Why I Believe China Will Win the Technology, Energy and AI Race—and Why the World Could Be Better Off

Why I Believe China Will Win the Technology, Energy and AI Race—and Why the World Could Be Better Off

By Jamie McIntyre | Opinion

The country that wins the next technological revolution will need more than brilliant software engineers. It will need electricity, factories, infrastructure and the ability to turn scientific advances into affordable products at enormous scale.

That is why I believe China is increasingly positioned to win the technology, energy and artificial intelligence race.

And if that success produces cheaper energy, wider access to technology and a greater emphasis on economic development over military confrontation, I believe the world will be better off for it.

Reading Chris Miller’s Chip War, published in 2022, reinforces how deeply modern power depends on semiconductors. But the competition has continued to evolve. Chips remain essential, while the electricity required to operate them is becoming an increasingly consequential constraint.

At Davos in January 2026, Elon Musk described electrical power as the fundamental limiting factor for AI deployment. He highlighted China’s rapid expansion of electricity supply as an exception to the constraints facing other countries. (weforum.org⁠)

For me, that is a major reason to take China’s prospects seriously.

China’s large industrial electricity producers generated approximately 9.72 trillion kilowatt-hours in 2025. US utility-scale generation was approximately 4.43 trillion. Although the figures have different statistical coverage, they demonstrate the enormous scale of China’s electricity advantage. (stats.gov.cn⁠, eia.gov⁠)

Electricity must still reach the right facilities reliably. But a country building the physical foundations for computing has an advantage that cannot be replicated simply by announcing another AI investment fund.

China is also becoming a much more formidable competitor in the technology itself.

Stanford’s 2026 AI Index found that Chinese models had nearly erased the American performance lead on the rankings it examined. Leading models from both countries have exchanged positions since early 2025. The United States still produces more top-tier models, but the assumption that China will remain permanently behind is increasingly difficult to defend. (hai.stanford.edu⁠)

The semiconductor story requires greater precision. China has made meaningful progress, including SMIC’s manufacture of the 7-nanometre processor identified inside Huawei’s Mate 60 Pro. However, Taiwan’s TSMC remains overwhelmingly dominant in contract chip manufacturing, accounting for 72.5% of foundry revenue in the second quarter of 2026, compared with SMIC’s 5.4%. (techinsights.com⁠, trendforce.com⁠)

My prediction does not require pretending China has already won every part of the contest. It rests on the possibility that increasingly competitive AI, expanding domestic chip capabilities and enormous electricity infrastructure will reinforce one another.

There is also a deeper question: what should technological power be used for?

I am critical of the resources that American and Israeli governments devote to military power and conflict. I would rather see more of that money, engineering talent and political attention directed toward affordable electricity, housing, healthcare and productive infrastructure.

SIPRI estimates that the United States spent $954 billion on its military in 2025. Israel spent $48.3 billion—97% more than in 2022. China also spends heavily: its estimated military expenditure reached $336 billion in 2025, making it the world’s second-largest military spender. It would therefore be inaccurate to claim China devotes no resources to military power. (sipri.org⁠)

Nevertheless, I believe China’s industrial and infrastructure development offers a more promising basis for global competition than an escalating contest over weapons and military dominance.

The benefits would depend on how that technological leadership is exercised. AI can improve medical care, education and productivity; it can also strengthen surveillance and warfare. Chinese leadership would not automatically guarantee peaceful outcomes.

What I welcome is the prospect of stronger competition making energy and technology more affordable and weakening the assumption that one country should control access to the tools of modern development.

America can still compete. Its companies, researchers and technological ecosystem remain formidable. But lasting leadership will require sustained investment in the infrastructure that turns innovation into practical capability.

My belief is that China’s combination of industrial scale, electricity expansion and increasingly competitive AI gives it a powerful advantage in the years ahead.

The victory worth pursuing is one that delivers better lives. If China’s rise helps shift global priorities toward building, producing and expanding prosperity, that is a future I would welcome.