China's PM Li Qiang calls for global ‘consensus' on AI regulation
Speaking at the opening of the World Artificial Intelligence Conference (WAIC) in Shanghai, Li said it is prudent to look at 'how to find a balance between development and security (which) urgently requires further consensus from the entire society'.
Li also announced the creation of a Chinese-led body to promote global AI cooperation and open-source development to keep AI from becoming 'the preserve of a few countries and a few enterprises'.
The tech rivalry between US, China
The three-day WAIC event comes amid intensifying US-China competition in advanced AI technology.
Just days before, US President Donald Trump announced the slashing of AI regulations to maintain the US' dominance in the field even as Washington continues to restrict exports of high-end chips to China, citing national security concerns.
These restrictions are forcing Chinese companies to look for alternatives, with startup DeepSeek introducing an AI model in January that matched the performance of leading US systems, despite working on less advanced chips.
Li, without naming the US, criticised monopolistic control and called for open access to AI technologies, warning of insufficient supply of AI chips and restrictions on talent exchange otherwise.
'Only by adhering to openness, sharing and fairness in access to intelligence can more countries and groups benefit from (AI),' he said.
'A test of international cooperation'
At the WAIC opening ceremony, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said in a video message that AI regulation would be 'a defining test of international cooperation.'
More than 800 companies are participating in this year's WAIC, showcasing over 3,000 tech innovations.
While Chinese firms like Huawei and Alibaba are the main entrants, international firms including US-based companies Tesla, Alphabet, and Amazon are also present.
DW
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times of Oman
4 hours ago
- Times of Oman
"You're going to see so much secondary sanctions": Trump after additional 25 pc tariff move
Washington: US President Donald Trump on Wednesday hinted that more "secondary sanctions" could be imposed shortly after US President announced an additional 25 percent against India in response to India being singled out for these additional sanctions. On being asked, 'Indian officials have said that there are other countries that are buying Russian oil, like China, for instance. Why are you singling India out for these additional sanctions', US President Donald Trump said, "It's only been 8 hours. So let's see what happens. You're going to see a lot going to see so much secondary sanctions, " Trump told reporters during a press briefing in White House. He also hinted that US administation could impose "more" similar sanctions on China. On being asked, 'On the Indian penalties, do you have any similar plans to enact more tariffs on China', US President Donald Trump says, "Could happen. Depends on how we do. Could happen." On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order imposing an additional 25 per cent tariff on imports from India. According to the order issued by the White House, Trump cited matters of national security and foreign policy concerns, as well as other relevant trade laws, for the increase, claiming that India's imports of Russian oil, directly or indirectly, pose an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to the United States. After the order, the total tariff on Indian goods will be 50 per cent. While the initial duty comes into effect on August 7, the additional levy will come into effect after 21 days and will be imposed on all Indian goods imported into the US, except for goods already in transit or those meeting specific exemptions. Following this announcement, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), in its response, termed the US's move as "unfair, unjustified and unreasonable", declaring that New Delhi will take "all actions necessary to protect its national interests." In an official statement, the MEA said, "The United States has in recent days targeted India's oil imports from Russia. We have already made clear our position on these issues, including the fact that our imports are based on market factors and done with the overall objective of ensuring the energy security of 1.4 billion people of India." "It is therefore extremely unfortunate that the US should choose to impose additional tariffs on India for actions that several other countries are also taking in their own national interest," the statement added."We reiterate that these actions are unfair, unjustified and unreasonable. India will take all actions necessary to protect its national interests," the MEA stressed.
Times of Oman
4 hours ago
- Times of Oman
GTRI calls US's additional tariff on India "hypocritical", overlooking Russia's trade with EU, China
New Delhi: The Global Trade Research Institute (GTRI) on Wednesday called the United States' decision to impose an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian imports "hypocritical", highlighting Washington's selective approach towards its allies and China when it comes to their trade relations with Moscow. This came after Washington announced the additional levy, which adds to an existing 25 per cent tariff, raising the total duty on Indian goods to 50 per cent, effective from August 27. The GTRI, in its statement, stated that the US had overlooked Russia's trade with the European Union and China, noting selective enforcement on India, exposing Washington's hypocrisy. According to the data given by GTRI, China purchased USD 62.6 billion of Russian oil in 2024, surpassing India's USD 52.7 billion, yet Beijing faces no punitive tariffs. The think tank pointed out that the US avoids targeting China due to its leverage over critical materials such as gallium, germanium, rare earths, and graphite, which are vital for the US defence and technology industries. It also noted that the US has turned a blind eye to the EU's USD 39.1 billion imports from Russia in 2024, including USD 25.2 billion in oil, while the US itself purchased USD 3.3 billion in strategic materials from Russia. "GTRI calls the US action hypocritical. In 2024, China bought $62.6 billion of Russian oil--more than India's $52.7 billion--yet faces no such penalties. Washington avoids targeting Beijing because of China's leverage over critical materials such as gallium, germanium, rare earths, and graphite, vital for US defence and technology," the statement read. "The U.S. has also overlooked its allies' trade with Russia: the EU imported $39.1 billion of Russian goods last year, including $25.2 billion in oil, while the U.S. itself purchased $3.3 billion in strategic materials from Russia," it added. It stated that this selective targeting not only threatens India's USD 86.5 billion in annual exports to the US, but also raises questions about the credibility of US trade policy, as the move is expected to potentially reduce Indian exports to the US by 40 per cent to 50 per cent. "The move places India among the most heavily taxed US trading partners, far above rivals such as China, Vietnam, and Bangladesh, and threatens most of India's $86.5 billion in annual exports to the US, from textiles to machinery... The tariffs are expected to make Indian goods far costlier in the US, with a cut of US-bound exports by 40-50%," the statement read. The GTRI recommended that India should remain cautious, avoid immediate retaliation for at least six months, and continue strategic engagement with Russia, China, and other global trade partners. It also noted that abandoning Russian oil purchases solely to appease Washington would not prevent future trade threats. "India could think of not buying Russian oil if economically viable, but should not abandon Russian oil purchases simply to satisfy Washington. The US may find a new pretext to tax India again. India should remain calm, avoid retaliation for at least six months, and recognise that meaningful trade negotiations with the US cannot proceed under threats or mistrust. US action will push India to reconsider its strategic alignment, deepening ties with Russia, China, and many other countries," the statement read.
Observer
12 hours ago
- Observer
The obstacles to UN reform
At the 80th United Nations General Assembly this September, participants will have to confront the escalating development finance crisis that is engulfing the UN system. So far, responses to financial pressures have focused on cutting costs, such as by reducing overhead and improving efficiency. But a lasting solution will require deeper changes, which begins with a fundamental question: What kind of UN does the world need today, and are current funding models fit for purpose? This year, a liquidity crisis created by non-paying or late-paying governments means that the UN faces a shortfall of $2.4 billion in regular UN budget dues, and $2.7 billion in peacekeeping contributions. Moreover, if the UN fails to spend any funds before year's end – say, because they were delivered late – it is required to return them to member states as credits, rather than rolling them over to the following year. Despite plans to cut spending by 30 per cent this year from its 2023 peak, the entire UN system is at risk of insolvency. Compounding the strain, aid cuts are undermining UN programmes, with the consequences being borne disproportionately by the world's most vulnerable people. Shrinking budgets among some of the world's largest donors – the OECD expects a 9-17 per cent year-on-year decline in foreign aid in 2025 – exacerbate these problems. While the scale of the UN's current funding and liquidity crisis is unprecedented, the underlying issues are not new. With its regular budget covering only a fraction of its needs, the UN is highly dependent on ad hoc, voluntary government funding. The UN Development System (UNDS) – comprising 43 funds, agencies and programmes that provide country-level development support and humanitarian assistance – is particularly dependent on voluntary contributions that can be quickly pulled back. Investment in the UNDS fell 16 per cent in 2023 (nearly $9 billion), with 93 per cent of total funding coming from voluntary sources and 7 per cent from assessed membership dues. To meet this crisis, UN Secretary-General António Guterres has launched the UN80 Initiative, which comprises three 'workstreams': finding ways to improve efficiency, reviewing implementation of the UN's mandates, and examining possible structural changes and programme realignments. The findings and proposals of the first two workstreams are supposed to inform thinking on the third. In fact, it is the third workstream that has the greatest transformative potential. If done right, the effort could mark a turning point for both the 'what' and the 'how' of the UN. But success will require the UN to avoid the mistakes of past reform efforts, which have sought to decentralise and improve coordination between agencies but avoided deeper questions about the UN's purpose and financing. As for purpose, the unique value of the UNDS lies in its power to advance and sustain globally agreed norms. Country-level activities that advance norms like gender equality, sustainability, and human rights should be at the top of the list. Fulfilling this function depends on the UNDS's technical competencies, convening power, international credibility and diplomatic relationships. But, importantly, it also rests on access to ample, predictable funding that sustains operations in support of these norms. While assessed contributions can provide this, in practice they currently account for a tiny fraction of total UNDS resources. As a result, cash-starved UNDS funds, agencies and programmes end up accepting contributions attached to narrowly defined projects, which can fragment efforts and reflect the whims and preferences of a handful of major voluntary donors. This effectively turns the UN into a contractor accountable to its paymasters, instead of a trusted adviser to host governments and a global agenda-setter. The UNDS is most effective when staff can steer policy strategically and deliver results where they are needed most, rather than where donors dictate. That is why two successive Funding Compacts called for more core financing for the UN's development activities, and less dependence on earmarked contributions. In return, the UN committed to improving transparency, strengthening reporting and boosting the efficiency of its operations. In 2023, UN agencies met 56 per cent of their Compact targets – more than twice the 24-per cent share met by member states. The inefficiency for which member states criticise the UN is thus at least partly the result of their own funding practices. Ultimately, the Compact failed to gain traction among UN member governments because it did not make a sufficiently compelling case for the UN's development role. One lesson of the Compact for the UN80 Initiative's third workstream is that a revitalised vision for the UNDS that member governments can broadly support is a necessary first step for successful reform. As for the financing itself, one solution would be to strengthen and expand the use of assessed contributions by re-examining the formula for allocating fiscal obligations among UN member states. The UN could also extend softer forms of earmarking, like joint and pooled funds; introduce more innovative forms of financing, such as replenishments and levies; and expand the scope for leveraging grant funds to crowd in additional investment. Whatever happens next, one thing should be clear: countries get the UN they fund. Only with a robust and predictable financing framework, guided by a strong consensus on goals, can the UN serve as a credible channel for members' investments in global development. These are the missing pieces of the UN reform jigsaw that must now be quickly found. @Project Syndicate, 2025
