Elon Musk - billionaire with self-made geopolitical power

Musk's ability to control key technologies makes him a stand-alone force in global politics , except in China.

Most business leaders don’t cause an international political incident in their lifetime. But Elon Musk has done it twice this month. First, the billionaire angered Ukraine with recent revelations in his biography that he once refused to activate the Starlink satellite service in Crimea, thereby preventing a Ukrainian attack on the Russian navy.

Days later, Taiwan criticized him for saying China views the island the same way the U.S. views Hawaii. Those are just a few of Musk’s diplomatic agenda this month, which includes meetings with the leaders of Israel, Turkey and Hungary.

Musk’s international influence poses an interesting problem for the US. In a world where geopolitical leadership increasingly depends on technology, Musk should be one of America’s most important “assets.” But in reality, he is a force on his own, according to the WSJ .

Elon Musk at the Viva Technology conference in Porte de Versailles (France) on June 16. Photo: Reuters — Elon Musk at the Viva Technology conference in Porte de Versailles (France) on June 16. Photo: *Reuters*

Historically, businessmen have wielded considerable geopolitical influence. In the 1700s, the East India Company and private army were truly political forces in their own right as they invaded India in pursuit of profit. "A great prince depends on my pleasure; a luxurious city is at my command," Robert Clive, the de facto ruler of the East Indies, told the British Parliament.

Or William Randolph Hearst, the Hearst Corporation's media conglomerate and founder of the New York Journal, who pushed the United States into war with Spain to sell newspapers. Or Henry Ford, the isolationist who tried to keep the United States out of both world wars. In 1940, he vetoed a contract to build fighter jet engines for Britain.

During the Cold War, oil tycoon Armand Hammer, founder and CEO of Occidental Petroleum, helped stoke tensions between the Soviet Union and the United States. Meanwhile, George Soros, founder of the Soros Foundation, used money made from betting on one country's currency to put pressure on another.

Today, Elon Musk's influence is not due to his control of oil, capital, or private armies, but to technologies that are critical to economic competitiveness, national security, and public opinion.

NASA and the Pentagon rely heavily on Musk-owned SpaceX for their spaceflight operations. But Gregory Allen, director of the Wadhwani Center for Artificial Intelligence and Advanced Technologies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), noted that SpaceX is not like traditional defense contractors.

While other contractors are almost entirely dependent on government approval for their sales, SpaceX is not, so Musk feels less obligated to align his views with those of Washington.

After Russia shut down Ukraine's satellite service in the early hours of its invasion in February 2022, Musk offered his Starlink satellite internet service to help the country restore connectivity on the battlefield. However, he refused to provide Starlink coverage in Crimea, saying he would avoid "clear complicity in an act of war and escalation of a major conflict."

Meanwhile, Tesla is not the only electric car maker in the world, but it is the most advanced and reputable, according to the WSJ . National leaders may see that inviting Tesla to build a factory will ensure the future of the electric car industry in their country.

That’s why China broke with tradition and allowed Tesla to own its subsidiary outright rather than forming a joint venture in 2019. Beijing is betting that Tesla’s presence in Shanghai will give a boost to domestic brands. That’s why Saudi Arabia is in talks with Tesla about an investment, which Musk denies.

Ultimately, while Musk’s acquisition of Twitter (now X) may seem like a huge financial loss, it has a positive political effect. As the world’s most influential media platform, owning X gives Musk the power to decide who gets heard, supported, and who gets filtered and banned.

Only America could have produced an entrepreneur like Elon Musk, who emigrated from South Africa to Canada as a teenager and then to the U.S. “America is really the place where the spirit of human exploration was distilled,” said historian Walter Isaacson, author of a biography of Musk.

And perhaps only in the United States has Musk enjoyed such political autonomy. Musk has been in near-constant conflict with the state, from the Federal Trade Commission to the Justice Department. Whereas in some other countries, dissenting from politicians can cost an entrepreneur his business, his freedom, or both, in the United States, where power is dispersed among different branches and parties, Musk has room to thrive.

In fact, there are also businesses that have significant diplomatic and geopolitical influence. However, they do not have the same attitude and response as Musk. Therefore, Musk's influence in some ways also causes a lot of concern. More importantly, because of Musk's independence from the US government, he himself is more susceptible to being influenced and yielding to China.

Musk's respect for China extends to Twitter. Shortly after buying the social network, he said the platform would have to be careful with "the language it uses about China, because Tesla's business could be threatened."

Musk is not alone in regularly antagonizing American politicians while cozying up to Beijing. In fact, CEOs of companies from Walt Disney to JPMorgan Chase do the same. But the difference is that the fate of nations depends more on who has the best technology than on bank loans or the best animated film.

The surest way to diminish Musk’s power over international relations is to diminish his influence over technology. Competitors are already working to erode SpaceX and Tesla’s market share. As for electric cars, now that Chinese brands have caught up, Tesla could be squeezed out of the market like other foreign companies once Beijing no longer finds it useful. But Musk would then be less vulnerable to China, since there would be no sales there to worry about.

Phien An ( according to WSJ )

Source link