Chinese artificial intelligence (AI) start-up DeepSeek early this year launched a new model to much fanfare internationally, but the company’s technological breakthroughs did not come from independent research and development, they relied on the technological achievements accumulated by the US and other Western countries.
As early as 2017, the Chinese government proposed a plan for a “new generation of AI,” with the goal of becoming a global leader in the technology by 2030. This is not only about tech competition, but also an important step for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to achieve “digital totalitarianism.”
Chinese companies use AI to monitor the nation’s people and bolster censorship at home. They promote Chinese-made AI technology abroad through large-scale subsidies and low bidding, coercing developing countries into dependence on Chinese technology and expanding the CCP’s digital authoritarian influence.
Last year, the CCP proposed a global AI governance initiative to promote its censorship system and surveillance technology internationally in the name of “responsible AI,” which is tantamount to asking the world to accept an AI version of its social credit system.
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Guo Jiakun (郭嘉昆) has said that China is willing to cooperate with other countries to develop AI and help developing countries benefit from “the intelligence dividend,” but such support often comes with control over data and monopoly of infrastructure.
Under Beijing’s Digital Silk Road initiative, Chinese companies provide AI technology and surveillance systems in Africa and Southeast Asia, but transmit local data back to China and use technical barriers to tie the countries into China’s digital ecosystem, endangering national security and tying recipient countries to Beijing.
Nations should be wary of China’s use of AI technology to expand its authoritarian influence. They should bolster protections of intellectual property to prevent technological innovators from being defeated by China’s theft and subsidy strategies.
Ryan Xu is a freelancer.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has
RSS