The US government on Tuesday, July 28 local time, announced a ban targeting new Chinese robots and inverters. Reuters reported that the Federal Communications Commission （FCC）updated its "Covered List" to include foreign-made "advanced robotic devices," such as humanoid and quadruped robots, as well as network-connected power inverters. Washington says the measure will shield US artificial-intelligence development from alleged national-security threats and bring manufacturing in critical industries back to the United States.
The FCC said the equipment could expose vulnerabilities in supply chains, potentially disrupting the US economy and national security. The agency also said the products could create cybersecurity risks and threaten critical infrastructure. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said: "The FCC will continue to do our part to secure America's critical supply chains."
The United States has announced a ban targeting new Chinese robots and inverters.
The FCC measure applies only to new models of the affected equipment. It does not bar people from using existing devices, prevent retailers from selling already authorized models, nor affect federal procurement and use. But the FCC retains the authority to revoke approvals already granted to models sold in the US market.
Politico said the move fits two central priorities of Trump’s second presidential term. One is to curb China’s competitiveness in AI. The other is to prevent China’s clean-energy sector, already dominant globally, from continuing to rise.
An interagency group in the Trump administration concluded that the technologies could threaten US supply chains, according to the report. Its concerns include the possibility of triggering large-scale blackouts or enabling surveillance of US citizens.
The stakes rise as the United States builds AI data centers at scale. Analysts told Reuters that grid-connected inverters are becoming increasingly important because they link renewable-energy sources, battery storage, the power grid, and data-center facilities. A supply disruption or cyber intrusion could undermine data-center operations and the security of critical infrastructure.
Humanoid robots are also moving into industrial, research, and consumer markets. Because they carry cameras, sensors, and AI computing systems, US officials worry that foreign intelligence agencies could exploit the data they collect. They also fear malicious actors could seize remote control of the machines.
Four people familiar with the matter said the FCC is expected to exempt many non-Chinese suppliers from the restrictions. That would mirror recent US bans involving foreign drones and routers.
The robot ban is expected to hit China’s Unitree Robotics, according to Counterpoint Research. Unitree is a global leader in humanoid robots, holding nearly one-fifth of the worldwide market. The Pentagon recently added the company to its so-called “Chinese Military Companies List,” a move that could signal tougher US action ahead.
Unitree Robotics’ latest breakthrough humanoid robot.
Unitree recently partnered with Nvidia, which will use its advanced Blackwell chips to provide the “brains” for Unitree’s robots. Nvidia has said the robots’ data will remain in the United States. Unitree’s largest customers are US academic and research institutions.
Morgan Stanley analysts predict that the humanoid-robot market could reach $5 trillion by 2050. The Trump administration’s import ban may give US companies a competitive advantage.
Morgan Stanley analysts predict that the humanoid-robot market could reach $5 trillion by 2050.
The Washington Post said Trump’s sons have also entered the humanoid-robotics sector. They have invested in defense and robotics companies focused on US-based production.
The US government has spent recent years trying to reduce its dependence on Chinese-made equipment, citing national security.
The Chinese Embassy in the United States urged Washington to stop smearing Chinese companies and threatening them with sanctions. It said China would take all necessary measures in response to actions that harm Chinese interests.
A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson has previously said that China firmly opposes the US side’s overbroad interpretation of national security, its creation of discriminatory lists under various pretexts, and its unjustified suppression of Chinese companies.
The spokesperson urged the United States to correct its erroneous practices and end its unreasonable crackdown on Chinese enterprises. China, the spokesperson added, will take necessary measures to firmly safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies.
Deep Throat
** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **
The future belongs to artificial general intelligence (AGI). China and the United States are pursuing different strategies in the contest for global leadership.
But one US national security think tank wants to take the rivalry to an extreme. The Center for a New American Security (CNAS) has gone so far as to suggest that Washington consider extreme measures to stop China from achieving AGI first.
CNAS released “Superpowers and AGI” report late last month.
Jacob Stokes, one of the report's authors and a former White House official, called on the US to prepare itself. He listed possible extreme measures, from diplomacy and espionage to cyberattacks and coercive steps. Among them: military strikes on Chinese data centers.
Stokes, one of the authors of the report urged extreme steps, even strikes on Chinese data centers.
CNAS is headquartered in Washington and was founded in 2007. It has long advised the US government on defense, Indo-Pacific and China strategy. Its lean is hawkish.
Late last month, CNAS released a report titled “Superpowers and AGI”. The document reeks of gunpowder. It argues that the race for AGI, and the technology's potential emergence, could profoundly affect US-China competition. It could also heighten the risk of military conflict or catastrophe on multiple fronts.
The Containment Checklist
To that end, the report urges US policymakers to act on several fronts. First, ensure that American resources and technology do not aid China's AI development. Second, establish AI-focused diplomatic channels with allies and with China, so that the potential emergence of AGI is placed on the agenda. Third, develop a technically sophisticated method to track the inputs into AGI and the key performance thresholds of frontier AI systems.
The list goes on. Washington should conduct scenario exercises testing when and how the US should intervene to halt China's AGI development. It should prepare to reverse-engineer or steal the technology should China obtain AGI first. And it should limit and contain the reach of authoritarian digital infrastructure.
The most extreme proposal of all is military strikes. The South China Morning Post reported on 4 September that Stokes, deputy director of CNAS's Indo-Pacific Security Program, addressed an online event on Thursday.
His message was blunt. The US Department of Defense, the National Security Agency and other agencies should begin assessing what intelligence would be needed to justify such operations. That would pave the way for the "hard action" to follow.
The Cold War Playbook
Stokes served as a national security staffer under former US president Barack Obama. In the report he unabashedly lays out a menu of what he calls "diplomatic, espionage, cyber and kinetic measures." Among them are military strikes on the data centers that train and run China's AGI systems. He even touts preventive strikes before China develops AGI at all.
Stokes goes so far as to compare the undertaking to the way "in a past era, policymakers would learn about nuclear weapons." His declared method is to "work backwards from the science to the policy implications."
Citing assessments by research outfit Epoch AI, the report notes that the US currently leads China in advanced AI models by only "months." But it warns that China could pull off an "unexpected technological breakthrough" in fields such as robotics and "embodied AI."
Citing research institute Epoch AI data, the report sees China pulling off surprise breakthroughs.
Notably, Stokes also concedes a gap on the American side. The US government and its intelligence agencies have "not been organised for espionage to gather technological secrets for decades."
"The Height of Recklessness"
Stokes' extreme remarks have drawn questioning within the United States itself. William Hartung, a senior arms and defense budget expert at the Washington-based non-profit Project On Government Oversight (POGO), publicly slammed the report as "the height of recklessness."
Hartung warned that any strike on Chinese data centers would "risk starting a shooting war between two nuclear-armed powers". Such a war could bring tragic consequences for all concerned.
China has consistently maintained that AI should be people-centered and that intelligence should serve the good. Military applications must remain under human control. Beijing opposes turning technological issues into bloc confrontation or weaponry.
Make no mistake: technological competition is no casus belli. When individual American politicians and think-tank figures reach for threats of "military strikes" and "espionage" at every turn, they gravely violate the basic norms of international relations. They also expose a dangerous bid to politicize and militarize technology.
