David Rennie, The Economist magazine in Beijing; writes the “Chaguan” column; in re: Artificial intelligence; the contest between the US and China. From the first Cold War: how adversaries can agree not to destroy each other: even when you don't trust each other at all, you can nonetheless discuss a new technology that could abruptly change everything, destroy everything. Now we have three, not two, parties: Russia, US, China. Even during the Cold War, you could send an inspector to see what was being done; but no way to see an algorithm. . . . Unenforceable compliance. We’re left making a distinction: countries’ saying it’s best not to have this technology; but among major powers (not rogue powers), it’s possible for large countries to agree that biowar, for example, is unimaginably dangerous & stupid, just not worth having. . . . The PLA is focussed on nonnuclear war.
.. .. ..
In 1999 the Chinese released a book entitled, Unrestricted Warfare. Commentary: “. . . PLA doctrine. . . . has focused on developing a joint operation doctrine for fighting limited, high-intensity conflicts using high-tech weapons.”