconsistent with the realities of operating a global think tank.
While none of these associations are illegal or unusual in Washington, they complicate Cass’ image as a champion of economic separation from China and highlight the difficulty of pursuing that ideal while relying on corporate sponsors. His stance on China remains a central focus of his advocacy, but the contradictions in his own operations have drawn significant scrutiny from both supporters and critics in Washington.