March of the robots highlights China’s research rise
Heavy state investment in the past two decades has been the key to developing ‘critical technology’
China is now the world leader in research on almost 90% of critical technologies, according to an Australian think tank.
In a newly released report, the research group revealed there is also a high risk of Beijing securing a monopoly on defense-related tech, including drones, satellites, and robots that can work safely alongside humans.
Analysts pointed out that the huge leap forward for China is the result of heavy state investment over the past two decades.
But they said that despite the progress, Beijing is still dependent on other countries for key tech components and lacks self-sufficiency.
The report from the government-funded Australian Strategic Policy Institute, or ASPI, released last week, said China led the way in research in 57 out of 64 advanced technologies between 2019 and 2023.
Advanced technologies
ASPI’s Critical Technology Tracker ranks countries’ innovation capabilities based on the number of appearances in the top 10% of research papers. It focuses on crucial technologies.
The range of fields includes artificial intelligence or AI, biotechnology, cyber, and defense. The report found:
[That] China and the United States have effectively switched places as the overwhelming leader in research in just two decades.
The world’s second-largest economy led in only three of the 64 technologies between 2003 and 2007. But it has shot up in the rankings, replacing the US, which is now a frontrunner in just seven critical technologies.
Josh Kennedy-White, a technology strategist based in Singapore, said:
[China’s huge leap is a] direct result of its aggressive, state-driven research and development investments over the past two decades.
He added that the shift toward China is “particularly stark in fields like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and advanced aircraft engines,” adding:
China has transitioned from a laggard to a leader in a relatively short period.
‘ASPI also determined the risk of countries holding a monopoly on the research of critical technologies.
‘High risk’
They classified 24 as “high risk” of being monopolized – all by Beijing.
Ten technologies are newly classified as “high risk” this year, with many of them linked to the defense industry. Tobias Feakin, the founder of consultancy firm Protostar Strategy, told Voice of America:
The potential monopoly risk in 24 technology areas, especially those in defense-related fields like radars and drones, is concerning in the current and future geopolitical context.
Chinese President Xi Jinping has sought to boost his country’s advanced manufacturing capabilities with the ambitious “Made in China 2025” initiative. The policy was launched in 2015 to strengthen Beijing’s self-reliance in critical sectors.
It was also aimed at making China a global high-tech powerhouse. Feakin pointed out:
[Xi views advanced technologies as] strategic priorities for China’s development, national security, and global competitiveness. [This is a] central component of China’s long-term economic and geopolitical goals.
Beijing’s ambitions are being closely watched in Washington, with the Biden administration working to limit China’s access to advanced technology.
Last week, Washington introduced new export controls on critical tech to China, including chip-making equipment and quantum computers and components.
That announcement came shortly after US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan made his first visit to Beijing. He met with Xi and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.
National security
Sullivan told reporters that Washington “will continue to take necessary action to prevent advanced US technologies from being used to undermine national security.”
The continued efforts to curb China’s chip industry mean that Beijing must look further afield for advanced technology. Kennedy-White, the technology strategist in Singapore, told VOA:
Even though it leads in areas like artificial intelligence and 5G, China still depends on Taiwan, the US, and South Korea to produce high-end semiconductors.
Describing this as China’s Achilles’ heel, Kennedy-White said the lack of self-sufficiency in the chip industry could “stunt Beijing’s progress in artificial intelligence, quantum computing and military applications.”
Still, as Beijing continues its dominance in critical tech research, questions have been raised over exactly how the country is making these breakthroughs.
Last October, officials from the Five Eyes intelligence alliance of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the US issued a joint statement accusing China of stealing intellectual property.
FBI director Christopher Wray described it as an “unprecedented threat.”
Kennedy-White, the managing director of Singapore-based venture catalyst firm DivisionX Global, agreed with this assessment, adding that China’s jump up the ASPI rankings is “not entirely organic.” He said:
There is a correlation between China’s rise in certain technologies and allegations of intellectual property theft.
ASPI also recommended ways for other countries to close the gap with China. It advised the AUKUS alliance of Australia, the UK, and the US to join forces with Japan and South Korea to try to catch up.
‘Key center’
The report also highlighted the emergence of India as a “key center” of global research innovation and excellence.
The South Asian nation now ranks in the top five nations for 45 out of the 64 technologies that are tracked by ASPI. It is a huge gain compared with 2003-2007 when India sat in the top five for only four technologies. As Ferkin said:
[Countries across the Asia-Pacific] will benefit from leveraging India’s growing technology expertise and influence.
It will also provide a counterbalance to “overdependence on China’s technology supply chain,” he added.
Adam Hancock is a producer at Voice of America.
This edited article is republished courtesy of Voice of America. Read the original article here.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of China Factor.