Washington is buzzing with reports that the US plans to heighten scrutiny of Chinese efforts to access artificial intelligence (AI) and other sensitive technology by acquiring or taking stakes in cutting-edge Silicon Valley firms.
The worry is that China, or others, will use acquired American AI tech to ramp up their military and economic power. The Pentagon is said to have a report under wraps that says China is dodging US security reviews by engaging in outwardly harmless joint ventures, investing in early-stage startups or gaining minority shareholdings in US tech companies.
But a larger question is whether it’s practical or even possible for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) – the inter-agency committee that reviews foreign acquisition of US firms on national security grounds – to restrict Chinese access to AI, especially given that AI is on the verge of becoming an integral part of many mainstream technologies. Another issue is whether Beijing, which already invests heavily in the sector, is really making a concerted effort to steal stateside AI tech while skirting US oversight.
Former US officials and defense analysts say that Washington has no choice but to act. They note precedents set by past US efforts to control outflows of sensitive technology. Their hope is that this can be done in the case of AI, though signs are that the technology may become too prevalent to effectively police.
“Anyone concerned about US national security would have to be concerned about the Chinese making off with crown jewels such as AI,” John Pike, an intelligence expert who heads the military think tank GlobalSecurity.org told Asia Times.
John Schaus, an Asian security expert at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, says the US must look harder at so-called “backdoor” investments by Chinese firms in Silicon Valley. While bids by Chinese firms with links to China’s military can be blocked, he says it’s tougher to pinpoint with more conventional companies how much autonomy they have and if China’s government can access their technology.
Schaus says US concerns about national security are justified since AI is a new field whose military and economic implications are still being calibrated. “We’re really at the front end of understanding AI,” said Schaus, a former Pentagon official whose duties included day-to-day management of the US-China military relationship.
He points to the use of export controls during the Cold War to halt the shipment of sensitive tech to the Soviet Union as a successful example of such policing. Current US regulatory regimes include International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) that control the export of military-related technologies. The US also has cryptography technology export rules in place.
Schaus, at the same time, concedes it’s problematic whether the US can effectively curb Chinese access to AI. “It’s a good question,” Schaus said, acknowledging the difficulty of controlling a spreading technology.
Global Security’s Pike says the practicality of such moves depends on exactly what the US plans to do as part of a strategy to limit Chinese access to AI. But one thing’s for sure, Pike says: “The Chinese are not our friends. They have a vision of an international order that is quite different from the US.”
Winn Schwartau, a noted cyber warfare expert, says it would be a serious mistake to curb Chinese investment in US AI firms. “If the US tries to crack down, that’s the complete Balkanization of intellectual property. It’s a failed fortress-mentality mindset,” he told Asia Times. “AI is a global science and this is a global society.”
In weighing the AI security issue, Schaus says the potential threat should be divided into two parts: foreign access to US R&D in AI and foreign access to actual AI expertise and products. He says the US must eye both the long-term and immediate challenges posed by such access.
Is the Chinese government making a coordinated effort to access US AI tech? Schaus says the evidence is spotty, though he asserts there have been cases of Chinese firms with ties to China’s government attempting such transactions.
“If the US tries to crack down, that’s the complete Balkanization of intellectual property. It’s a failed fortress-mentality mindset. AI is a global science and this is a global society”
He says this was the case with a US$1.3 billion bid in November by a China-backed buyout fund, Canyon Bridge Capital Partners, to acquire the Portland, Oregon-based Lattice Semiconductor Corp.
Reuters reported last year that Canyon Bridge is funded by cash originating from China’s central government, and also has indirect links to its space program.
Researcher CB Insights says 29 investors from mainland China have invested in US AI-focused companies since 2012. Chinese investors, the researcher says, invested a total of US$9.9 billion in US tech startups in 2015. The level was four times higher than the previous year.
Does China already lead in AI?
Other developments stir doubts about how crucial accessing US AI technology is to China’s overall AI campaign.
A July 15 article in the Economist noted that “China May Match or Beat America in AI.” The story noted that China may already be overtaking the US based on its “deep pool” of data in the field and recruitment of world-class AI experts.
An Obama administration report in October 2016 said that China had overtaken the US in publishing scientific articles on deep learning — a key branch of AI.
“China has it’s (stuff) together,” said Schwartau, who is chairman of Mobile Active Defense, a US firm that specializes in security and compliance for smartphones and tablets.
China has made no secret of its plans to surpass the US in AI. Its State Council issued a development blueprint on July 20 calling on the country to become the world’s leader in AI by 2030 with a domestic industry worth US$150 billion.
Doug Tsuruoka is Editor-at-Large of Asia Times
Why is USA afraid of competition?
The Zionist Global financial power will need AI to change from today printing of US fiat currency to tomorrow creation of a global crytocurrency.
The US needs to stop trying to control the world and get its own house in order. The country is controlled by finance capitalists who suck the blood out of the system. Most income tax reciepts go to the Pentagon and the rest of the national security state. Wages, and retail sales, are flat. People are broke. Half the population could not deal with a $500 extra expense. The country is in ruins; streets, bridges, etc are in bad shape. Meanwhile, China has a 6.9% growth in GDP, Wages have doubled since 2009, retail sales increase at 11% a year. The country is prosperous. THIS is what the US should be looking at instead of sanctioning everyone.
" But one thing’s for sure, Pike says: “The Chinese are not our friends. They have a vision of an international order that is quite different from the US.”
One has to give him credit for being so frank in making this statement. I would say this is the general sentiment harbors by the political elites in the west, especially in the US. Te west ever since they forced themselves into China in the late 18th century, they have never treated the Chinese as their "friends". Their action/intention has always been one to despise,dominate and subjugate. This is very clearly demonstrated in their treatment of the Chinese immigrants from more than a century ago, as compared to the treatment of any other immigrants going to the US. In the early 19th hundred, their dislike and discrimination of the Chinese was so extreme that they resorted to stopping the Chinese immigrants completely from being admitted (for a period of almost half a century) and in the case of Canada in the beginning they even imposed a "head tax" of $500 in 1885, after 15,000 Chinese laborers had helped in building and completing the Canadian Pacific Railway! In 1923, Canada passed a law prohibiting the Chinese coming into Canada altogether. This law was not repealed until 1948. In the US it adopted the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882 and was not repealed until 1943!
A comment by Noam Chomsky, a leading critic of U.S. foreign policy, is very revealing of the west, in particular the US’s mentality towards China. He commented that the terminology "loss of China" is revealing of U.S. foreign policy attitudes:
“In 1949, China declared independence, an event known in Western discourse as "the loss of China" – in the US, with bitter recriminations and conflict over who was responsible for that loss. The terminology is revealing. It is only possible to lose something that one owns. The tacit assumption was that the U.S. owned China, by right, along with most of the rest of the world, much as postwar planners assumed."
Fom the above, certainly China has not been seen, let alone treated in any way as a friend by the so-called democratic capitalistic west. It may perhaps be seen and treated with some modicum of friendliness if ever one day China "behaves" as if a. it is willing to be subservient to the hegemonic west b. it wholesale embraces Christianity as a religion c. it adopts wholesale English as the lingua franca d. it disavows socialism-communism or any other variant as its governing philosophy. Since this is not going ever to happen, then it must be accepted that the west will never never think of China as a friend. It thus behooves the leadership in China to accepte this reality and deal with the west accordingly.
Very well said. The U S doen’t have friends only vassals or foes.
Haha except they might be better at it. Lets hope China doesnt have that vision.
My take is everytime the US stops China from accessing certain technologies, they go into a shell and develop their own and better! Look at the ISS, the supercomputers, military hardware and quantum technologies. This has the effect of nullifying the value of their IP and create an even more formidable comoetitor. I thought the idea of multi source components for Chnia’s commercial jet is a good start, providing their expertise and services to accelerate the development of China’s first wide bodied airline but the minute if screws are tightened, you can bet China will revive their vision of 100% local compoents and that would be bad news for Boeing and Airbus
you aren’t competition, you are China.
is that what you masters told you to say?
There are many U.S. venture capital firms based in China investing in cutting edge technologies there. Should those also be forbidden based on "China’s national security " issues?
“The Chinese are not our friends. They have a vision of an international order that is quite different from the US" . Pike is right but let us qulaify it. China’s vision is unlike the West whose vision is domination and regard for peopel of colout to be inferior. Chinese vision is friendship and trade. China has never occupied another country