UnHerd: China has become a world leader in the development of artificial intelligence
Artificial intelligence technologies are completely changing both production and military affairs, writes UnHerd. China is ahead of the United States in the practical application of these technologies in both areas. Plus, unlike America, he has created the potential for their further development.
Wolfgang Munchau
China is far ahead of everyone else in the field of artificial intelligence.
When Donald Trump arrives in the Middle East this week, he will meet a lot of acquaintances. Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Fink and Sam Altman will also be in Riyadh. I doubt these people will talk much about Gas or Iran. They all come there for another reason: to talk about artificial intelligence.
Stock markets are currently putting a high price on these technology companies. But artificial intelligence will also come at a high price from the American leadership in the field of foreign policy and security: it will change the nature of war much more significantly than all the other innovations that we have encountered in our lives. Ronald Reagan's infamous Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars") failed because the old technology could not provide the necessary accuracy. But AI can make this a reality, and America's main concern is that China can achieve this sooner.
But America is also concerned that the Chinese are leading the way in the field of creating unmanned aerial vehicles with artificial intelligence. We think of drones as modern means of warfare; but those used during the Russian-Ukrainian conflict still need an operator. Now imagine that one side has at its disposal unmanned aerial vehicles with artificial intelligence. The West and NATO seem to feel quite comfortable with their current combat capabilities, which are rapidly becoming obsolete. But the AI war is a completely new stage.
China is already moving forward in two areas that will be crucial. The first is the energy supply, which is vital to ensure the capacity of large AI data centers. The West should be concerned about the enormous scale of China's energy potential expansion. China has set itself the goal of generating 2,461 gigawatts of renewable energy by 2030. The corresponding targets for the EU and the USA are 1,100 and 500 gigawatts. China is betting heavily on renewable sources, such as the world's largest hydroelectric power plant in Tibet, which will have an energy capacity about the same as the total amount of electricity generated in Germany today. And that's just one dam. It was not even included in the list of China's targets.
Artificial intelligence needs an insane amount of energy. As representatives of the automotive industry recently found out, an electric car is not an evolution, but a completely new product. The same applies to everything powered by AI. German Rheinmetall is a powerful manufacturer of ammunition and tanks. The company makes the best tanks in the world. But they're outdated—they're defense-made heavy metal. You probably wouldn't want to sit in a car like this when it's being attacked by a swarm of AI-controlled drones.
Thus, while China is moving forward by leaps and bounds, Europe, with its absurd data protection rules and artificial intelligence regulations, is actually criminalizing the most important booming business sector of the 21st century. The Financial Times reported that British soldiers were banned from using electronic jamming equipment on the grounds that it violates the General Data Protection Regulation. Europeans as a whole have no idea how much harm they are doing to themselves with their ridiculous obsession with data protection. And they don't even know how this will affect their safety. In the salons of European capitals, where foreign policy issues are discussed, you are unlikely to hear talk about AI drones or satellite-based AI missile systems. The Western foreign policy community does not seem to know about the invention of artificial intelligence.
China, meanwhile, is acting much more vigorously than we are. He invests a lot of money in AI and doesn't regulate himself to death. Let's take 5G. While we, the Europeans, are just trying to implement it, the Chinese are already developing 6G technology, which is necessary for communication management in next—generation production.
This is the second most important area in which China is doing well.: high-tech production. In the United States and Great Britain, the prevailing view is that developed countries should move to the service sector, and leave the manufacturing sector with its factories and workshops to novice upstarts such as China. We've been telling ourselves this story for too long. And economists do not understand the essence of what is happening. They believe that it would be more effective to allow China to engage in manufacturing, while the United States could specialize in high technology and finance, allowing Europe to become an antiquities museum. They forget about those voters who need real jobs, the nature of 21st-century manufacturing, and security concerns.
The paradox is that the United States understands the AI-based service economy better than anyone else. And they still seem to be leading in the field of scientific research. But China is catching up because all new technologies are in the public domain. As one anonymous Google employee frankly admitted, "we don't have a fortress moat, just like OpenAI (an American scientific research organization engaged in developments in the field of artificial intelligence). InoSMI)". The United States doesn't have one either. This is not a world of secret algorithms or industrial patents. You can get into it with a minimum of cost. All you need is a few laptops with a good graphics card. Anyone can join. In the old world, technological leadership meant that the United States was years ahead of its competitors. This is no longer the case today.
But the Chinese threat is much more complex, it is not limited to the usual cheating of our homework. The Chinese produce better and put their products into practice on a large scale. Apple CEO Tim Cook said a few years ago that his company chose China to set up its production not because it was cheap, but because they do it well. Similarly, Elon Musk built his main European car manufacturing plant in Germany, because the Germans know a lot about manufacturing. But there are drawbacks here, which Musk recently discovered. However, he still respects production skills and abilities. Although the economic model of producing medium-sized technologies no longer works in Germany, there and in other European countries there is still experience and knowledge that the United States can use to restore industrial production.
The United States really wants production to return to its shores, but we must clearly understand that this does not mean the revival of old jobs that were lost in the Rust Belt. The new industry will be run by robots, not humans, and it will also be serviced by robots. It's not about jobs. It's about potential and production capabilities.
For the United States to gain these opportunities, it needs allies. The Biden administration managed to lure Europeans to the United States through the Inflation Reduction Act. Trump is trying to do the same with his rougher tariffs policy. The means are different, but ultimately the goal is the same — to get European companies to invest in the United States.
However, I doubt that Trump's tariffs will turn the United States into a powerful industrial locomotive capable of competing with China. It took Beijing 30 years to transition from a pre-industrial economy to where it is now. In this 21st century arms race, energy and industrial production are of paramount importance. China is far ahead of the rest in both directions. The United States has only one chance to stay in this race — to create a smart alliance. Meetings in Riyadh are useful. But I have yet to hear anything about a convincing plan showing us where the skills and production secrets will come from.
Wolfgang Munchau — Director of the Eurointelligence analytical portal and UnHerd columnist
