Hello and welcome to World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Coming up, President Xi Jinping calls for equal and a multipolar world as he meets with Uruguay's leader.
Iran's president says Tehran seeks fair and equitable negotiation with Washington.
CPC and KMT held a forum in Beijing focusing on cross-strait exchanges and cooperation.
And Elon Musk is moving to merge SpaceX and XAI with plans underway for space-based AI data centers.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching World Today.
First up, Chinese President Xi Jinping has called for deepening the China-Uruguay Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, expanding cooperation and strengthening their people-to-people exchanges.
He made a remark in a meeting with Uruguayan President Yamandu Orsi in Beijing.
The Chinese leader also voiced the support for Uruguay assuming the rotating presidency of the Group of 77 in China, adding that Beijing is ready to strengthen global sales cooperation with Latin American and Caribbean countries.
And, for his part, President Orsi said developing ties with China is a national priority of his country, pledging to expand cooperation in trade investment, technology and green development.
The two leaders witnessed the signing of more than 10 deals, including agreements regarding investment promotion and trade.
Orsi is now on a week-long trip to China.
So for more.
Joining us now on the line is Zoom Amit Khan, research fellow with the Center for China and Globalization.
So thank you very much for joining us today, Zoom.
President Xi Jinping has called for deepening China-Uruguay cooperation in trade finance agriculture, infrastructure and telecommunications, and exploring cooperation potentials in green development, the digital economy, artificial intelligence and clean energy, etc.
So, first of all, why is it in the interests of both China and Uruguay to deepen their cooperation in all possible fields?
Thank you so much, Lingheng, for having me, first of all.
You know, this is the first Latin American, so President Orsi is the first Latin American leader to visit this year.
Of course, we've had many significant international visits to Beijing which have made ripples across the world.
But specifically when we talk about Latin America-China relations and, even more specific, Uruguay-China relations, they have been well-rounded.
China imports a lot of agricultural products.
Of course, the beef from Uruguay is very famous over here.
And Uruguay has also been part of the Belt and Road Initiative since 2018.
Moving forward in 2026.
We know that there are a lot of uncertainties in the world, especially in Latin America, to be more precise.
And this is a good point for Uruguay to think of further expansion when it comes to their own economic goals, their own medium to long-term goals to further modernize their country, to further have more value addition in their already globally famous products.
Uruguay has a small but a very talented population.
So now the real trajectory for them in the coming years is how do we do more value addition and how do we further modernize the domestic economy to make sure that their growth and their economic impact regionally and globally only increases?
And when it comes to all of these, China is the country that is helping with technology transfer, with balanced development, with greener development, with more financial and technologically advanced ways forward.
China is the country that's sharing these resources and has successful experience back home as well.
So I think well-rounded, deeper and more holistic cooperation has been on the agenda, and this visit just makes it more, makes that trajectory move forward faster.
In terms of two-way trade, China is the top destination for Uruguayan exports.
Uruguay is actually running a trade surplus for the first half of 2025.
It ran a trade surplus of more than US$187 million with China.
So, with that in mind, and when President Xi Jinping says China and Uruguay should work together to advance an inclusive, universally beneficial economic globalization, how do you think this message can be received by the Uruguayan side?
Well, you know, it's interesting because a lot of countries have a trade deficit with China.
But Uruguay is definitely one of those important examples that has a surplus.
And as I mentioned, Uruguayan products that are known globally are also very popular in China.
And that said I mean I think you know President Xi's messages about inclusive, open economic globalization is something that also truly resonates with the Uruguayan side.
Trade surplus aside, I mean, I think, the real point between when it comes to economic cooperation trade, and also when we speak of broader investments.
I think both sides have been dedicated to ensure that more open trade, more avenues for cooperation, more multilateralism in the regions and globally is encouraged.
So I think the message is not only is being received well, it is something that resonates with the Uruguayan side.
One of the things that Uruguay is seeking for when it comes to deeper cooperation with China is how to do further value addition, how to make their current products more valuable in global markets, more competitive in global markets, and how they can include more modern techniques, which China has successfully been doing so.
So it's an important message, not just for Uruguay but, I think, in the world at large.
When we see a lot of de-globalization trends and we see especially the Trump administration inducing new uncertainties globally and in the Latin American region, I think China's message makes it clear that China has a consistent open policy and China will always promote economic openness and mutual cooperation.
So, in the meantime, President Xi Jinping has also called for China and Uruguay working together to advance an equal and orderly multipolar world, adding that China supports Latin American and Caribbean nations in terms of upholding their sovereignty, security and development interests.
So, at a time when Latin America in general appears to be faced with a growing threat from a certain major power, the growing threats of unilateral bullying, for example
In what ways do you think developing ties with China might help defuse that volatile situation for them and make Latin American countries feel more secure or feel more certain?
You know, I think this is really the trillion-dollar question of our time.
Look at the latest national security document from Washington.
And it's really clearly stating that they think of Latin America as an extension that needs to somehow be controlled.
And I think there is a pushback.
There is a strong pushback and a needed pushback against this mindset, against this very raw hegemonic mindset, to really take precedence over overall, the direction that developing countries, the global south want to go in.
So I mean, when we talk about a multipolar, orderly world, what it really means is no one country should be above international law.
No one country should think that it is their right or prerogative to interfere in other countries' internal businesses.
We have global institutions, we have the United Nations.
What we need to do is collectively work towards making those multilateral and international organizations that represent the world more functional and their execution of the collective will of the world more effective.
And that said, I mean I think definitely again.
You know if I mentioned that we have had some significant international leaders coming to Beijing, including obviously Carney and latest Starmer.
And that is that that speaks of a direction in which the world does not want to choose between two false binaries.
There is no binary choice, and China being consistently supportive and proactively working towards respecting the international law and towards a multipolar world that represents the interests of the world's countries at large.
I think this is much needed.
I'm not sure.
If expanding cooperation and being on the right side of history can show immediate results overnight, I think what we are witnessing is going to be a challenging phase for many countries in the world, especially Latin America.
But what's important is that we need to keep working in the direction that we support.
A just and fair world, an international order that a majority of the countries have agreed to and that respects sovereignty and the right of nations to develop.
And in that, you know, China is consistently giving the right message and making sure that tangibly practically, we are helping each other improve, improve economically, improve our standing in the world.
Yeah, your point's well taken.
Talking about Uruguay assuming the rotating presidency of the Group of 77 in China.
How do you think this particular mechanism has brought to the international community over the years?
I will go back to a few years ago, just a couple years ago, when my own country Pakistan, had the rotating presidency.
And uh together.
You know, g77 represents essentially the global south and together we were able to push for the loss and damage fund.
The g77 is an a manifestation within within the un system, within the international uh order that we've agreed to, that gives developing countries the power, the means to come together and to work towards policies, towards shifts that will help us help reduce the gap right now that exists in the system, the systemic disadvantages that we have.
So, I feel, if we organize, if we work together, if we are united when it comes to specific issues, especially those of global governance, especially those when it comes to the sustainable development goals, especially those that affect a vast majority of the world's countries,
We need to be able to utilize the G77 mechanism more effectively, and we have precedent for that happening.
So Uruguay's presidency could show similar promise by organizing, by utilizing the current institutions.
There's a lot that can be done.
Yeah.
So I guess, in a bigger picture sense, the elephant in the room we need to mention is that Washington has long been viewing Latin America as its sphere of influence.
And I guess White House officials are watching this visit by Orsi to China with some awareness or with some alert.
So Zoom, what is your take on this view that China's engagement with Latin America undermines US interests in that region?
I think it undermines interests that are illegitimate.
If the US's desired interests to ensure they remain the influential power that can dictate the opportunities that exist for the Latin American region, then that is an illegitimate interest.
If it's the U.S.'
's interest to ensure that they continue to work positively, cooperatively with Latin American countries, respecting them as equal partners, then those interests can be legitimate.
If any country thinks that we live in a zero-sum game mindset, we either win.
If the other is moving forward, then it's a loss for us.
Then that country is basically putting itself in a position where they will maybe, you know cross certain red lines which will be unacceptable for smaller countries.
So I think by especially as I mentioned the 2026 NSD, I mean I think that clearly states that the US views Latin America as part of its own backyard, where it can dictate.
And I think this very raw manifestation of hegemonic aspiration is also further incentivizing not only Latin American countries but countries like Britain, countries like Canada, to also think of moving forward more pragmatically and establishing relations with countries which are beneficial for their own domestic interests.
I think if every country worked for its own people, for the economies and well-being of their own people, we wouldn't have such mindsets and we wouldn't have such conflicts.
And that is where I think the US is creating a situation where it's further incentivizing countries to be more proactive about their national interests.
And I think that's a good thing.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Zoom American Research Fellow with the Center for China and Globalization.
Coming up, Iran's president says Tehran is seeking fair and equitable negotiations with Washington.
This is World Today.
Stay tuned.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
The United States and Iran will hold nuclear talks on Friday in Istanbul, with Washington's Special Envoy Steve Whitakoff due to meet with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Arachi.
Representatives from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other countries are also expected to attend.
President Donald Trump says discussions with Iran are ongoing, warning of severe consequences if no agreement is reached.
Tehran says it remains open to diplomacy, stressing that talks must be based on mutual respect.
In the meantime, the United States is continuing with its move to increase naval deployments near Iran.
Iran says it is fully prepared to respond to any military provocation.
So joining us now on the line is Professor Wang Jing from Northwest University in Xi'an, China.
Thank you very much for joining us.
It's my pleasure.
So, judging from the situation right now, Dr Wang, do you think it is fair to say that the threat regarding a military confrontation appears to be easing?
Why or why not?
Well, I think apparently, that the military threat now is easy, given that, on the one hand, the military strike or the preparation for the possible military strike become not imminent.
And also, on the other hand, as we mentioned, that the political dialogues and diplomatic mediation started to work.
And the contact between Iran and the United States has already been clear.
And the efforts, mediation efforts by the original countries, by some, for example, the Egypt Qatar, by Saudi, also worked to hope to pacify the tension, to ease the tension and to decrease the crisis between Iran and the United States.
So that's why we can say that we might take a break, because during the past days, particularly during the past week, uh many of the news and many of the the discussions uh has been uh has been there about the possible attacks from united states against iran and many believe that the attack, these attacks, could be imminent.
But given that now we have already witnessed the signals from both united states and iran that these tensions could be uh pacified and the dialogue started, I think we could take a breath and we hope that and we expect that this dialogue could to some extent decrease the hostilities between the United States and Iran and help the two countries to find new ways to end their rivalries.
Now Iranian President Massoud Pesachian says he has instructed his country's foreign minister to pursue fair and equitable negotiations.
Can there be fair and equitable negotiations between the United States and the Tehran in Istanbul?
Well, I don't think it is easy because uh, we have to know, uh it is just the kind of remarks uh defined or by the Iranian president uh about the possible um uh the the, the possibilities of the dues uh possibilities of the dialogues started between Iran and the United States, because inside Iran there was still a lot of opposition opinions uh over whether or not Iran should start dialogues with the United States, whether or not Iran should pursue political dialogues with the United States.
But I think from many other ideas, particularly from many other views of the international society.
They believe that Iran and the United States should resume dialogues.
So yes, the dispatch of actually events, the Foreign Policy Department, the actual, face strong pressure at home and many of them are criticized by the very conservative and hardliner politicians.
So that's why Iran's president now defined that okay, what they are pursuing is fair and equitable negotiation, rather than under the pressure of the United States that they go back to the negotiator table.
So that's why there's this very clear message that Iran and the United States, they might face a very new opportunity of dialogue.
This is a positive sign.
Now the Trump administration has, according to some media reports, has demanded that Tehran agree to put an end to its enrichment of uranium, curtail its missile program and hold support to its weapons.
You know, network of allied armed groups in the Middle Eastern region.
We know, actually in the past Iran has demonstrated certain kind of flexibility when we talk about discussing the nuclear issue, but I guess for the missile program as well as the regional allies.
These two issues have long been treated by Tehran as something non-negotiable.
Do you think Iran will change its position now?
I don't think Iran will change the position because Iran's stance is very clear.
They don't want a nuclear bomb, but they don't want to give up their nuclear capabilities production because they believe this is a legal right for any international society member.
So that's why, from the United States perspective, that Iran should hand over all the kind of uraniums produced inside at their home.
And also Iran should give up all their capabilities for the further production of the uranium.
So I don't think this is something negotiable, but given that the military pressure from the United States are very imminent and given that the war becomes more and more possible, we can't say that Iran's assertive stance who still stand?
We can also cannot say that United States shouldn't give up their negotiation possession.
So I think if the dialogue resumed, it should be encouraged, rather than to talk about something okay, who is right, who is wrong?
This is, i don't think it's it's meaningful.
The most important thing right now is that uh to encourage more dialogues and more negotiation between united states and iran to to decrease the possibility of war between the two countries.
So ultimately, is using force against iran in the us interests?
Well, and we have to know that, of course, using the using the force is not the ultimate goal.
Using the force is just a channel or it's just the tool for united states to realize their goal.
They hope to realize their goal by using the force.
They hope to realize their goal to uh to force iran to make concessions based upon the United States consideration of Iranians internal as well as the external circumstances, and make the concessions to the direction that pray for United States interests.
So that's why I think it's still facing the kind of the debate, or facing the kind of discussion inside the United States whether or not the United States should attack Iran.
Some maintain that Iran would would not give up their possession and would be still very assertive over the Iran nuclear issue as well as missile issue as well as regional influence issue.
But also from other perspective, they may believe that the war might be important.
But the ultimate goal should be realized through diplomatic ways.
So the war itself is just a channel, just a kind of tool rather than an ultimate goal.
So that's why I think the United States may consider using the force, but also may consider not to use the force.
But that would depend on how the negotiation would go in the future.
Okay.
And finally and very briefly, what do you make of the roles played by regional players like Qatar Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia in this US-Iran negotiation?
I think they played a very important role because this country, they don't like war.
They fear that the war could be further spread to their own territory, and also fear that the possible collapse of Iran might lead to the refugee waves that then would finally affect their own national security.
But no matter how, I think they also become a very important bridge for sending messages between the United States and Iran.
So I think that's why their role should be praised, should be positively defined.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Professor Wang Jing joining us from Northwest University in Xi'an, China.
More to come.
CPC and KMT held a forum in Beijing focusing on cross-strait exchanges.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
We'll be back after a short break.
You're back with World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
The Communist Party of China and the Chinese Kuomintang Party have held a think tank forum in Beijing focusing on cross-strait exchanges and cooperation.
Participants of the event have discussed issues like cross-strait tourism, industrial development, environmental protection and sustainable development.
The forum aimed to explore the overall direction for cross-strait ties and promote the well-being of compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
The event was marking the revival of the dialogue system between the two parties after a hiatus of nearly a decade.
So for more.
Joining us now on the line is Dr Liu Kuangyu from the Institute of Taiwan Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Thank you.
This is Kuang Yu.
So this dialogue channel has been held 11 times since its launch in 2006, but was suspended in 2016.
Why do you think it has now been restored?
I'd say the resumption of the CPC and KMT think tank forum after almost 10-year hiatus, disposed symbolic and strategic.
And the forum was suspended.
As you said, when the DPP came to power in Taiwan, refused to accept the 1992 consensus, the tacit understanding that both sides belongs to one China, which has long served as the foundation of the cross-strait dialogue.
Now, several factors converge to make this revival in this time.
At first, I think it's the Why the DPP remains quite influential on the island?
There's growing fatigue among Taiwan's public, especially business and the younger generations, over the DPP's prolonged cross-strait entrenchment.
They see rising living costs and limited global space and economic uncertainties.
All those have revived interest in pragmatic engagement with Chinese mainland.
And second, I think the KMT, although not in power, but they are trying to position itself as the responsible alternative on the cross-relations.
And by reactivating this high-level channel, the KMT reinforces its identity as the party that can stabilize relations and protect Taiwan's interests through dialogue, not by confrontation.
From Beijing's perspective, restoring this forum aligns with its consistent message.
Peaceful reunification remains the goal and is willing to work with any Taiwan political force that accepts the one China principle.
With the US-China tensions persisting and external factors increasingly meddling in Taiwan's question Beijing, I think, sees this value in strengthening ties with pro-dialogue groups in Taiwan to counter separate tendencies and reduce regional uncertainties.
So a clear message we have heard from the forum held in Beijing is about, for example, upholding the common political foundation of the 1992 consensus and resolutely opposing any form of Taiwan independence, and that people across the Taiwan Strait both belong to the Chinese nation and should work together for its rejuvenation.
Why do you think these spirits represent the right side of history?
Yes, those spirits.
You mentioned the consensus in opposing Taiwan independence.
They're all affirming that people on both sides of the street belong to one Chinese nation, and not just political positions.
They represent, like you said, the right side of history.
First, we see that They reflect historical truth and legal continuity.
Taiwan has been a separate part of China since ancient times, with extreme, deep cultural, linguistic and family ties binding the two parties the two sides across the straits.
And also, we know the 1992 consensus reached through a very pragmatic dialogue.
It acknowledges those shared identity while allowing space for different interpretations, which is a rare example of cross-race statements, statementship.
So, to deny this foundation is to ignore uh, the centuries of shared heritage and the post-war international order.
So which, uh which i think uh this affirms the china's sovereignty over taiwan?
And secondly, is that uh all those principles, they serve peace.
They serve peace and stability.
We know that Taiwan independence is a dead end.
It provokes confrontation.
They fuse militarization and risk dragging the region into crisis.
We see.
History show that when the 1992 consensus guided relations across the straits, as between 2008 to 2016, cross-strait exchanges flourished.
We see direct flights, trade boomed, tourism surged and mutual trust grow.
Conversely, its rejection led to tensions and stagnation of the relations.
So choosing dialogue over division aligns with the universal desire for peace, which is a core aspiration of our time and across the strait.
And third, i think they embody the collective will of the chinese nation.
Like you said, rejuvenation.
Rejuvenation isn't about so-called domination.
It's about healing historical wounds, achieving shared prosperity and contributing to global harmony.
We see that over 90 of Taiwan's population traces their roots to Chinese mainland, and millions of families are split by the strait.
So, in this case, in this context, rejuvenation pursued peacefully and inclusively, which will fulfill a moral imperative to reunite the nation which is fractured by the civil war.
So in this era of, we can see, globally fragmentation, this vision offers unity without erasing diversity, so it rejects Zero-sum geopolitics in favor of common destiny.
That is why it stands on the right side of history, not because it serves any one party or one ideology, but just because it honors the truth.
It safeguards the peace and answers the deepest hope for Chinese people on both sides of the straits.
Yeah, so indeed, your points well taken, and thank you very much for joining us.
Actually, there is not a lack of opportunities for cross-strait cooperation, but since 2016, many of them have disappeared due to the obstacles set up by Taiwan's DPP authority.
That was very unfortunate.
So hopefully, as the main opposition party in Taiwan, the KMT can play a vital role in terms of stabilizing this cross-strait ties.
But thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Liu Kuangyu joining us from Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
You're listening to World Today.
Stay tuned.
You are back with World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
China is taking a world first step in auto safety.
The country will officially ban hidden door handles on cars sold domestically.
Under the new rules, all vehicles must be equipped with door handles that include both interior and exterior mechanical releases, ensuring that they can be operated even if a car's power system fails.
The move comes after several incidents in China, where drivers or occupants were trapped in their cars after crashes or power loss.
China is the first country in the world to impose such a ban.
The regulation is set to take effect on January 1, 2027.
For more, my colleague Xue Wen spoke with Andy Mak, professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University.
Andy, China is about to become the first country to fully ban hidden door handles, with the new rule taking effect in 2027.
From your perspective, what message does this send to the global auto industry?
And why do you think China is choosing to take the lead on the safety issue rather than following international trends?
Well, I think this is a very interesting development here.
And the way I would describe it is that once upon a time in the United States, California really determined the direction of not only the US auto market but even the global auto market, because California was a big market in the United States and American automakers did not want to have one version for California and one version for the rest of the United States.
So I think we're seeing something very similar here, in that China is the California of the global auto industry but, of course, on a much larger scale.
But at the same time, I think what we're seeing is that China is also a regulatory authority.
And I think this is very important as well that when it comes to making important choices, China puts human safety first, before design elegance, and I think this is the primary reason we are seeing this current new policy legal decision and that this will only be the start because again, I think what we've seen consistently is that not only China is an enormous market because of its size, that many companies look to what's happening in China to make global decisions, but I think, from a regulatory perspective, that China really is seen as a jurisdiction that is serious, competent and forward-looking on these issues.
Let's zoom into the new regulations.
So it lays out very specific technical requirements, from the strength of exterior handles to how visible and accessible interior release need to be.
How do these measures tackle the main safety concerns around the hidden door handles?
And do you think these standards could eventually maybe become a global benchmark?
Well, you know, I do.
And again, you know, I think again, given the size of China's market and its emphasis on human safety, human well-being, before other considerations like design, elegance and profits, that that's very important.
Now specifically, what is going on here is that EVs, of course, led by Tesla, really adopted this hidden door handle aesthetic because, you know, it was seen as really contributing to a forward, modern design for these automobiles.
And it also had some functional benefit, because it reduces aerodynamic drag, which then, of course, can allow the cars to travel further on a single battery charge.
But the problem is that if any of these systems fail, there's an accident, something else goes wrong.
Passengers, the driver inside the car, might not be able to get out or escape.
Or other people.
Police, firefighters coming to rescue someone in an accident might not be able to find or open the door again because of an electronic failure.
So, again, this is clearly a safety hazard.
And, you know, I think, you know, sometimes it takes time for this to become evident.
And it really requires a strong, competent regulatory authority to step in to say you know, this needs to change.
And I think this is what we're seeing, of course, with China right now.
Andy, actually you just mentioned.
A number of high profile incidents appear to have played a role in this decision, including a fatal fire involving a Xiaomi Suqi in Chengdu, as well as Tesla crashes where electronic door handles failed due to battery issues.
In the U.S., we know regulators are still investigating rather than banning this design outright.
How much did this incidence influence China's decision?
And why do you think China is acting faster than other countries to implement this full ban rather than partial regulations?
Well, I think there's two important reasons for this.
So one is, I think, just the way systems work, right?
So the American system has really changed, built around the concept of when there's a problem, we will fix it.
And of course, the system is designed with fragmented political authority.
And this can make it very difficult to reach timely decisions.
And I think the Chinese system, on the other hand, is designed again for efficiencies.
Once a decision is made, an issue is recognized, it can be implemented.
Well, a policy response can be formulated very quickly and implemented very quickly as well.
And then you know, I think a less tangible way to think about it is you know, the US system tends to prioritize corporate interests first.
Now where I go back again to this point that you know, the Chinese philosophy or the Chinese set of priorities is human safety and well-being first.
So I think there's two main reasons.
You know why I think we're seeing, you know, China again taking a leadership position here.
And, you know, I think we shouldn't be surprised that if this again becomes adopted all around the world.
Another thing is um.
We have noticed that the ban will be rolled out in stages, with different deadlines for new models and existing ones.
And major automakers like Geely was involved in drafting the standards, while Tesla was not listed as the drafter.
Then how do you see this face the timeline affecting automakers, especially Tesla?
And what practical challenges do manufacturers face in redesigning their vehicles?
Right.
Here.
I think it's worth pointing out that these kinds of policy decisions affect many, many different actors.
Now, of course, the primary goal is consumer safety, as well as allowing again firefighters police, to rescue people when needed.
And of thinking about this could be very disruptive and damaging because again there are the automakers to consider.
There are other stakeholders as well.
So again, I would point to the efficiency and the comprehensiveness of China's approach to policymaking, and that it is very decisive, but it also is very comprehensive in balancing and considering giving opportunities for input to the various stakeholders that will be affected.
And here clearly, of course, the manufacturers of electric vehicles will need to make changes to their product.
We can see also that this is not a blanket okay, starting tomorrow we're going to do all this, but there's a phase in as well.
That, I think, strikes a balance.
I can't really speak to this question of why Tesla was not included, but my impression of this is that the perspectives of industries are represented, because there's not just one EV maker, but several that have input into this.
And lastly Andy, how might this door handle safety standard driven innovation in China's auto parts industry, particularly for door handle manufacturers?
Well, it certainly can.
And you know, here in the design world there's a principle that severe design constraints are what lead to brilliant design.
So now clearly a need to increase range of a vehicle I think is a very important consideration.
Aesthetics are very important as well, but obviously safety is more important.
So I think what this will do is this will be an opportunity for companies to innovate and ideally, find a solution that balances all three and perhaps even again may surprise us with their innovation and creativity.
But we have to see, of course.
But I think it's also important to point out here that scale plus legitimacy is what makes standards travel globally.
And so China, as the world's largest auto market, is going to play a factor, but its regulators are increasingly seen around the world as technically serious as well as operationally grounded.
So I think what this means is that when China mandates mechanical fail-safes, Other regulators around the world will watch and maybe adopt.
And manufacturers will redesign globally to avoid fragmentation and also, I think, reap the opportunities of design innovation for this.
Andy Mauck, professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University, talking with my colleague Xu Yaowen.
You're listening to World Today.
Stay tuned.
You're back with World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Elon Musk's aerospace company SpaceX has acquired his artificial intelligence business XAI.
The two companies announced this particular deal on Monday.
Musk says the goal is nothing less than building artificial intelligence data centers in space, arguing that orbit may be the only way to scale the massive power and computing needs of advanced artificial intelligence.
The deal comes as SpaceX edges closer to a long-anticipated initial public offering, with reports valuing the combined company at US12 trillion.
SpaceX is going to gain XAI properties like Grok, chatbot and this social media platform X.
With more.
My colleague Zhao Yang spoke with Yan Liang, a professor of economics at Willamette University.
So Yan, first, what's the logic behind Elon Musk's SpaceX acquiring XAI now?
Why combine the rocket, satellite AI and a social media platform under one roof?
Well, according to Elon Musk, as he put on his ex-social media platform, he is forming, quote the most ambitious vertically integrated innovation engine on and off Earth, with AI rockets, space-based Internet.
So it's obvious that for him, this makes sense to be able to develop AI in the space.
He believed this is the most cost-efficient way to enable innovative companies to go ahead and train their AI models and processing their data at what he called unprecedented speeds and scales and accelerated breakthroughs in the AI development.
So I think for him, from a technological point of view, it makes sense to develop AI in the space.
And so that's why he is thinking to merge the two.
And, of course, it also made economic sense, as you know that SpaceX is going to have the IPO later this year.
And so by forming, by combining these two companies together, if it sells a good story right to the investors, that would definitely help to boost the IPO of the company.
Elon Musk says space-based AI is the only way to scale.
So what exactly does AI data center in space mean in practical terms?
What advantages could space offer and what's the biggest challenges?
Well, there are quite a few of actually good reasons to develop space-based AI.
For one is on the energy, right?
As we know that, as Elon Musk is very concerned about the energy capacity to continue to develop the AI.
He mentioned on many occasions that the US's electricity generation is growing at about 4 a year, but AI development will require really exponential growth in this electricity generation.
So for him to operate this data center in the universe and powered by solar power.
Solar energy would make the most sense, right for cost and also for sustainability, because solar panels in orbit could receive somewhere between five and 10 times more energy than on Earth.
So that would help to generate enough power to develop the AI center.
And of course there are also benefits, such as such as the thermal management, because the cool vacuum of space would allow for more efficient passive cooling of the massive data center right, rather than using a lot of water and other sort of resources to be able to do that.
Then, of course, there is the benefit of the more efficient operation when it comes to data processing, because the satellites would allow for real-time in-orbit processing of data, rather than having to transmit a large amount of data back to the earth.
So that really helped to improve efficiency as far as data processing and analytics is concerned.
Then I think there's also other added benefits, for example, security, right?
Space-based system, they're more physically isolated, and so they offer some extra security.
And I think, last but not the least, we know that the XAI's operation has already attracted some sort of oppositions.
So Elon Musk's Memphis operation of the SAI had already complained because they're using the gas-burning turbines to power the facility.
And so the residents complained about the emissions adding to air pollution.
And also his XAI operation in South Evan in Mississippi.
They also had a protest about the noise levels from the local residents.
So if you move this data center and AI portions into the space, then you are really spared from all these environmental and other pushbacks.
And does putting AI infrastructure in space complicate the regulation even further?
Because who governs the AI data centers in orbit?
Yeah, I think this kind of merge, first of all, would already draw a lot of scrutiny from regulators and also investors when it comes to governance, when it comes to valuations and conflicts of interest, given that Elon Musk already has the overlapping leadership role across multiple companies.
And there's also the potential movements of engineers and proprietary technologies and also contracts between all these entities.
So that in and of itself already creates some regulatory hurdle for whether or not this merge can go ahead.
But then I think you're also talking about a very important question in terms of regulation of AI and AI data.
So, as we know, in the US right now, there are local governments regulations, but there are also federal and national level of regulations.
So I think, if this merger does go through and AI infrastructure is being brought to the space, so the FCC, the Federal Communications Commission and also Federal Aviation Administration, at least these are the two agencies that would have to oversee some of these operations.
But I think that also complicate in terms of international coordination, right?
Because again, if any companies can build AI center in the space, then there's definitely the question about how you divide up the space, how you regulate and how you coordinate, because we know the lower orbit with all the satellites it's already a very crowded space.
And now, adding to that right, building more AI data center And also in terms of the governance.
We require some kind of regulatory catch up.
So I think that is still quite, I would say, muddy at this point and quite uncertain how the regulatory system is going to go forward, both in terms at the US federal level, but also at international level.
And is this an euro for a private company to reach a claimed 1.2 trillion US dollars valuation?
And what does that tell us about today's capital markets?
Right.
I think the capital market is definitely very enthusiastic when it comes to now, you know, technological sector, especially if it's AI related and space economy related.
So I think the both sides Uh, when it comes to the um space acts, it has been a pretty lucrative um business for uh, out of you know, many of Elon Musk's businesses.
Um, I think you know they have a quite decent in terms of the revenue streams and also their profits.
Um.
So the space acts generated about 8 billion in profits and somewhere between 15 and 16 billion revenues in 2025.
So, in a sense, this is exciting opportunities for many investors looking to you know.
Put their money into tech-related businesses right, be it space economy or be it in the AI system.
And I think this merger is potentially able to pull the capital, talent and all these resources together.
So for investors, this seemed to be a logical way to, sort of synergize the different resources.
And Elon Musk has been doing these kinds of things.
He has a history of merging his ventures together.
For example, he folded the social media platform X and the XAI together through a share swap last year.
And so that helped the AI startup to have the social media access data and distribution.
So in a way, it really helped to develop both X and XAI.
And back in 2016, he also used Tesla's stock to buy his solar energy company, SolarCity.
So he has been doing the kinds of merger and to have the vertically integrated sort of ecosystem.
And it seems that investors are quite excited about this kinds of potential.
So how does this move position Elon Musk against other big tech players like OpenAI Google, Microsoft and Meta?
Right.
So, as we know that Elon Musk used to be the co-founder of OpenAI, but he left in OpenAI in 2018 and then he built XAI in 2023.
So it's clear that he wants to out-compete many of these businesses, as you mentioned.
They're considered as the AI leaders.
And I think, in a way, if this merger does go through and again, given all else, you know, going through as planned right, that he's able to build this data center in space, he's able to utilize the solar farm out in the outer space to be able to energize and to power these AI data centers and to be able to again use the cooling system and have the operational efficiency using data.
If, giving all these, that is happening as planned, then I definitely think he has a very good advantages, has a very good lead in developing AI and to be able to really rival some of these competitors.
Yan Liang, professor of economics with Willamette University, talking with my colleague Zhao Yang.
That's all the time for this edition of World Today.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching World Today.
I'm Dinghan in Beijing.
Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
