Understand this story
On October 6, 2026, Xiao Qian, deputy director of the Center for Strategic and Security Studies at Tsinghua University, wrote in the South China Morning Post, responding to the question raised by the U.S. side of "whether China agrees to slow the development of frontier artificial intelligence." The article does not simply give an answer of agreement or opposition, but asks who can answer on China's behalf, whether it is model training or high-risk capability deployment that should be slowed, and how to establish credible and verifiable arrangements. The article also puts forward three suggestions: China and the U.S. continue dialogue on frontier AI risks, draw on the experience of the Pugwash Conferences, and encourage companies of the two countries to carry out safety assessments first. At present, the article has been published by the Center for Strategic and Security Studies at Tsinghua University, and there are no subsequent factual developments.
AI-generated from public reports
Latest development · Report
Tsinghua's Xiao Qian responds in South China Morning Post to discussion on slowing AI developmentDevelopments
1 confirmed developments
Xiao Qian writes in response to discussion on slowing China's frontier AI development
Source:English text is being prepared.
Reports and discussion timeline
Browse reports and discussion by time. Their evidence levels remain distinct.
Oct 22
Center for Strategic and Security Studies, Tsinghua UniversityFirst-party
Tsinghua's Xiao Qian responds in South China Morning Post to discussion on slowing AI development
Xiao Qian, deputy director of the Center for Strategic and Security Studies at Tsinghua University, wrote in the South China Morning Post in response to the U.S. side's question of "whether China agrees to slow the development of frontier artificial intelligence," and did not simply give an answer of agreement or opposition. The article asks who can answer on China's behalf, whether it is model training or the deployment of high-risk capabilities that should be slowed, and how to establish credible and verifiable arrangements, and puts forward three suggestions: China and the United States should continue dialogue on frontier AI risks, draw on the experience of the Pugwash Conferences, and encourage companies of the two countries to carry out safety assessments first.