Australian think tank says China’s global leadership in science and technology constitutes monopoly Expert: Be wary of background and motivation | Blog post

The report also said China is highly likely to monopolize eight technologies, including nanoscale materials and manufacturing, hydrogen and ammonia power generation, and synthetic biology.

After presenting China’s technological development over the years, the ASPI report began to make claims that China had established “stunning leadership in high-impact research” through government programs, and that “Western democracies” were losing their global technological competitiveness. be encouraged to invest more in research.

At the same time, the report warns that unless the West joins forces to catch up with China, China will soon be in a position to control the supply of some key technologies, calling on “democracies” to work more closely together. together to establish a secure supply. chains and “rapidly upgrading strategically critical technology”.

“In the past five years, China has published 48.49% of the world’s high-impact research papers in the field of advanced aircraft engines including hypersonics, and seven of the world’s top ten research institutions are in China.” ASPI declared that China in 2021. Advances in hypersonic missiles have surprised US intelligence. Meanwhile, in the fields of photonic sensors and quantum communication, China’s research capability could “put it in the dark” from surveillance by Western intelligence agencies, including the Five Eyes alliance.

ASPI also claimed to have found that the introduction of talent and knowledge underpins China’s advantage in technological research, with a fifth of China’s high-impact research papers produced by people with postgraduate training in Five Eyes countries Written by.

The report also provides suggestions for Western countries, saying that although China is powerful, Western countries in general still have an advantage over China, but the problem lies in how to form power collectively within the West in fact. The report suggests that, in order to promote the development of advanced technology, the establishment of a sovereign wealth fund which accounts for 0.5% to 0.7% of the gross national product, which will be used in particular to support high technology, can be considered. venture capital.

It is worth noting that according to the internal media “Observer.com”, ASPI is known as an “anti-China leader in an academic cloak” and is a well-known “anti-China think tank” “The organization have always been advertised as independent “Thinking Benches” and “Academic Research Institutions”, but in reality have been started and manipulated by financial masters for a long time, and have collected a large number of notorious lies that n linked to Xinjiang and China and previously false information.

According to the data, ASPI was founded in 2001, and its 2020-2021 “Annual Report” shows that funding from the Australian government and its allies and the military industry accounts for 87% of the think tank’s total budget. Among them, the US State Department is its largest source of foreign funding. The “annual report” shows that the two fees provided by the US State Department total about 1.58 million Australian dollars, accounting for 80% of the think tank’s foreign government funding between 2020 and 2021.

Reuters reported that the research report on China’s technological development released by ASPI also received funding from the US State Department.

The Global Times quoted Gao Lingyun, a researcher at the Institute of World Economics and Politics of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, as saying that the background and motives of this report are worthy of vigilance.

Gao Lingyun said that this report is funded by the United States, so it is very easy to use it as a political tool to exaggerate the “China Threat Theory” in the field of science and technology. It is inconvenient for the US government or related agencies to publish such a report, so they attacked the sides and asked other agencies to provide so-called “evidence”.

Gao Lingyun said that many “leading edge” technologies were mentioned in the report. If they were really leading, how could they know? Therefore, the report is also largely hypothetical. Furthermore, technological leadership does not mean monopoly. China used to have many world-leading technologies, but these technologies were later acquired by many countries, which shows that China does not have monopoly genes; on the contrary, the US and some allies have “really” launched many technologies. in order to monopolize the technologies of Alliances and treaties.

He emphasized that healthy competition in technology and talent itself is the only way for technological progress, and healthy competition can promote iterative technology upgrades.