DeepSeek’s rapid ascent illustrates how indigenous innovation can disrupt established industries. The company’s flagship model reportedly achieved performance levels comparable to those of leading United States (US), counterparts while operating at a fraction of the cost normally associated with such breakthroughs. Within days of its launch on January 20, 2025, DeepSeek’s AI chatbot became the most downloaded free app on the US iOS App Store, displacing established systems and triggering a dramatic drop in market valuations for major chip manufacturers. Such seismic market reactions underscore not only the technological prowess of DeepSeek but also its potential to redefine competitive benchmarks in AI development.

At the heart of DeepSeek’s success is its founder, Liang Wenfeng, whose entrepreneurial journey reflects a broader trend in China’s tech ecosystem. Liang, originally from a modest background in Guangdong province and educated at Zhejiang University, transitioned from pioneering algorithmic trading at a leading Chinese quant hedge fund to establishing DeepSeek in 2023. His vision was not solely profit‐driven; in interviews, Liang emphasised the pursuit of scientific inquiry as a means to overcome hardware limitations imposed by US export controls and to foster a uniquely Chinese model of AI innovation. DeepSeek’s development strategy prioritising algorithmic efficiency and cost‐effectiveness serves as a powerful counterpoint to the “more is better” ethos that has traditionally underpinned western AI research and development.

This technological leap forward prompts an essential debate about the potential trajectories of global tech relations. On one hand, DeepSeek’s achievements demonstrate that focused investment in local talent and strategic government support can enable breakthroughs that rival those achieved with massive capital outlays in the West. National policies aimed at fostering indigenous innovation have not only reduced reliance on foreign technologies but have also spurred a domestic culture of tech nationalism. These State‐backed strategies have proven effective in creating an environment where companies like DeepSeek can thrive despite external restrictions, such as US export controls on advanced semiconductors and AI tools.

Yet, this rise of indigenous innovation carries a dual-edged consequence. While it propels China further along the path to tech supremacy, it also risks deepening the technological divide between nations, a phenomenon often described as “decoupling.” From the US perspective, measures such as the Clean Network initiative are designed to prevent critical infrastructure from being compromised by technologies tied to the Chinese State. Such policies have fueled a protectionist response that limits collaboration and promotes self-sufficiency. In the context of AI, this means that while Chinese firms are accelerating their domestic capabilities, international partnerships may increasingly be supplanted by unilateral efforts to secure and control technological supply chains.

Proponents of global collaboration argue that innovation in AI and indeed in all high-technology sectors is inherently transnational. The pooling of diverse perspectives and expertise across borders can spur advancements that no single nation could achieve in isolation. In an ideal scenario, countries would embrace collaborative frameworks that safeguard security concerns while allowing for the free flow of ideas and talent. Joint research projects, cross-border academic exchanges, and multinational innovation clusters could facilitate a shared understanding of ethical standards and operational best practices. Such cooperative endeavors might also mitigate the risks of regulatory fragmentation and the inefficiencies associated with duplicate research and development investments. Historical precedents in scientific research have repeatedly shown that international collaborations can accelerate breakthroughs by pooling resources and knowledge.

Conversely, the strategic imperative of national security especially in the wake of recent US actions targeting Chinese tech firms suggests that nations may increasingly resort to protectionist policies. The US has already taken significant steps to restrict technology transfers and safeguard its critical infrastructure, measures that have decimated market valuations of companies once seen as untouchable. In this environment, collaboration may be viewed as a vulnerability and a potential backdoor for adversarial exploitation. The resulting decoupling could lead to parallel innovation ecosystems, each with its own standards, research priorities, and competitive dynamics. This bifurcation would not only intensify geopolitical rivalry but could also fragment the global market, increasing costs and reducing the overall pace of innovation.

The current landscape suggests that both forces of collaboration and protectionism are likely to coexist. Global supply chains and research networks remain deeply interconnected. Even as governments impose restrictions and promote self-reliance, multinational corporations and academic institutions continue to pursue cross-border collaborations. For example, while US policymakers have enacted measures to limit China’s technological access, Chinese companies are simultaneously expanding their overseas investments and forging partnerships in emerging markets to offset these barriers. This dual strategy reflects a pragmatic approach: leveraging domestic strengths while remaining engaged in a globalised economy.

At the same time, the prevailing political rhetoric and policy measures indicate an inevitable trend toward protectionism in strategic sectors such as AI and semiconductors. National security concerns, coupled with a desire to maintain technological leadership, are driving countries to insulate their core industries from potential foreign interference. This protectionist impulse is further reinforced by public sentiment and political pressure, as exemplified by the controversies surrounding companies like Huawei and the subsequent fallout in tech markets.

The case for tech supremacy is, therefore, multifaceted and fraught with both opportunities and challenges. DeepSeek’s emergence as a disruptive force in AI technology exemplifies the potential of indigenous innovation to redefine global technological hierarchies. However, this success also illuminates the inherent tensions between collaboration and protectionism. While international cooperation remains essential for the continued advancement of technology, the strategic imperatives of national security and economic self-interest are increasingly driving nations toward decoupling and unilateral action.

For policymakers and industry leaders alike, the challenge lies in striking a balance that nurtures global innovation through cooperative frameworks while safeguarding critical infrastructure and intellectual property from geopolitical risks. As the AI race accelerates, a nuanced approach that recognises the interdependence of nations yet remains vigilant against vulnerabilities will be essential. In this rapidly evolving landscape, the future of tech supremacy may well depend on our ability to reconcile these competing forces in a manner that promotes both innovation and security.

Ultimately, the story of DeepSeek is not just about a breakthrough in AI technology it is a microcosm of the broader global struggle for technological leadership. Whether nations choose to collaborate or to insulate themselves against perceived threats, the path forward will determine the pace and nature of innovation for years to come.

This article is authored by Gunwant Singh, scholar, international relations and security studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.