DeepSeek: How sinophobia blinded the West to China’s AI prowess
Hysterical sinophobia and exchange restrictions with China have bred Western ignorance of its progress. US academic Zhu Zhiqun questions whether global hi-tech competition should be a zero-sum game or foster cooperation for collective benefit.
In January 2025, Chinese AI startup DeepSeek unveiled its latest R1 model that rivals leading Western AI systems like OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Though there are still some questions about DeepSeek, experts generally have been amazed by its superior performance.
DeepSeek seemingly came out of nowhere and blindsided its competitors in the West, creating stock market shocks and security concerns in the US and its allies.
Why has DeepSeek astonished the West? What is DeepSeek’s impact on US-China power rivalry? And what can the international community do about global hi-tech competition?
Frankly, DeepSeek caused a sensation in the West and grabbed global headlines largely because it was developed in China by the Chinese in the midst of US-China competition. Imagine if DeepSeek was developed in Japan, Germany or Israel, would Western politicians and media have reacted in the same way?
DeepSeek said it took two years and US$6 million to develop this latest model. The actual cost was unclear, but it was surely much lower than what DeepSeek’s Western counterparts have spent developing their models. DeepSeek’s developers apparently figured out how to train their models with far less computing power than other large language models. They were able to rely on less sophisticated chips instead of more advanced and expensive ones in the West that are banned from being exported to China.
Hysterical sinophobia and arrogant restrictions of educational and scientific exchanges with China have led to collective ignorance among many Western politicians of China’s reality and the latest progress Chinese scientists have made.
Using young Chinese talent
DeepSeek founder Liang Wenfeng recruited some of the top talents from China’s best colleges. Liang believed that experience could be a potential obstacle to creativity. He encouraged his team to be imaginative and innovate. These young people represent a new generation of creative Chinese engineers and scientists.
While China has become a global technological power to be reckoned with, many politicians in the West continue to think the Chinese can only steal and copy. Hysterical sinophobia and arrogant restrictions of educational and scientific exchanges with China have led to collective ignorance among many Western politicians of China’s reality and the latest progress Chinese scientists have made. For example, inside China, DeepSeek faces strong competition from the so-called “Six Tigers” — Stepfun, Zhipu, Minimax, Moonshot, 01.AI, and Baichuan, which are considered to be at the forefront of China’s AI sector.
Silicon Valley is a household name, but most people in the West have never heard of cities like Shenzhen or Hangzhou, which are high-tech hubs of China.
The fishing village turned into a modern metropolis, Shenzhen is China’s largest special economic zone created in 1980 during the Deng Xiaoping era. Several major hi-tech companies are headquartered there, such as Huawei and ZTE, which are both banned by the US government.
Hangzhou, a beautiful city near Shanghai, is China’s new hi-tech hub. It’s Alibaba’s home base. Unitree Robotics that is a leader in making humanoid robots is there, so is DeepSeek.
China will continue to move up industrial value chains
Facing demographic challenges posed by a shrinking workforce and an ageing population, China will continue to try to move up industrial value chains and develop advanced technologies, regardless of what Western countries do about China.
China’s ability to develop cost-effective, energy-saving approaches to hi-tech challenges the US to rethink how best to preserve its supremacy in technology.
DeepSeek’s success is fuelling debate over whether the US needs a new strategy. Some try to downplay the significance of DeepSeek. They claim that DeepSeek relied on a covert supply of advanced graphics processing units (GPUs) from abroad. They believe that US export controls had, and will continue to have, an impact on restricting China’s access to advanced technologies.
Others point out that DeepSeek is technically innovative and financially cost-effective. They argue that US export controls are ineffective and counterproductive.
The clichéd “national security” allegation is a lazy and boring argument that has been abused, reflecting the knee-jerk reaction of politicians who are unable or unwilling to adapt to the new geopolitical landscape.
Western politicians tend to use the same playbook when facing challenges from China. They first discredit DeepSeek by claiming China stole US technologies without providing evidence. They create alarm by raising national security concerns, suggesting that users’ data “could” or “might” be transferred to the Chinese government. And their final resort is to simply ban Chinese apps and products.
The clichéd “national security” allegation is a lazy and boring argument that has been abused, reflecting the knee-jerk reaction of politicians who are unable or unwilling to adapt to the new geopolitical landscape.
Unsurprisingly, several members of US Congress planned to introduce a bill that would ban DeepSeek’s chatbot application from government-owned devices. The legislation written by Representatives Darin LaHood, an Illinois Republican, and Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat, is echoing a scheme that Congress used to ban Huawei and TikTok.
In the hi-tech competition between the US and China, DeepSeek is not alone. Other Chinese companies are also formidable rivals, such as Alibaba, Baidu, Tencent, Huawei, ByteDance, BYD, just to name a few.
And China is not alone in the global hi-tech race. In Asia, Japan, South Korea, India and Southeast Asian countries have all invested ambitiously in technological development.
If Chinese startups have learned from existing Western technologies, why can’t Western businesses and consumers also benefit from China’s new inventions?
A zero-sum game or an endeavour to benefit all
Moving forward, what should the international community do about global hi-tech competition? Do we want to turn the hi-tech race into a zero-sum game, or should the international community cooperate to develop new technologies together to benefit all?
Unlike closed AI models, DeepSeek is open-source, offering free access to cutting-edge technologies. If Chinese startups have learned from existing Western technologies, why can’t Western businesses and consumers also benefit from China’s new inventions?
The rise of DeepSeek and other programmes calls for international cooperation and global governance. An international regime must be established to develop some protocol or rules about global hi-tech competition. Technologies can be developed by all and for all. Humanity as a whole will be better served if a new programme like DeepSeek could inspire greater international cooperation in advancing technological revolution.
A multipolar world where the US has no monopoly over technologies
Technologies should not become a tool of geopolitical competition. They should serve as a public good for all mankind, enabling greater efficiency and productivity, and creating greater prosperity and happiness for all. American politicians and the public must overcome myopia and fear and embrace new technologies developed outside the US in this multipolar world, in which the US does not have monopoly over technologies.
US Vice-President JD Vance insisted that America, not Europe or Asia, would dominate the AI field. This does not bode well for international cooperation.
The AI summit recently held in Paris was attended by leaders from the US, China, India, European countries, and others. Regrettably, the summit failed to make much progress partially due to disagreement over whether these countries should focus on AI safety or AI regulation. The US and the UK refused to sign a joint declaration that emphasised inclusive and sustainable AI development.
US Vice-President JD Vance insisted that America, not Europe or Asia, would dominate the AI field. This does not bode well for international cooperation. The 2025 Paris AI summit, together with the AI summits hosted by the UK and South Korea in the past couple of years, is an important step in the right direction towards global governance on hi-tech. Unfortunately, the international community has a long and tortuous way to go to establish basic rules governing AI and other hi-tech competition, and this has become more challenging as US-China rivalry continues and as the Trump administration walks away from international regimes such as the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Agreement.
