Now, this is ultimately avoidable if research and development stops depending on stolen technology. This is why I say that the idea that continuing to rely on stolen technology is a dead-end pursuit. It's a crutch that ultimately cripples the development of a productive engineering culture.

The entire thing is a very goal-focused competition. For China, rapidly closing the military gap is the biggest driver for stealing technological information. It will continue until the drawbacks outweigh the benefits or like you say, a dead-end. However, the use of foreign technology would not necessarily be a 'poison pill' for the simple reason that humans are adaptable and will change their approach when it doesn't work. There's no reason to assume China would be any different.

There's a common sentiment that the United States will always be X number of years ahead of China, whether through fielding next-generation weapons platforms or some other technological advancement. I'm always dubious of the claims that the Chinese must master old technology before stealing/understanding next-generation technology. We already see the trend that the Chinese are requiring less years to bring into operation their own equivalent of American weapon systems.

And adding to my previous statement, my main point was that there is nothing stopping the other country from continuing to perform their independent research even if they engage in technological espionage. Using stolen information to build upon existing fundamentals is not much different from the academia using publicly available research for less sensitive projects. Each generation of scientists and researchers builds upon previous research, unless it's something truly revolutionary.

I believe the problem is more of education quality where the Chinese education system is less effective than more developed countries. The flow of university graduates into Western places of learning is one way of addressing the problem as they return to China and diffuse their knowledge and practices.

They really didn't, though. With regard to nuclear weapons development, at least, the Soviets were continuously lagging behind the U.S. in terms of development.

Yes, the focus on the arms race and the failed economic policy caused the vicious cycle into societal and economic stagnation. But the point still stands. A state with a rigid ideology that engaged in technological espionage was able to compete in a technological arms race until it started becoming economically incapable of doing so from the late 60s onwards.

The Chinese are on a similar trajectory, but with the virtue of having a more sustainable economy. So no 15% military budget on top of a command economy.