'China Opportunity' trilogy benefits world: China Daily editorial

Almost every time China climbs another rung of the industrial ladder, an alarm sounds in some Western policy circles.

The original "China Shock" followed the country's integration into global manufacturing and its accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001.

The "China Shock 2.0" accompanied China's ascent in green manufacturing. Affordable solar panels, batteries and electric vehicles made decarbonization cheaper, accelerated technological adoption and gave consumers alternatives to expensive incumbents.

Now the alarm has been raised about "China Shock 3.0". Alicia Garcia-Herrero, an economist at Natixis and Bruegel, warns that Chinese advances in artificial intelligence, biotechnology and robotics could produce an even "greater disruption". But contrary to the claims of the alarmists, each "shock" has instead brought benefits and opportunities.

"China Opportunity 1.0" produced consumer goods, thanks to lower production costs, more efficient supply chains and expanded export markets. "China Opportunity 2.0" is transforming the energy transition from an environmental aspiration into an increasingly viable industrial reality. Now, the country's proficiency in both developing and the practical application of AI, biotechnology and robotics is heralding "China Opportunity 3.0". This new phase is bringing affordable open-source AI, sophisticated robotics and biotechnology to markets otherwise priced out of technological progress. Chinese robots are already being used in US research laboratories, while Chinese AI models are finding commercial users in the United States.

Calling technological competitiveness a "shock" does not establish that it is economically harmful; such technologies can strengthen foreign industries rather than merely displace them. Nor does it explain why Western companies struggling with innovation, investment or commercialization should be excused from examining their own shortcomings.

The numbers expose the contradiction. China is a major trading partner of more than 160 countries and regions and has contributed roughly 30 percent of global growth in recent decades. It has become an indispensable supplier of computing infrastructure, not simply a competitor for its customers. China's integrated-circuit exports surged 136 percent in value in September year-on-year, reflecting soaring global demand and chip prices.

Blaming China for Western industrial woes confuses competition with culpability. Underinvestment, regulatory fragmentation and workforce shortcomings in some developed economies that have failed to establish the necessary skills training cannot be attributed to China.

The intellectual selectivity is revealing. In the eyes of scaremongers, the US and the European Union are always viewed as the "victims". US tariffs, export controls and investment restrictions disrupt international commerce. The EU's unilateral practices do likewise. Yet few Western commentators voice apprehension at a "US Shock" or an "EU Shock" whenever these policies damage developing economies.

AI makes the distinction particularly important. Cybersecurity vulnerabilities, autonomous weapons and unreliable models are problems inherent in the technology, regardless of nationality. US developers already face serious safety questions. Eight US states have just sued OpenAI over alleged harm involving its chatbot. Baselessly blaming Chinese competition cannot substitute for effective domestic oversight.

Notably, former US vice-president Kamala Harris warned on Wednesday that the opportunity to establish AI safeguards was narrowing. She urged Washington and Beijing to cooperate on international standards.

The two major players in AI recognize that technological safety requires engagement and are reportedly discussing an AI incident-management framework ahead of November's APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting in Shenzhen.

The deeper anxiety behind the "shock trilogy" is fear about Western decline. That anxiety encourages a zero-sum view of an economy in which innovation, supply chains and markets remain profoundly interconnected.

China has moved from supplying affordable consumer goods to affordable green technologies and now increasingly accessible advanced technologies. Each transformation creates adjustment costs, but also enormous opportunities. The sensible response is to compete, innovate and cooperate — not to rename opportunity as a "shock".

The world needs safer AI and a faster green transition. Some Western strategists are still prescribing protectionism and unilateralism for yesterday's industrial anxieties. The real shock is how little their prescription has changed.