Transcription
China created a strategy, pursued it, and tried on its own to decrease its own dependencies on the rest of the world and has been remarkably successful. And that in EVs, and batteries, and critical materials, China has an extraordinary stranglehold, if you will, upwards of 80 and 90% market share, that now the United States and even Europe are trying to catch up.
Make a lot of people who are critics of China, or critics of this situation that the United States and China find itself, believe that China, basically, to use the term you did, weaponized supply chains, weaponized strategic uh predatory targeting of industries. You know, what they're basically arguing is that China created a strategy, pursued it, and tried on its own to decrease its own dependencies on the rest of the world and has been remarkably successful. And that in EVs and batteries and critical materials, China has an extraordinary stranglehold, if you will, upwards of 80 and 90% market share that now the United States and even Europe are trying to catch up with.
So, to some degree, is China and is the situation a victim of China's success at being so good at being able to strategically target industries it wanted to dominate and to be in, and now that's created a fear that that free trade system just didn't work out right in terms of balance?
>> Well, allow me to put EV car industry in historical perspective. Around uh 2012, when China decided to really put all the resources in developing this uh new sector, uh at that time, it was not certain at all that electric vehicle industry will be a splashing success because at that time uh lots of uncertainties in terms of the technologies, in terms of the supply.
>> Well, I remember I drove one of the first BYD vehi- vehicles in like 1997.
>> Really?
>> Uh in Bay- it was one of the test sites, and I knew it was going to be big.
>> Well, you are a visionary. You were a visionary then, and uh hopefully you'll remain very optimistic about this uh industry. But, China really took a big bet. Why? Because China want to do the right thing to mitigate the impact of the climate change and the CO2 emission, etc. China wants to cut down its dependence on imported oil, crude oil. That's the driver for uh exploration of this EV car revolution. And China came up with an overarching view about how this industry should be done, and what should be the prospect, and how the supply chain should be structured or restructured. So, you can say China has the vision and has the wisdom and has the courage to play such a big bet on the EV car industry, which in China's belief will really reduce the dependence on fossil fuel, which is what China really cares about. Now, China turns out to be right. Other countries placed the similar bets. For example, Japan placed a big bet on hydrogen car, which didn't materialize. So, you cannot blame China for being visionary as well as very wise in placing the bet. And now, China's production of EV cars already succeeded China's production of fossil fuel cars. And China's goal is to push the EV car production up to about 100% of all the vehicles produced in China.
>> Let me ask you a big question, Victor, and I ask it of many military leaders, foreign policy leaders, and political leaders in the United States. Why does it matter so deeply who wins the AI race?
>> Well, I think AI revolution is not only with us, it is going to shape and change everything we do as individuals, as families, as cultures, as civilizations, you name it. And I think several things stand out very sharply to me. First of all, AI is not American intelligence. Most of people don't know that or don't want to figure that out. Secondly,
>> What do you mean by that?
>> Well, I think the way the Americans are building up their AI dominance is kind of in the belief that they should turn AI into American intelligence, which is not true. Secondly, for any country to really achieve AI dominance will be a recipe of great disaster for humankind. Because
>> Even China?
>> Even China. Just imagine any country building up AI dominance, what will it do? It probably wants to dictate to all the other countries. And that will really change the way we understand about sovereignty and independent rights of nations, for example. Therefore, I think from the Chinese perspective, first of all, AI is not American intelligence. Secondly, AI should be open sourced rather than closed sourced. Therefore, AI should be developed in such a way that all countries should have a chance to participate. No AI dominance should be allowed. And then AI should not be hugely expensive and threshold should be lower and lower rather than higher and higher. And that is the way China's developing its AI. And I truly believe in a matter of three or five years to come, mankind should know very well the megatrend in the AI, which will be open sourced. And I urge the American friends to really abandon the closed sourced way of developing AI. I think China and the United States are in the top league in terms of pushing the edge of the envelope as far as AI is concerned. And neither country is way ahead of the other country by any measurable means. And I think Mr. Jensen Huang of Nvidia is probably right. If China's behind the United States, it's probably just by an iota, a nanosecond behind the United States. And the fact that he keeps saying that top AI professionals are more than 50% Chinese from everywhere, mainland China, Taiwan, Malaysia, the United States, etc., does have a profound meaning. That is the mind of the Chinese people using Chinese characters for thousands of years, probably are better trained and better equipped to understand AI in the in the abstract sense of the word. And then the fact that China is producing about three quarters 3 million engineers of all kinds every year, uh putting them into this large pool of talents in China, uh many of whom are well trained for the AI revolution means that if any country wants to push China down in terms of the AI revolution, uh probably they will fail. Working with China is the better thing the United States has been overreaching for decades and probably has reached a point where it realizes that it does not have infinite resources to continue to practice overreach. And eventually you need to pull back.
>> overreach as encircling China as, you know, a string of pearls around you, containing China.
>> Overreaching in many senses of the word. For example, try to police the whole world, try to launch one war after another to achieve its strategic goal, which eventually is not a sustainable by any stretch of the imagination. And try to be more realistic and pragmatic. And also try to, for example, defend free trade, defend peace rather than using war as the first priority, uh should probably better serve the fundamental interest of the American people. Now, between China and the United States, I firmly believe in what I call the inevitability of peace between China and the United States, which is a kind of real
>> The inevitability of peace.
>> Inevitability of peace between China and the United States, meaning whether you like it or not, whether you like China or hate China, dislike China, you cannot use war to achieve your goal. Eventually, you need to come to terms with China as a mega trend and solve whatever problems there are, which are plenty, uh in peacefulness, through diplomacy, negotiation, for example, to avoid war rather than I came up with this inevitability of peace theory because I truly believe war should be absolutely avoided between China and the United States because if you instigate a war between China and the United States in conventional war terms, it will soon get out of control and uh escalate the uh from conventional war into non-conventional war, and that probably will spell the doom for mankind. And it will be Armageddon, in a sense. So, I talk about inevitability of peace to anyone who hasn't
>> You are in the way. Number You don't want to make war. Joe Rogan told me to join Google. I should Jack Harlow told me to join Google. We like John Joe So John Joe told Why you like Eat your towel.