We do not wish for China to win! The UK's ambassador to the US has made his stance clear! On May 28th, according to a report by Singapore's Lianhe Zaobao, UK's ambassador to the US, Lord Mandelson, stated that if China continues to lead in artificial intelligence and other key technologies, the consequences would be "unimaginable". My biggest concern is China winning the race for technological dominance. The ambassador claimed that the current UK-China relationship is unlikely to return to the "golden era" during Cameron's time ten years ago.
Furthermore, Mandelson reminded the EU to be more cautious when establishing closer ties with China. Clearly, this statement from the UK's ambassador to the US conveys a very obvious message: they do not want China to win the technology competition. Regardless of Sino-British or Sino-European relations, this British politician holds a highly vigilant attitude towards China.
However, we must ask, why can't China win the technology competition? Who stipulated that all technology fields must be dominated by the US or the West? It is evident that the ambassador harbors great bias against China. Currently, we are making continuous progress in the field of technology, and China's technological strength is growing stronger. This will not change in the slightest due to the will of this politician.
In addition, even if Sino-British relations cannot return to the past, we must emphasize that any cooperation between the UK and any country should not come at the cost of harming our interests. International exchanges should be based on equality and respect. Therefore, any actions that harm our interests will inevitably prompt us to defend our own interests. The remarks of the UK's ambassador to the US are very likely aimed at pleasing the US. Since the US, which initiated the trade war, does not wish for closer Sino-European relations. However, we believe that Europe is well aware that the US is no longer a partner in defending the world trading system.
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1833331336761418/
Disclaimer: The article solely represents the author's personal views.