In its pivot to making batteries for AI data centers, Ford is licensing Chinese technology for its Kentucky plant. This strategic move, designed to compete in a market dominated by Chinese firms, ironically highlights the deep dependency on Chinese innovation even within American domestic manufacturing efforts.

Related Insights

The decision to allow NVIDIA to sell powerful AI chips to China has a counterintuitive goal. The administration believes that by supplying China, it can "take the air out" of the country's own efforts to build a self-sufficient AI chip ecosystem, thereby hindering domestic firms like Huawei.

Counterintuitively, U.S. and global auto firms need to collaborate with Chinese suppliers to reduce strategic dependency. The model involves onshoring Chinese hardware and manufacturing expertise while maintaining national control over sensitive AI software and networks, creating a strategic "co-opetition."

The strategy of selling advanced tech to rivals like China to create dependency is flawed. The example of Tesla in China, which arguably gave BYD a 'paid education' in EV manufacturing, shows this approach can backfire. Instead of addiction, it can accelerate a competitor's ability to learn, iterate, and ultimately leapfrog the original innovator.

German automaker Volkswagen can now develop and build an electric vehicle in China for half the cost of doing so elsewhere. This shift from simple manufacturing to localized R&D—the "innovate in China for the world" model—signifies a dangerous hollowing out of core industrial capabilities and high-value jobs in Western economies.

While China bans many US tech giants, it welcomed Tesla. A compelling theory suggests this was a strategic move to observe and learn Tesla's methods for mass-producing EVs at scale, thereby accelerating the development of domestic champions like BYD, mirroring its past strategy with Apple's iPhone.

Contrary to their intent, U.S. export controls on AI chips have backfired. Instead of crippling China's AI development, the restrictions provided the necessary incentive for China to aggressively invest in and accelerate its own semiconductor industry, potentially eroding the U.S.'s long-term competitive advantage.

The credit's requirements for North American manufacturing and sourcing from trade partners were designed to counter China's dominance in the EV supply chain. Its elimination undermines this strategic goal, leaving tariffs as the primary, less effective tool.

Conceding that competitor BYD has a cost advantage from vertically integrated battery production, Ford's CEO revealed a counter-strategy: designing motors and gearboxes so efficient they require 30% less battery capacity to achieve the same range, thereby bypassing the core battery cost problem.

While the West may lead in AI models, China's key strategic advantage is its ability to 'embody' AI in hardware. Decades of de-industrialization in the U.S. have left a gap, while China's manufacturing dominance allows it to integrate AI into cars, drones, and robots at a scale the West cannot currently match.

Without government incentives to offset high costs, American carmakers like Ford are now forced to pursue radical manufacturing innovations and smaller vehicle platforms, directly citing Chinese competitors like BYD as the model for profitable, affordable EVs.