Technology & Science
FCC Blocks New Foreign-Made Drones, Freezing DJI’s U.S. Pipeline
On 23 December 2025 the FCC placed every non-U.S. drone and component on its Covered List, immediately halting import and authorization of any new foreign models.
Focusing Facts
- Starting 23 Dec 2025, foreign-built unmanned aircraft systems cannot obtain the FCC equipment authorization legally required for sale in the U.S.
- DJI, which supplies roughly 70–90 % of U.S. hobbyist and commercial drones, is barred from releasing new models such as the Neo 2 until cleared by the Pentagon or DHS.
- The move satisfies a deadline written into the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act that ordered an inter-agency security review to conclude by 23 Dec 2025.
Context
Washington’s drone freeze echoes earlier tech clampdowns—Toshiba’s 1987 milling-machine sanctions, the 2019 Huawei telecom ban, and even the 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff—where security fears and industrial policy blurred. It signals an accelerating shift toward techno-nationalism: the U.S. is willing to sacrifice short-term consumer choice and entrenched supply chains to regain domestic production of strategic hardware ahead of the 2026 World Cup and 2028 Olympics. Whether the threat assessments are substantive or politically driven matters less than the precedent: critical data-collecting platforms built abroad are being summarily excluded. If similar logic is applied across autonomy, AI, or EV sectors, the globalized electronics ecosystem painstakingly built since the 1980s could unwind over the next century, redrawing where—and by whom—flying robots, networks, and other dual-use technologies are designed and controlled.
Perspectives
US conservative media outlets
e.g., Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller — They frame the FCC ban as a long-overdue national-security safeguard that counters Chinese espionage and vindicates former president Trump’s hard-line stance on Beijing. By praising Trump and stressing worst-case spy scenarios, they may amplify fear of China while glossing over the economic cost to U.S. consumers and industry, as reflected in partisan quotes and minimal mention of DJI’s rebuttals.
Tech consumer publications
e.g., SlashGear, PCMag UK, Gizmodo, Mashable — These outlets highlight how the blanket ban deprives hobbyists and filmmakers of DJI’s market-leading gear, stressing that existing owners can keep flying but future innovation and repairs will suffer. Relying heavily on DJI statements and focusing on user experience, they tend to downplay or question the security findings that motivated the ban, reflecting an audience and advertiser interest in continued product availability.
Media echoing Chinese government positions
e.g., The Times of India citing China’s Commerce Ministry, iTnews quoting China’s Foreign Ministry — They present the U.S. action as an abuse of state power and protectionist bullying aimed at suppressing Chinese competition and distorting markets. By foregrounding official Beijing reactions and threats of retaliation, they mirror China’s talking points and give little space to the U.S. security rationale, potentially serving diplomatic messaging as much as journalistic balance.