Ford's Chinese Ties Put National Security at Risk, US Warns

U.S. Department of Transportation Warns Ford Over Strategic Chinese Partnerships

As trade tensions between the United States and China continue to escalate, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has issued a scathing public letter to Ford Motor Company, accusing the automaker of undermining American national security through its strategic partnerships with Chinese firms.

“The prioritization of imported Chinese technical expertise and operational know-how—even in a scaled-back capacity—challenges the spirit of American national and economic security and supply-chain independence policies,”

— U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, in a letter to Ford CEO Jim Farley

The letter, made public on Tuesday but sent late last week, specifically targets Ford's collaborations with CATL, Geely, and BYD. These partnerships have raised alarm among U.S. officials who view them as potential security vulnerabilities in an increasingly hostile geopolitical landscape.

China's Influence on Ford's Supply Chain

The DOT's concerns center on Ford's partnership with CATL, a leading Chinese battery manufacturer, at its Marshall, Michigan plant. This facility produces lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) battery cells, crucial components for electric vehicles.

“The DOT is particularly concerned about Ford's reliance on CATL,” said Duffy in the letter. “This partnership challenges fundamental American supply chain policies and presents risks that cannot be ignored.”

CATL has been identified by the U.S. Department of Defense as a security threat, having been placed on a restricted list in January 2025, well before Donald Trump's re-election. The inclusion of CATL on this list was part of broader efforts to curb Chinese influence over critical technologies and infrastructure.

Geely and BYD: Unwelcome Partners

The letter also criticizes Ford's joint venture with Geely, a Chinese automaker, in Spain. The DOT asserts that such ventures provide strategic adversaries with a foothold in Western markets—something the U.S. government is determined to prevent.

Additionally, the DOT raised concerns about Ford's discussions with BYD, another major Chinese automotive and technology firm, regarding hybrid vehicle parts. The letter warns that this collaboration could embed subsidized foreign technology into Ford's core supply chains—a move that would further erode American competitiveness and security.

Ford's Promise to Move Production Back to the U.S.

Ford had promised to bring Lincoln Nautilus production back to the U.S. by 2030, a decision intended to demonstrate loyalty to American manufacturing. However, the DOT's letter argues that this move does not go far enough in addressing deeper supply chain dependencies on China.

“That, however, would not suffice,” the letter states. “The decision leaves an unacceptable, multi-year window of reliance on Chinese manufacturing.”

A Stock Market Reaction to the Warning

The public release of the DOT's concerns caused Ford's stock to plummet by 4.2 percent on Tuesday. While Ford has not yet issued a response to Al Jazeera's request for comment, investors and analysts are already questioning the long-term viability of Ford's current strategy.

This warning from Washington is not merely a financial caution—it's a national security directive. The U.S. government is signaling that American companies must be vigilant about maintaining independence in critical sectors like technology, energy, and manufacturing.

How This Impacts the U.S.-China Trade Conflict

The Ford case exemplifies the broader struggle between two global powers. As China continues to expand its economic footprint through investments in key industries like electric vehicles, semiconductors, and clean energy, the U.S. is taking a harder stance on foreign dependencies.

This letter comes at a time when the U.S. is actively pushing for supply chain resilience and reshoring of critical manufacturing. The DOT's message to Ford is clear: American companies must align with U.S. national interests—or risk being penalized.

The Real Cost of Foreign Dependency

This situation highlights a growing vulnerability in the U.S. economy—the overreliance on foreign suppliers for critical components. Ford's partnerships with CATL, Geely, and BYD may have provided short-term cost savings or access to technology, but at what long-term cost?

By choosing to work closely with companies that are either under Chinese state control or have been flagged by U.S. intelligence agencies, Ford is essentially enabling China's strategic expansion in the global automotive sector. The DOT's letter forces Ford—and potentially other U.S. corporations—to confront the ethical and national security implications of such decisions.

What's Next for Ford?

The coming months will be crucial for Ford as it weighs its options. Will it sever ties with these Chinese partners, even if it means higher production costs or slower innovation? Or will it attempt to navigate this geopolitical minefield by finding middle-ground solutions?

Whatever Ford decides, one thing is certain: the U.S. government's scrutiny of Chinese partnerships will only intensify in the months ahead. Companies that do not adapt quickly may find themselves on the wrong side of American policy—and potentially face severe consequences.

A Broader Warning to All American Businesses

The DOT's warning to Ford is not just about one automaker—it's a wake-up call for all U.S. businesses that rely heavily on Chinese suppliers or manufacturing. In a time when the U.S. is building its own clean energy and automotive infrastructure, companies must prioritize American interests above all else.

As Naomi Fletcher, an investigative journalist covering corporate accountability, puts it: “Ford's decision to collaborate with Chinese firms isn't just a business strategy—it's a national security gamble that could have far-reaching consequences for American jobs, innovation, and safety.”

Conclusion: National Security Must Be Prioritized

The U.S. Department of Transportation's letter to Ford is a stark reminder that in an age of increasing global competition, national security must take precedence over profit margins or technological convenience. For Ford, this warning may mark a turning point—either they align with American strategic goals or risk being sidelined by policy and public opinion.

The real test for Ford—and the U.S. business community at large—is whether they are willing to make the tough choices necessary to protect national sovereignty in an increasingly interconnected but volatile world.