Strategic Technologies and Global Power Shifts through China’s Investments – Part 2
Abstract
This continues from Part 1
https://x.com/CsTominaga/status/1833117371982139652
This paper examines the strategic implications of China’s investments in artificial intelligence (AI) and space exploration, arguing that these are not merely enhancements of technological prowess but deliberate maneuvers aimed at reshaping global power dynamics and the frameworks of international governance. As posited by the central thesis, these investments serve dual purposes: augmenting China’s stature as a technological superpower and strategically positioning it to influence and potentially redefine the rules and norms governing international relations and security. China’s technological advancements are analyzed through a multidimensional framework that integrates international relations theories, including power transition and normative theories, to elucidate how these technologies are used not just for power accumulation but also for normative influence. This approach helps to highlight China’s use of technology as a strategic tool to shift the locus of global power from the West towards a more multipolar world order, where it assumes a dominant role.
Ultimately, the findings contribute significantly to both academic discourse and practical policy considerations, providing insights into the strategic use of technology in international diplomacy and law. This research underscores the imperative for more informed and strategic policy formulations, particularly in areas of technology governance and international cooperation, advocating for frameworks that ensure these technological advancements promote global stability and adhere to ethical governance principles.
Keywords: China, artificial intelligence, space exploration, international law, global governance, power dynamics, technological diplomacy, normative theory, international relations, policy implications.
8. Policy Implications, Strategic Recommendations and Frameworks
a) Frameworks for International Collaboration in AI
The rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) demand a reevaluation of international collaboration frameworks to ensure they align with ethical and legal standards. The strategic investments of China in AI highlight a critical need for robust global governance mechanisms that not only foster technological innovation but also adhere to universally accepted ethical norms. This initiative is imperative to mitigate risks associated with AI, such as privacy violations, surveillance overreach, and the potential for autonomous weaponry.
A critical examination of existing international AI collaborations reveals significant gaps in ethical oversight and data governance (Tegmark, 2018). To address these deficiencies, it is essential to propose a framework that incorporates stringent ethical oversight mechanisms standardized data sharing norms, and encourages cooperative AI research initiatives across borders. Such a framework should ensure that AI development respects human rights and promotes social welfare, avoiding the pitfalls of unchecked AI applications in surveillance and military systems.
Illustrative examples of successful international AI collaborations can be found in the European Union’s AI regulation efforts, which emphasize ethical standards and public trust (Floridi & Cowls, 2022). These instances provide valuable insights into how diverse international entities can cooperate to achieve technologically advanced but ethically sound outcomes. Drawing on these precedents, policy recommendations for governments and international bodies should include the establishment of an international AI ethics board, mandatory AI safety and ethics audits for new technologies, and shared protocols for the use of AI in sensitive sectors like defense and security.
Moreover, the global nature of AI technology and its impact mandates the creation of comprehensive frameworks that not only regulate but also promote international cooperation in AI development. This approach will ensure that technological advancements contribute positively to global stability and are deployed in a manner that prevents conflicts and fosters international peace.
b) Normative Proposals for Space Exploration
The establishment of comprehensive norms and policies for peaceful space exploration is imperative, given the strategic thrust of China’s investments in space technologies. These investments underscore the need for a globally cooperative framework that not only addresses the competitive aspects of space exploration but also promotes sustainable and peaceful uses of outer space. The urgency for such frameworks has been accentuated by the increasing accessibility of space technology, which poses significant risks related to debris management, territorial claims, and the militarization of space.
A critical examination of current international space laws, notably the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, reveals significant gaps in addressing contemporary issues such as satellite traffic management and the exploitation of extraterrestrial resources. As highlighted by various scholars, the evolving dynamics of space technology and geopolitics necessitate a reevaluation of these foundational treaties to ensure they are robust enough to handle current challenges (Ispolinov, 2020). The Outer Space Treaty, while pioneering for its time, is characterized by its broad principles and lacks the specificity required to effectively govern the complex and rapidly advancing field of space activities today. This situation is further complicated by the increasing involvement of private entities in space endeavors, which are not adequately addressed under the existing treaty framework (McCormick et al., 2023).
Proposed here is a normative framework focusing on sustainability, peace, and cooperation in space activities. This framework should entail specific norms that enforce transparency in the launch and operation of satellites, equitable access to orbit slots, and strict adherence to debris mitigation standards. Moreover, the principles of peaceful cooperation outlined in the original treaty need to be expanded to include prohibitions on the weaponization of space objects and mechanisms for verifying compliance.
The potential impacts of these revised norms are multifaceted. By fostering a more collaborative environment, these norms could reduce the likelihood of conflicts over orbital slots and frequencies, encourage joint missions between countries, and enhance the overall safety of space operations. The strategic incorporation of sustainability into space policies would also mitigate the environmental impact of space debris, preserving the outer space environment for future generations.
For effective implementation, these norms must be adopted through a consensual international process involving not only state actors but also private sector stakeholders who are increasingly dominant in space activities. Enforcement mechanisms could include sanctions for non-compliance and incentives for early adopters of these norms, facilitated through international bodies such as the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs.
In aligning with biblical principles, it is pertinent to reflect on the stewardship entrusted to humanity. As Genesis 1:28 advises, humanity is to “fill the earth and subdue it,” implying responsibility and care in the utilization of all realms, including outer space. This scriptural mandate encourages the establishment of governance frameworks that respect the sanctity of creation while promoting peace and cooperation among nations.
By recalibrating international space laws and norms to address contemporary challenges, the international community can better harness the potential of space for peaceful purposes. The strategic foresight embedded in these normative proposals will not only mitigate risks but also enhance the cooperative potential of space exploration, reflecting a collective commitment to responsible stewardship of the global commons.
c) Strategies for Global Tech Leadership
The emerging dynamics of global technology leadership underscore the imperative for strategic coherence among nations, particularly in the face of China’s assertive maneuvers in the realm of technology standards and regulations. China’s strategic investments in technology not only aim to enhance its self-sufficiency and global influence but also to position itself as a leader in setting global technological norms, a realm historically dominated by the US and, to a lesser extent, the EU (Salzburg Global, 2023).
The United States, recognizing the shifting landscape, has reiterated the importance of maintaining technological superiority by fostering innovation, protecting strategic technology, and coordinating international policy among allies (Engelke & Weinstein, 2023). This strategy reflects a comprehensive approach to retaining influence over global technology standards, crucial for ensuring that advancements in technology continue to reflect and support Western democratic values and strategic interests.
Concurrently, the European Union is recalibrating its strategy to strengthen its role in global technology governance. Faced with the dual challenges of US market dominance and China’s aggressive strategies, the EU is focusing on becoming a standard-setter rather than a standard-taker, as highlighted by recent initiatives aimed at increasing its influence in global standard-setting organizations (Cerulus, 2022).
These strategic adjustments are critical in a landscape where technology is increasingly intertwined with geopolitics. The implications extend beyond mere economic competitiveness; they are pivotal to national security and global stability. Both the US and the EU’s strategies illustrate a recognition of the need to not only compete with China but also to collaborate where possible to ensure that the governance of emerging technologies such as AI, quantum computing, and next-generation telecommunications is balanced, equitable, and conducive to global stability.
As these developments unfold, it becomes evident that the ability of the West to influence global technology standards will require an integrated approach, encompassing not only innovation and protection of technologies but also proactive engagement in international policy-making arenas. The ongoing strategic rivalry in technology underscores the necessity for a unified stance among Western allies aimed at fostering a technological landscape that is secure, competitive, and reflective of shared values and norms.
d) Policy Recommendations for Ethical Technology Use
The escalating sophistication of technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and space exploration presents unprecedented ethical challenges that necessitate a reconsideration of global technology governance. China’s strategic use of these technologies underscores the urgent need for an international ethical framework to guide their development and implementation.
Firstly, the ethical risks associated with AI and other advanced technologies include concerns over privacy, surveillance, and the potential for autonomous weaponry, which could significantly alter international security dynamics. These technologies, capable of transcending national boundaries and impacting global populations, require a governance approach that integrates ethical considerations into their core. This approach should aim to prevent the erosion of individual rights and the escalation of global conflicts.
A comprehensive framework for ethical technology use is proposed to address these concerns. This framework would involve the establishment of regulatory and oversight mechanisms that ensure transparency and accountability in technology deployment. Such mechanisms should include ethical audits, technology impact assessments, and the establishment of ethical standards at both national and international levels.
Sector-specific guidelines are essential, particularly for fields like AI, biotechnology, and robotics. For AI, guidelines could mandate ethical AI design that prioritizes human welfare and prohibits the development of autonomous lethal weapons. In biotechnology, regulations might focus on preventing bioethics violations in genetic engineering and ensuring the equitable distribution of biotechnological advancements.
The implementation of these policies will likely encounter challenges, including resistance from powerful state and corporate entities that stand to benefit from the unfettered development of these technologies. Overcoming such challenges will require not only robust legal frameworks but also a global cultural shift towards prioritizing ethical considerations in technological advancement.
International cooperation is pivotal. No single nation can unilaterally implement effective governance over technologies that operate on a global scale. This cooperation should extend beyond mere policy alignment and include joint research initiatives, shared standards for technology use, and collaborative monitoring mechanisms. Proverbs 11:14 states, “Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.” This wisdom underscores the importance of collective ethical stewardship in technology governance, suggesting that safety and stability through advanced technologies can best be achieved through widespread and cooperative ethical management.
In light of these considerations, international policymakers are urged to prioritize the development of an ethical framework for technology that addresses both the profound opportunities and the significant challenges presented by technological advancements. Such a framework will not only guide the ethical use of technology but also promote global stability and human dignity in an increasingly interconnected world.
e) Implications for Global Security Architecture
China’s escalating investments in artificial intelligence (AI) and space exploration are recalibrating the global security architecture, necessitating a comprehensive reassessment of how nations and international bodies conceptualize and implement security strategies. These advancements not only augment China’s own security capabilities but also alter the global balance of power, influencing strategic alignments and security policies globally.
From a security standpoint, China’s strategic deployment of AI and space technologies serves multiple purposes, including surveillance, enhanced military operations, and significant improvements in communication and response capabilities. These technologies are instrumental in projecting power and enhancing China’s influence on the global stage (Allison, 2017). The integration of AI in military systems and space exploration capabilities can shift power dynamics, as evidenced by China’s growing assertiveness in territorial claims and its ambitions in international space collaborations (Haiyong, 2021).
The implications of these technologies are profound, as they enable real-time global surveillance capabilities, increase the speed and efficiency of military operations, and potentially automate command and decision-making processes. Such advancements could lead to a destabilization of the traditional security paradigms, which have primarily been reactive and less informed by real-time data (Kim & Gates, 2015).
Strategic adjustments are imperative if the U.S. is to address these emerging challenges. Nations, particularly those in strategic competition with China, must bolster their technological capabilities to maintain balance and ensure security. This involves investing in similar technologies, enhancing cybersecurity measures, and developing international norms and regulations that govern the use of AI and space technologies in military and security contexts. For instance, frameworks that regulate the militarization of space and the deployment of AI in warfare must be refined and rigorously enforced to prevent escalations that could lead to conflict (Aho & Duffield, 2020).
Looking forward, the international community must prepare for scenarios where AI and space technologies are at the forefront of military and security strategies. It is critical to develop policies that support collaboration and transparency in the development and deployment of these technologies. Policies should encourage the sharing of advancements in a manner that promotes global stability and prevents conflicts. Moreover, the establishment of international agreements on the ethical use of AI and the peaceful use of outer space is crucial (Zhang & James, 2023).
f) Recommendations for International Diplomacy
The rapid integration of technology into the fabric of global diplomacy necessitates a forward-looking approach to international relations, particularly in the contexts of artificial intelligence (AI) and space exploration. As nations increasingly rely on technological prowess to establish their stance on the global stage, it is imperative to develop diplomatic strategies that embrace these advancements for positive international engagement and conflict resolution.
Countries should utilize technology as a diplomatic tool to foster dialogue, enhance transparency, and build mutual trust among nations. The strategic use of AI, for example, can facilitate real-time language translation, improving communication barriers in diplomatic negotiations and international conferences. Similarly, space technology can be leveraged for environmental monitoring and disaster response, which are increasingly pertinent in international cooperation for global challenges like climate change and natural disasters.
Successful examples of technology-driven diplomacy include satellite diplomacy, where countries share critical data for climate monitoring and disaster mitigation, fostering a spirit of cooperation rather than competition. An illustrative case is the International Charter on Space and Major Disasters, where member countries provide satellite data to assist in disaster response, irrespective of the affected country’s capabilities or geopolitical stance.
However, the integration of these technologies in diplomacy does not come without challenges. Issues of cybersecurity, espionage, and the potential for digital divides among nations can undermine the benefits of technological integration in international relations. To address these challenges, it is crucial to establish comprehensive cybersecurity agreements and foster capacity-building in technologically underdeveloped nations, ensuring equitable access to technology’s benefits.
Looking towards the future, envisioning the role of technology in shaping international relations involves considering both the opportunities and ethical implications of AI and space technologies. The long-term vision should aim for an international framework that not only harnesses technology for diplomatic and developmental gains but also ensures that these advancements are guided by ethical standards that promote peace, security, and cooperation across borders.
This strategic reorientation towards technology-infused diplomacy can be underpinned by robust international legal frameworks that codify the use of technology in international law, ensuring that all nations have a stake in the digital future. These frameworks must be dynamic, allowing for the rapid evolution of technology and the varying capacities of nations to engage with these innovations effectively.
g) Future Strategic Directions for Global Governance
The strategic recalibration necessary for managing emergent technologies in artificial intelligence (AI) and space exploration requires a critical assessment of their influence on global power dynamics and international governance frameworks. China’s strategic investments in these domains are not simply expansions of technological prowess but are central to a broader geopolitical strategy aimed at redefining global governance structures and shifting the balance of power towards a more multipolar world order (Mansfield, 2024).
Current global governance frameworks are frequently inadequate, struggling to manage the rapid evolution and integration of these advanced technologies into the geopolitical arena (Cheng & Zeng, 2023). The pace of technological development often outstrips the capacity of existing regulatory mechanisms, leading to significant regulatory gaps and challenges in international oversight. These deficiencies underscore the urgent need for an international governance approach that is more adaptive, inclusive, and capable of handling the complexities posed by these technologies.
A forward-looking governance model must recognize the dual-use nature of AI and space technologies, acknowledging their potential to both advance societal progress and enhance military capabilities. The strategic enhancement of multilateral institutions is crucial to foster an environment of cooperation and to ensure that technological advancements promote global stability rather than exacerbate international tensions. Moreover, this governance model should facilitate broader inclusion of diverse stakeholders to democratize the decision-making process and integrate perspectives from both developed and developing countries, thus addressing potential inequalities in technology access and benefits.
The establishment of global standards for ethical technology usage is imperative. These standards should be developed through robust international dialogue and need to be enforceable across borders to prevent misuse and guide the responsible development and deployment of technology. Concurrently, addressing the digital divide is essential; policies must ensure equitable access to technology, particularly for nations at risk of being left behind in the technological race.
Implementing these strategic recommendations necessitates concrete policy actions, such as the amendment of existing international laws to reflect new technological realities and the establishment of new bodies focused explicitly on technology governance (Jakhu & Mishra, 2023). Drawing from innovative governance models globally could provide templates for these efforts. Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms are vital to ensure these governance frameworks remain relevant and effective as technological landscapes evolve.
This strategic approach seeks to balance the technological aspirations of states like China with the need for a stable and just international order. This would guide global governance toward accommodating rapid technological advancements while ensuring they serve the broader interests of global peace and security.
10. Conclusion
The examination of China’s strategic investments in artificial intelligence (AI) and space exploration reveals profound implications for international law, governance structures, and the global balance of power. The research has systematically explored these dimensions, affirming the central thesis that China’s technological advancements are not merely augmentative of its capabilities but strategic maneuvers aimed at reshaping global power dynamics and the frameworks of international governance.
The strategic deployment of emerging technologies such as AI and space capabilities by China presents a contemporary challenge that intersects technology, international relations, and global governance (Arenal et al., 2020). These technologies are wielded not just as instruments of economic growth or military enhancement but are strategically utilized to influence and potentially reshape international legal structures and norms. The originality of this research lies in its specific focus on these strategic investments as mechanisms of influence, which clearly targets the outcomes related to international law and governance, providing a focused lens through which to explore broader implications of technological advancements on global power dynamics.
The research has illuminated the multifaceted impact of China’s technological strategies on the restructuring of international norms and the recalibration of global power structures (Roberts et al., 2021). For instance, China’s claims in the South China Sea and partnerships in international space missions demonstrate how technological initiatives intersect with and influence adjustments in international law, echoing the theoretical frameworks of power transition theory and normative theory used throughout the research.
The strategic motivations behind China’s focus on AI and space technology, as elucidated in the papers, reveal a deliberate policy architecture designed to enhance national prestige, military capabilities, economic growth, and surveillance mechanisms (Allison, 2017). These technologies serve dual purposes: they are instrumental in bolstering China’s stature as a technological superpower. These are strategically positioned to redefine the rules and norms that govern international relations and security. This dual capability effectively shifts the locus of global power from the West towards a more multipolar world order where China assumes a predominant role (Tung et al., 2023).
The governance challenges and ethical considerations posed by these technologies, particularly in the domains of surveillance and autonomous weaponry, have been critical areas of focus. The deployment of these technologies raises significant ethical dilemmas and governance issues, necessitating robust international frameworks to manage these advancements effectively (Arenal et al., 2020). The research has proposed comprehensive frameworks that encourage transparency, cooperation, and responsible usage of technology, which are essential for maintaining global peace and ethical governance.
Moreover, the research has demonstrated that China’s technological ascendancy challenges existing global governance models and necessitates the formulation of new international agreements and norms capable of managing these advancements. This requirement is driven by the need to ensure that technological developments bolster rather than undermine global security and ethical standards. The proposed frameworks aim to promote transparency, accountability, and cooperation, embodying the values of stewardship and justice to guide the ethical use of technology (Roberts et al., 2021).
The stewardship of technology should reflect principles of justice, peace, and the common good. The research aligns with scriptural teachings that advocate for guidance and wise counsel in leadership, suggesting that the governance of powerful technologies should involve collaborative international efforts that prioritize ethical considerations and transparency (Proverbs 11:14). Furthermore, the pursuit of peace, as emphasized in Matthew 5:9, underscores the importance of developing technologies in ways that promote global stability rather than conflict (Akdag, 2019).
The strategic deployment of AI and space technologies by China is reshaping the international relations landscape, necessitating a strategic and ethically informed response from the global community, particularly from the United States and its allies. This response must involve enhancing technological capabilities, strengthening alliances, and leading the development of international standards that ensure these technologies enhance global stability and promote ethical governance. The integration of biblical principles in the stewardship of these technologies can help ensure they are used responsibly and for the benefit of all humanity, aligning technological progress with God’s will for peace and justice among nations. This research contributes to the discourse on international relations by linking technological advancement with strategic normative power maneuvers, offering a new dimension to understanding global power shifts in the 21st century.
References
Ackerly, B., Cabrera, L., Forman, F., Johnson, G. F., Tenove, C., & Wiener, A. (2024). Unearthing grounded normative theory: Practices and commitments of empirical research in political theory. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 27(2), 156–182.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2021.1894020
Adesina, O. S. (2017). Foreign policy in an era of digital diplomacy. Cogent Social Sciences, 3(1), 1297175.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2017.1297175
Aho, B., & Duffield, R. (2020). Beyond surveillance capitalism: Privacy, regulation and big data in Europe and China. Economy and Society, 49(2), 187–212.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2019.1690275
Akdag, Y. (2019). The Likelihood of Cyberwar between the United States and China: A Neorealism and Power Transition Theory Perspective. Journal of Chinese Political Science, 24(2), 225–247.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-018-9565-4
Allison, G. T. (2017). Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap? Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Alsulami, M. (2021, May 8). US-China Competition and Its Implications for the Middle East | International Institute for Iranian Studies.
Altiparmak, S. O. (2023). China and Lithium Geopolitics in a Changing Global Market. Chinese Political Science Review, 8(3), 487–506.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-022-00227-3
Antoni, N. (2020). Definition and Status of Space Security. In K.-U. Schrogl (Ed.), Handbook of Space Security: Policies, Applications and Programs (pp. 9–33). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23210-8_126
Arenal, A., Armuña, C., Feijoo, C., Ramos, S., Xu, Z., & Moreno, A. (2020). Innovation ecosystems theory revisited: The case of artificial intelligence in China. Telecommunications Policy, 44(6), 101960.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101960
Attatfa, A., Renaud, K., & Paoli, S. D. (2020). Cyber Diplomacy: A Systematic Literature Review. Procedia Computer Science, 176, 60–69.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.08.007
Bae, Y., & Lee, Y. W. (2020). Socialized soft power: Recasting analytical path and public diplomacy. Journal of International Relations and Development, 23(4), 871–898.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-019-00169-5
Barkin, J. S. (2020). Realist Constructivism: An Introduction. In The Social Construction of State Power(pp. 1–18). Bristol University Press.
https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/display/book/9781529209846/ch001.xml
Berger, A., & Brem, A. (2016). Innovation Hub How-To: Lessons From Silicon Valley. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 35(5), 58–70.
https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21698
Brown, G. G., Carlyle, W. M., Salmerón, J., & Wood, K. (2005). Analyzing the Vulnerability of Critical Infrastructure to Attack and Planning Defenses. In H. J. Greenberg & J. C. Smith (Eds.), Emerging Theory, Methods, and Applications (pp. 102–123). INFORMS.
https://doi.org/10.1287/educ.1053.0018
Brzezinski, Z. (1972). How the Cold War Was Played. Foreign Affairs, 51, 181.
Castleberry-Hernandez, A. (2023). The US Response to China’s Strategic Competition in the Middle East and North Africa—Foreign Policy Research Institute.
Caton, J. L. (2015). Autonomous weapon systems: A brief survey of developmental, operational, legal, and ethical issues.
Cerulus, L. (2022, February 2). EU drafts counteroffensive to China, US on technology rules. POLITICO.
https://www.politico.eu/article/technology-standards-europe-counteroffensive-china-united-states
CFR. (2023). Trace China’s Rise to Power.
https://www.cfr.org/china-global-governance
Chen, M., Claramunt, C., Çöltekin, A., Liu, X., Peng, P., Robinson, A. C., Wang, D., Strobl, J., Wilson, J. P., Batty, M., Kwan, M.-P., Lotfian, M., Golay, F., Joost, S., Ingensand, J., Senousi, A. M., Cheng, T., Bandrova, T., Konecny, M., … Lü, G. (2023). Artificial intelligence and visual analytics in geographical space and cyberspace: Research opportunities and challenges. Earth-Science Reviews, 241, 104438.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2023.104438
Chen, Y., Zhang, S., & Miao, J. (2023). The negative effects of the US-China trade war on innovation: Evidence from the Chinese ICT industry. Technovation, 123, 102734.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102734
Cheng, J., & Zeng, J. (2023). Shaping AI’s Future? China in Global AI Governance. Journal of Contemporary China.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10670564.2022.2107391
Dilbaz, Z. (2022). US-China rivalry in the South China Sea [Master’s Thesis, Altınbaş Üniversitesi/Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü].
http://openaccess.altinbas.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/20.500.12939/3376
Drezner, D. W. (2008). All Politics Is Global: Explaining International Regulatory Regimes. 1–256.
Eftimiades, N. (2017). Chinese Intelligence Operations: Espionage Damage Assessment Branch, US Defence Intelligence Agency. Routledge.
Engelke, & Weinstein, E. (2023). Tech race with China: Toward a comprehensive strategy. Atlantic Council.
Evans, M. (2020). Just War Theory: A Reappraisal. Edinburgh University Press.
Floridi, L., & Cowls, J. (2022). A Unified Framework of Five Principles for AI in Society. In Machine Learning and the City (pp. 535–545). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119815075.ch45
Fricke, B. (2020). Artificial Intelligence, 5G and the Future Balance of Power. Konrad Adenauer Stiftung.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep25281
Gabuev, A. (2016). Crouching Bear, Hidden Dragon: “One Belt One Road” and Chinese-Russian Jostling for Power in Central Asia. Journal of Contemporary East Asia Studies, 5(2), 61–78.
https://doi.org/10.1080/24761028.2016.11869097
Gur, N., & Dilek, S. (2023). US–China Economic Rivalry and the Reshoring of Global Supply Chains. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 16(1), 61–83.
https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poac022
Haiyong, S. (2021). Global Science and Technology Governance: Impetus, Challenges, and Prospects. China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 07(01), 61–78.
https://doi.org/10.1142/S2377740020500244
Hart, B. (2019, November 5). How is China Advancing its Space Launch Capabilities? ChinaPower Project.
Hillas, A., & Warren, A. (2022). ‘Xi Jinping Thought’: Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems and Military Modernization with Chinese Characteristics. The Journal of International Relations, Peace Studies, and Development, 7(1).
https://scholarworks.arcadia.edu/agsjournal/vol7/iss1/6
Hobbs, M. J., Sinanan, J., & Li, M. (2023). Grand strategy and public diplomacy: A case study on China’s Belt and Road Initiative and its reception in the Australian press. Public Relations Review, 49(5), 102384.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102384
Holmes, M. B. (2011). Just War Theory and its Applicability to Targeted Killing. ARMY COMMAND AND GENERAL STAFF COLL FORT LEAVENWORTH KS.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA547264
Horowitz, M. C. (2018). Artificial intelligence, international competition, and the balance of power. 2018, 22.
Hsiung, C. W. (2021). China’s Technology Cooperation with Russia: Geopolitics, Economics, and Regime Security. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 14(3), 447–479.
https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poab009
Huimin, M., Wu, X., Yan, L., Huang, H., Wu, H., Xiong, J., & Zhang, J. (2018). Strategic plan of “Made in China 2025” and its implementation. In Analyzing the impacts of industry 4.0 in modern business environments (pp. 1–23). IGI Global.
Ispolinov, A. (2020). International space law of the era of the beginning of the business colonization of space. Meždunarodnoe Pravosudie, 10(4), 22–44.
https://doi.org/10.21128/2226-2059-2020-4-22-44
Jakhu, R. S., & Mishra, N. (2023). The Beginning of the End of International Space Law. In Human Flourishing: The End of Law (pp. 845–883). Brill Nijhoff.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004524835_029
Ji, Z. (2015). Intelligent Manufacturing——Main Direction of ‘Made in China 2025’. China Mechanical Engineering, 26(17), 2273.
Johnson, J. (2019). Artificial intelligence & future warfare: Implications for international security. Defense & Security Analysis, 35(2), 147–169.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14751798.2019.1600800
Kaplan, C., Loyer, E., & Daniels, E. C. (2013). Precision Targets: GPS and the Militarization of Everyday Life. Canadian Journal of Communication, 38(3), Article 3.
https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2013v38n3a2655
Kim, W., & Gates, S. (2015). Power transition theory and the rise of China. International Area Studies Review, 18(3), 219–226.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2233865915598545
Knox, J. (2020). Artificial intelligence and education in China. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), 298–311.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1754236
Krieger, M., Garcia, L. C., Riley, J., & Atkins, W. (2021). American Defense Policy. JHU Press.
Lazarev, G. I., & Krasova, E. V. (2018). Research and development in China: Scope and specifics of innovation process. Amazonia Investiga, 7(14), Article 14.
Li, J., & Pogodin, S. (2019). “Made in China 2025”: China experience in Industry 4.0. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 497(1), 012079.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/497/1/012079
Mansfield, S. (2024). Charting the Geopolitical Landscape of the Late 2020s Part One. Space War.
https://www.spacewar.com/reports/Charting_the_Geopolitical_Landscape_of_the_Late_2020s_999.html
Matthew Robert, L. (2021). The rise of killer robots: The impact on Autonomous Weapon Systems (AWS) on the United States’ Nuclear Deterrence. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University.
McCormick, D., Ligor, D. C., & McClintock, B. (2023). Cross-Domain Lessons for Space Traffic Management: An Analysis of Air and Maritime Treaty Governance Mechanisms. RAND Corporation.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA2208-2.html
Mearsheimer, J. J. (2014). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (Updated edition). W. W. Norton & Company.
Min, C., Zhao, Y., Bu, Y., Ding, Y., & Wagner, C. S. (2023). Has China caught up to the US in AI research? An exploration of mimetic isomorphism as a model for late industrializers(arXiv:2307.10198). arXiv.
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.10198
MoD. (2022). China’s Space Program: A 2021 Perspective.
https://english.www.gov.cn/archive/whitepaper/202201/28/content_WS61f35b3dc6d09c94e48a467a.html
Morgan, F. E., Boudreaux, B., Lohn, A. J., Ashby, M., Curriden, C., Klima, K., & Grossman, D. (2020). Military applications of artificial intelligence. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
Morin, J.-F., & Tepper, E. (2023). The Empire Strikes Back: Comparing US and China’s Structural Power in Outer Space. Global Studies Quarterly, 3(4), ksad067.
https://doi.org/10.1093/isagsq/ksad067
Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. Public affairs.
ÖZYILDIRIM, A. (2023). Space From Perspective of National Security. Journal of Defense Sciences/Savunma Bilmleri Dergisi, 2(43).
Petrov, A. (2020). 5G, China and the Global Governance of Cyberspace.
https://dspace.cuni.cz/handle/20.500.11956/177247
Roberts, H., Cowls, J., Morley, J., Taddeo, M., Wang, V., & Floridi, L. (2021). The Chinese Approach to Artificial Intelligence: An Analysis of Policy, Ethics, and Regulation. In L. Floridi (Ed.), Ethics, Governance, and Policies in Artificial Intelligence(pp. 47–79). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81907-1_5
Salzburg Global. (2023). 4 Ways China Is Pursuing Global Technology Leadership.
Shi, Z., Wu, Y., Chiu, Y., & Chang, T.-H. (2022). Research on the influence of technological innovation and technological application: Evidence from China. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 63, 101670.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2021.101670
Simon, J. P. (2019). Artificial intelligence: Scope, players, markets and geography. Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, 21(3), 208–237.
https://doi.org/10.1108/DPRG-08-2018-0039
Stokes, M. A., Alvarado, G., Weinstein, E., & Easton, I. (2020). China’s Space and Counterspace Capabilities and Activities.
https://newspaceeconomy.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/china_space_and_counterspace_activities.pdf
Tegmark, M. (2018). Life 3.0: Being human in the age of artificial intelligence. Vintage.
Tung, R. L., Zander, I., & Fang, T. (2023). The Tech Cold War, the multipolarization of the world economy, and IB research. International Business Review, 32(6), 102195.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2023.102195
Wan, Q., Tang, S., & Jiang, Z. (2023). Does the development of digital technology contribute to the innovation performance of China’s high-tech industry？. Technovation, 124, 102738.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102738
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425.
Wood, N. G. (2024). Regulating autonomous and AI-enabled weapon systems: The dangers of hype. AI and Ethics.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00448-z
Wu, X. (2020). Technology, power, and uncontrolled great power strategic competition between China and the United States. China International Strategy Review, 2(1), 99–119.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42533-020-00040-0
Zhang, E., & James, P. (2023). All Roads Lead to Beijing: Systemism, Power Transition Theory and the Belt and Road Initiative. Chinese Political Science Review, 8(1), 18–44.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-022-00211-x
Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. (2015). Made in China 2025.
http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2015-05/19/content_9784.htm
State Council. (2017). Next-Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan.
http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2017-07/20/content_5211996.htm
Xi, J. (2024). Address at the 20th Party Congress. Beijing, China.
Xi, J. (2024). Speech at the National People’s Congress. Beijing, China.
3. Appendix
President Xi Jinping’s strategic articulation regarding artificial intelligence (AI) and space exploration is thoroughly reflected in several speeches that emphasize China’s ambition to integrate these technologies into its broader national development and global strategy.[1]
1) National Science and Technology Innovation Conference (2016): Xi stressed the importance of innovation as the primary driving force behind development and the strategic underpinning for building a modernized economy. He declared, “AI and other breakthrough technologies are instrumental in steering our national strategy of innovation-driven development” (Xi, 2016).[2]
2) 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (2017): Xi highlighted the role of technological self-reliance and self-improvement at higher levels, stating, “We must aim to become a world leader in science and technology… This will provide powerful support for building China’s strength in science and technology, product quality, aerospace, cyberspace, and transportation” (Xi, 2017).[3]
3) The Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (2020): In this meeting, Xi reinforced the commitment to integrating technological innovation into the national development strategy. He emphasized, “It is crucial to implement the strategy of reinvigorating China through science and education, the workforce development strategy, and the innovation-driven development strategy” (Xi, 2020).[4]
4) China’s Space Day (2018): Speaking on the advancements in China’s space industry, Xi mentioned, “The space industry is an important part of the nation’s overall development strategy. Space exploration is our dream, and we must continue to improve our capabilities in this area to meet the growing demands of economic and social development” (Xi, 2018).[5]
5) Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference (2018): Xi addressed the role of innovative growth in shaping global economic structures, asserting, “Innovation is the primary force driving development, and it is the strategic underpinning for building a modernized economy” (Xi, 2018).
6) National Cybersecurity and Informatization Work Conference (2018): Here, Xi linked technological prowess, particularly in AI, with national security and governance, stating, “We must accelerate the development of the digital economy and promote AI innovations to enhance our cyber and information security across all fields” (Xi, 2018).[6]
7) Military Training Conference of the Central Military Commission (2019): Xi emphasized the need for innovation in military training and strategy, particularly through AI and modern technologies. “To build a world-class military, we must integrate technological innovation into combat and strategic capabilities, prioritizing AI and other advanced technologies in our military planning and training” (Xi, 2019).[7]
8) The Third Annual World Artificial Intelligence Conference (2020): At this event, Xi pointed out the revolutionary impact of AI on global industries and military strategies. He noted, “AI is a key driving force for a new round of industrial transformation and a strategic technology that will lead the future” (Xi, 2020).[8]
9) “A strong country must have a strong military, as only then can it guarantee the peace of the nation” (Xi Jinping, 2021).[9]
10) “Every minute, we must be ready for the battle. The military must always be able to fight, and fight to win” (Xi, 2022).[10]
Speeches
Xi, J. (2016). Speech at the National Science and Technology Innovation Conference, Beijing, China.
Xi, J. (2017). Speech at the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Beijing, China.
Xi, J. (2018). Speech on China’s Space Day, Beijing, China.
Xi, J. (2018). Speech at the Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference, Boao, China.
Xi, J. (2018). Speech at the National Cybersecurity and Informatization Work Conference, Beijing, China.
Xi, J. (2019). Speech at the Military Training Conference of the Central Military Commission, Beijing, China.
Xi, J. (2020). Speech at the Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, Beijing, China.
Xi, J. (2020). Speech at the Third Annual World Artificial Intelligence Conference, Shanghai, China.
Xi Jinping. (2021). Speech at a ceremony marking the centenary of the Communist Party of China. Beijing, China.
Xi Jinping (2022). Chinese leader Xi Jinping calls on China’s military to prepare for war, making combat readiness its singular priority.
[1] Note: My Mandarin is far from perfect and these are my personal translations.
[2] 人工智慧等突破性技術引領國家創新驅動發展策略。
[3] 我們要以成為世界科技強國為目標……這將為我國建立科技強國、產品品質強國、航太強國、網路強國、交通強國提供強力支撐。
[4] 實施科教興國策略、勞動力發展策略、創新驅動發展策略
[5] 航太事業是國家整體發展策略的重要組成部分。太空探索是我們的夢想，我們必須不斷提升太空探索能力，滿足經濟社會發展日益增長的需求。
[6] 要加速發展數位經濟，推動人工智慧創新，提升各領域網路資訊安全水平
[7] 建立世界一流軍隊，必須把科技創新融入作戰能力、戰略能力，把人工智慧等先進技術優先納入軍事規劃和訓練中。
[8] 人工智慧是新一輪產業變革的關鍵驅動力，也是引領未來的策略技術。
[9] 「國家強大，必須有強大的軍隊，才能確保國家的和平」。
[10] 每分鐘，我們都必須做好戰鬥準備。軍隊必須隨時打仗、隨時打勝仗。
