Closing the Robotics Gap with China — Lessons from RoboBusiness At RoboBusiness, I listened to an important panel on Closing the Robotics Gap with China featuring Jeff Burnstein (A3 - Association for Advancing Automation), Georg Stieler, Eric Truebenbach (Teradyne Ventures), and Eugene Demaitre (The Robot Report). China’s robotics acceleration over the last 15 years has been remarkable. They’ve built a complete ecosystem — world-class suppliers, low-cost precision manufacturing, and rapid customization — all backed by strong government coordination. As Georg Stieler pointed out, this supplier base is China’s true advantage. It’s not just about making robots; it’s about controlling the components, sensors, motors, and materials that make robotics possible. But that dominance has a cost. Georg Stieler noted that during the Ukraine war, China restricted drone parts to the U.S. — a warning that supply chain control can quickly become geopolitical leverage. Robotics and automation are now national security issues. Jeff Burnstein shared that the U.S. government has opened a Section 232 investigation into robotics, automation, and sensors — a sign Washington is taking the issue seriously. Tariffs might be one tool, but Jeff Burnstein stressed that incentives to manufacture in the U.S. — tax credits, R&D support, and targeted investment — are essential to rebuild our own ecosystem. Still, as Georg Stieler made clear, in some areas it’s already too late to fully decouple. China has a stranglehold on key components, particularly rare earths used in motors and sensors. For now, manufacturers have little choice but to rely on Chinese suppliers. Long term, the answer will require enormous investment, coordination, and time to rebuild a secure, competitive base. Here’s my take: we let things go too far under the belief that free trade was always fair trade. It wasn’t. We allowed dependency to deepen until critical manufacturing became exposed. We can’t fix this overnight, but we can start — by rebuilding the capacity to make essential technologies safely within the U.S. and by strengthening alliances with partners like Germany, France, and Canada. China should remain a partner in global trade — but not the only one capable of supplying the world’s robotics infrastructure. The goal isn’t isolation; it’s balance. When one country dominates too much of the critical technology, the rest of the world becomes vulnerable. It’s time to ensure fair competition — and rebuild the industrial resilience that keeps innovation, and freedom, secure. #robotics #manufacturing #robobusiness
Thanks for posting about this and highlighting my comments in your video, Bob.
China paid the price of environmental damage and harsh labor conditions to make clothes and shoes for developed nations, "under the belief that free trade was always fair trade" and would allow it to buy high-tech products from those countries. However, the U.S. and others have prohibited the export of chips and other advanced technologies to China. “When one country dominates too much of the critical technology, the rest of the world becomes vulnerable.” This can easily be applied to any country.
Another way to look at this is to ask the question, "Is there some robots shortage impacting Reshoring or Increased US Manufacturing?" Since this panel is composed of robot industry insiders and there isn't even one end-user clamoring with something like, "We desperately need more robots and we can't get them!", it would point to this not being a real limitation or issue for US Manufacturing. If anything, the opposite is true with supply, [most/all as stated already coming from off-shore], more than exceeding US demand. Understandable that the industry wants to increase robot adoption in the US, but the high water mark reached during Covid, when many applications were haphazardly deployed without much thought or planning .... [mostly out of fear more than any strategic plan], is unlikely to be significantly increased. And, it's likely that Chinese made Robots will slowly dominate the market ... except as prohibited by tariff and other artificial barriers. The real vulnerability is the shortage of capital investments in US manufacturing, [and yes that will include some robots], even as we read that $billions of new plants are in the works.
Spot on Robert! "under the belief that free trade was always fair trade". This has been an American deceit and Achilles Heel since we invited China to join the WTO and receive all the special benefits. We give our global competitors our economic weapons and then are somehow surprised when those same weapons are improved and turned on us. It is the pinnacle of American naivete' to think people will fight fair, but also the pinnacle of greed because in an open capitalist system the greatest benefits go to those who source materials at the lowest cost. We would and did support human slavery (low cost labor), poor environmental regulations, and poor worker safety standards to get lower costs for the owners. Many Americans have become wildly rich by taking American jobs and giving them to foreign interests, which made most Americans poorer. As you say, Bob, we have done this to ourselves. The only way out is to implement not-so-fair-trade by controlling those who seek personal wealth and forcing them to put the interests of the country and their countrymen first. This is really what the Trump agenda is all about, no matter how you feel about the person. We are in an economic war and we must fight to win
What a great lineup of panelists!
Very important conversation. Thank you for sharing!
Closing the gap with China starts with a national strategy—first in STEM, then in robotics innovation. We should tip the scales where it matters most: zero-interest student loans for engineering, math, and software degrees, and market rates for others. That’s how you align incentives with the future. From there, we must democratize robotics—intuitive UIs, powerful backends, and LLMs that truly understand context so operators can simply ask a robot to change behavior and see results. This brings back a major element of the workforce with blue collar crews able to flexibly adapt their technology which is key to scaling systems in production. These capabilities are less than five years from transforming how we build and operate systems. Finally, we need policy to match ambition: tax offsets for every robot deployed and continued investment in maintaining automation at scale. Without deliberate action, the outcome is obvious—China will define the next era of advanced robotics.
We need to shift from passive tariffs to aggressive incentives to rebuild the USA supplier base because dependency is no longer an option.
Your point on the supplier base hits home. I find near-term wins come from better processes and operator-friendly automation on the floor, where small gains stack into safer, steadier output.
Chief of Robotics Strategy | MSME
2wEU floats conditions such as tech transfers for China investments. https://www.reuters.com/world/china/eu-floats-conditions-such-tech-transfers-china-investments-2025-10-14/