{
"authors": [
"Matt Sheehan"
],
"type": "commentary",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [
"Dynamic Technology Risks in Asia",
"China and the World"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"United States",
"China"
],
"topics": [
"Technology"
]
}
And what the United States must to do retain its competitiveness.
Conventional wisdom often suggests that technological breakthroughs proliferate in an environment of free markets, free speech, and democracy. In short, if you want to innovate, you need to operate like the United States. But over the past twenty years, China has transformed from a technological backwater into an innovation powerhouse.
Today, China directly competes with the United States on key emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing. And it has managed to accomplish this feat even as its government has tightened controls on markets, speech, and politics.
In this video, I argue that three main factors have turbocharged China’s rise as a technological powerhouse: a large, semi-protected market; ties with researchers and companies around the world; and waves of financial, human, and physical capital invested in promising fields like AI. To keep the United States competitive, Washington should explore certain elements of China’s strategy, including a willingness to experiment with pro-innovation policies and an ability to accept a certain amount of “waste” when catalyzing technological upgrading.
More on China and technology:
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
In return for a trade deal and the release of political prisoners, the United States has lifted sanctions on Belarus, breaking the previous Western policy consensus. Should Europeans follow suit, using their leverage to extract concessions from Lukashenko, or continue to isolate a key Kremlin ally?
Thomas de Waal, ed.
Carnegie scholars examine the crucial elements of a document that’s radically different than its predecessors.
James M. Acton, Saskia Brechenmacher, Cecily Brewer, …
The hyper-personalized new version of global sphere-of-influence politics that Donald Trump wants will fail, as it did for Russia. In the meantime, Europe must still deal with a disruptive former ally determined to break the rules.
Thomas de Waal
Between Greenland and U.S. interference in Europe’s democracies, transatlantic relations risk rising to an unprecedented level of crisis. Amid continued arguments on how Brussels should react, tough times lie ahead for European leaders.
Marc Pierini
2026 has started in crisis, as the actions of unpredictable leaders shape an increasingly volatile global environment. To shift from crisis response to strategic foresight, what under-the-radar issues should the EU prepare for in the coming year?
Thomas de Waal