China Rejects “Fear Mongering” Calls To Slow AI Development, Says It Will Disrupt Process...

China has rejected calls from leading US artificial intelligence executives to slow the development of powerful AI systems, saying that fear and confrontation could undermine efforts to establish global rules for the technology.

Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson for China's Foreign Ministry, pushed back on the proposal Monday after being asked about recent calls from Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Elon Musk for the industry to pace the development of advanced AI because of growing safety risks.

"Fear mongering, confrontation, competition will just disrupt [the] process of global AI governance," Guo said, according to an English translation published by Reuters.

The response underpins a widening divide over how the world's two leading AI powers should manage the technology. US AI executives are increasingly warning that advances in model capabilities could outpace the industry's ability to monitor and control them. Beijing, meanwhile, is framing AI as an area of strategic competition in which slowing development could carry its own economic and national-security risks.

China's Minister of State Security, Chen Yixin, added to that position in an article published Sunday, calling for faster construction of an AI security risk prevention and control system.

AI has become "the main battleground for global technological competition and a new arena for strategic rivalry among major powers," Chen said, while arguing that the technology should develop in a "healthy and orderly" manner.

The language captures Beijing's position that AI development and AI safety do not necessarily require a slowdown in capability building. Instead, China appears to be advocating stronger controls and risk-management systems while continuing to advance the technology.

US-China AI Gap Complicates Calls For A Slowdown

Amodei's proposal reflects the tension between AI safety and geopolitical competition.

In an essay published Saturday, the Anthropic chief proposed a three-step framework for pacing AI development. His proposal included greater access for independent safety evaluators, coordination among AI companies in democratic countries on common safety standards, and eventual coordination between democratic and authoritarian governments.

Amodei explicitly acknowledged, however, that any slowdown by US companies must take into account China's progress.

"Not building the technology deprives humanity of benefits or simply places AI in the hands of authoritarian powers, while building it too fast is reckless," Amodei wrote.

He said the amount by which US companies could slow down would be constrained by their existing lead over what he described as "authoritarian regimes, chiefly the Chinese Communist Party."

"If we slow down by more than this amount, then (unpaced) CCP-associated projects will pull ahead, creating significant national security risk," Amodei said.

That qualification exposes the central difficulty with a voluntary slowdown. A coordinated reduction in the pace of development could give companies more time to test models, strengthen safeguards and improve alignment. But if coordination does not include major competitors, the companies that restrain themselves could potentially surrender a technological advantage.

OpenAI's Altman backed Amodei's call for pacing and said independent evaluators with employee-level access would be a good idea for OpenAI as well.

Musk also endorsed the proposal, writing on X that "Dario is right."

The US government, however, has shown little appetite for deliberately slowing the country's AI development.

President Donald Trump rejected the executives' position during a trip to Ireland, warning that the United States should preserve its lead over China.

"Look, we're leading China in AI… and, frankly I want to keep it that way because whoever wins AI, wins," Trump said.

His position places national-security competition directly alongside the commercial race among AI companies. From Washington's perspective, the concern is not only what more capable AI could do but also who controls the most advanced systems and the infrastructure behind them.

Financial markets have begun to reflect the uncertainty around the AI investment boom. AI-related stocks fell on Monday, with SoftBank, one of OpenAI's largest investors, declining 10% in Japan. At the same time, China's AI industry is gaining greater attention outside the country as its models improve. Western companies have increasingly experimented with Chinese AI systems, putting additional pressure on US developers to maintain their technological lead.

Beijing Seeks Influence Over AI Development

China's position is also being reinforced at the diplomatic level.

President Xi Jinping said at the BRICS summit in New Delhi over the weekend that China would take the lead in promoting AI collaboration and development among developing countries. That ambition extends the AI competition beyond the United States and China themselves. If Chinese companies can establish their models, infrastructure and standards across emerging markets, Beijing could gain influence over how AI is deployed in a much broader group of economies.

For Washington, that creates another reason to view AI leadership as a strategic asset rather than simply a commercial advantage.

The result is a difficult policy paradox. US AI companies are increasingly expressing the view that they need more time to ensure that advanced systems can be safely monitored and controlled. But the same companies operate in an environment where slowing too aggressively could allow Chinese rivals to close the gap.

China, meanwhile, is calling for stronger AI security systems while rejecting the idea that global governance should be driven by fear or confrontation.

Now, the disagreement has been pushed beyond whether AI should be developed quickly or slowly. It is becoming a contest over who sets the pace, who establishes the safety standards and ultimately who has enough technological leverage to shape the rules governing the next generation of AI.