Mark Scott
Hello, good morning. Good afternoon. Good evening. My name is Mark Scott. I’m Politico’s Chief Tech Correspondent sitting here in London. We’re here to have a interesting conversation over the next 45 minutes about reviewing the last week’s EU US trade and tech Council. Luckily, we have two amazing speakers who are at the event last week in the Arctic Circle in Sweden. So before we get going, just wanted to introduce Director Helena Fu, who is from the National Security Council at the White House in Georgia Technology, national security. And then we’ve got Alejandro Caínzos, from Margrethe Vestager, a cabinet focused also on transatlantic tech issues, among other things. Thank you both so much for joining us today.
Let’s just dive in, there’s a lot to cover. And you know, from everything, from chips to AI to China, but Helena honestly turned to you than to Alejandro to kick us off. You know, we this is now the fourth event that we’ve had between the US and EU on a variety of trade and tech issues, you know, that relationship has inherently grown as people get to know each other, etc. But from your perspective, you know, before we get into the the nitty gritty, you give us maybe one takeaway from from the meeting last week that you that surprised you thought was a win for both sides.
Helena Fu
Thank you. Thanks so much, Mark. It’s a pleasure to be here today.
As you said, we were in Sweden last week and just got back on on Thursday evening. I think what struck me from the discussion was, you know, we’ve had so few opportunities for principal level, cabinet members, to really engage in frank and open, prolonged discussion over the two days, that really dive to the heart of the tech issues and the trade issues in our transatlantic partnership. And to do so, not only with each other, and the teams with each other, but with stakeholders from both of our sides. And so I think, you know, I don’t like to frame things in terms of wins, because I think in a partnership, it’s a give and take, and there really is not a one off wins. But I really think that you can see that the technical cooperation, and the staff level cooperation that sort of underpins some of the foundational aspects of this work are leading to real results. And that we are able to, at a very high level have very open and honest discussions about all of these aspects of our relationship.
Mark Scott
So openness and honesty, Alejandro, I presume you’re going to say the same thing. So you know, in terms of, again, you know, an outcome from last week’s event. Before we get into some of the details from from the European side, what was what are the successful outcomes that Alina mentions.
Alejandro Cainzos
So you were able to presume I was gonna say the same thing. And, indeed, I think, probably this fourth meeting, it’s fair to say was the most productive so far, and I think it just speaks to the fact that we’re at a stage of the relationship with I think most of the, let’s say, theoretical political policy alignment has already happened. And we’re now be talking about concrete projects, concrete results. From that perspective, we’re quite happy with the results on standardization on semiconductors on connectivity, including international connectivity. And also, I think we’ve we’ve laid out some pretty ambitious projects for for the near future, including on artificial intelligence, as well as on 60 for example. So it’s kind of a snowball that keeps rolling the more we get done, I think the more we see that there are more things we can we can do together.
Mark Scott
Anyway, I suppose I can’t help but start off with some of the things around AI that are Alejandro mentions most because you know, in the last six months, you know, chat GPT has become a thing that even my grandmother knows and therefore it’s you know, something that You’re, you’re both sides need to sort of look and see to be seen to do something. There was a discussion right at the end. And this came up in the press conference around some sort of voluntary code on AI. That was like a little bit of a more first for my liking. But you know, that seemed to be a sense of beyond some of the metrics and the, the AI roadmap that’s built into the TDC. Like another level of cooperation, even development or some sort of voluntary standard. From the US side, what does that look like? Because there’s been a variety of executive orders from the White House in recent months, there’s obviously things going on in you know, in Congress, that is, obviously another branch of the US government. But in terms of where the US government is looking to build ties with both Europe and other you know, like minded partners, what happens next in terms of that AI work within the TTC.
Helena Fu
And thanks, Mark. And as you rightly pointed out, a lot of this really harkens back to the work that’s been going on in AI in the TTC since the very beginning. It’s always been a thread, it’s always been something that’s been worked on. In this next instantiation, we’ve agreed to include generative AI focused within the work of the technical work between NIST and counterparts. But as you mentioned, you know, I think at this TTC, you could see our leaders really agree on the urgency of this moment, to address some of the new opportunities and the risks that are posed by generative AI. I think the conversation really benefited as well, from the very robust stakeholder engagement that happened in Luleå. We heard from a number of companies from the US and the EU, it’s very, very important discussion. So I think we’re really working to develop the right new approaches for Responsible uses, that include these kinds of voluntary principles, code of conduct, and commitments, as well as a longer term need for formal regulation. But we really aim to come to a common view. And I think this is part of that discussion. I heard in meeting sort of tasking, to really move together quickly on this. We’re also mindful that there’s already ongoing work within the g7 process, as well as the OECD and elsewhere. So it’s going to be an international issue, we’re going to need to work with all partners on this. But I think U.S. TTC is really a significant platform for us to advance the work that we’re doing.
Mark Scott
As I mentioned, Alejandro, there’s a lot going on from the sort of OECD principles to frankly, what’s China’s doing in its own domestic sphere on AI? Within Europe, there’s the AI act, right. And you know, your counterparts in the Spanish presidency coming up, are looking to get that done, at least by the end of the year, in terms of international corporate cooperation, how does that fit in with Europe’s own sort of legal legislative track that’s coming down the pike?
Alejandro Cainzos
Exactly. So as Helena mentioned, I think all of these things are happening in parallel. So you we are we are working on legislation. We proposed this already some some time ago. And we have the ambition to try to finalize the negotiations of the AI act by end of this year. But even in the best case scenario in given the our legal system and the transition periods involved, we’re talking about real application tangible application in about three years from now, give or take. And of course, we are seeing how generative AI in particular, is growing at exponential rate. And that means that we need to find stopgap measures. In the meantime, this is why I think that this was very prescient in the discussions in Lulea. And under the ministers concluded on this commitment to work together towards voluntary commitments from, from the AI developers that would, of course, need to evolve towards this code of conduct, we will need to involve stakeholders, not just the developers but of course the civil society, independent, academic etc. And as Helene said, with with our like my partners, there is this commitment from the leaders that the Hiroshima summit last month called the Hiroshima a process with a deadline end of this year. So we want to see how we can, let’s say merge those discussions with this first bilateral attempt coming out of Lulea in order to get as quickly as possible with as many partners as possible and as concrete as possible. So quite a high level of ambition as you can imagine. And just to finalize, of course, this is also complementary with the work that you mentioned at the beginning that we’ve been doing already for some time in the TTC on the joint roadmap on AI, which is very focused on definitions, terminology, metrics, measuring tools, etc, which will be crucial for any company on both sides of the Atlantic to comply, whether it’s legislation or voluntary codes, you will need these technical tools to comply.
Mark Scott
I don’t want to delay too much on AI, because there’s a lot more to cover. But, you know, just finally, on this point, President Biden has made it very clear that, you know, something has to be done. And everyone from Sam Altman, from open AI to Brad Smith, for Microsoft has also called for some sort of regulation in some ilk. I know, you know, bills and laws come from Congress, not the White House, technically. But in terms of, you know, a non binding voluntary code of conduct, if I’m a citizen, doesn’t sound that that like it has many teeth. And as I get it, I’m a technology reporter with a political bias. So I’m always going to look for policy and regulation, because that’s my beat. But is, you know, is it enough? Do you think I mean, does the does the White House, or, or Congress or the US government as a whole need to do more things than some sort of binding I’m sorry non binding voluntary code or the variety of executive orders that have come out recently?
Helena Fu
I mean, it’s a very good point, I think that what we’re trying to do here is really take a deliberate approach to understanding these new AI capabilities to ensure that our voluntary commitments are really anchored in technical realities that can be meaningfully implemented. And I think part of the challenge, as you all know, with Chat GPT, and others, is that it is very new for policymakers to kind of understand and come to grips with how to actually manage manage it. So I think this is going to be the hard work that we’re going to have to do going forward. Whether it’s enough? You know, I think it’s a very loaded term. I do think that we need to start with this to understand the spaces before we can go full on for sort of formal regulation here
Mark Scott
and find out Alejandro, give us some details, like what does the voluntary code look like?
Alejandro Cainzos
would be very disrespectful for me towards Halina to give you details that her agreed, even though it’s meant to be a joint endeavor, but I think you will not be surprised about some of the elements that are there. In terms of the principles of what you expect to feature in such a code of conduct. I think what matters is that it needs to be sufficiently robust to, to to be implementable, and for developers to be accountable to it. And I think that’s, that’s the, what we need to get to I think our boss is committed to trying to get a draft together in the next weeks. We’re also you need to be patient.
Mark Scott
Patience unfortunately is not a virtue I have, but I appreciate that. Halina, I’m somewhat skeptical of the TTC process, mostly because I see the US and the E.U. was frenemies more than anything else. Because there are, you know, very much like minded partners, but there’s obviously economic and political disagreements on many things. But what does strike me about this TTC was, you know, on some of the one curry that I kind of dig, you know, semiconductors, tenement communications, though did seem to be greater collaboration and cooperation. And even in the previous meetings, what struck me also was on the semiconductors the idea of trying to, like share information on each other’s subsidy packages to to avoid, you know, the Intel’s and TSMC’s of this world trying to pay off one another to get the most amount of money, frankly, can you give us a little bit detail what that entails? Like, what does that information sharing look like to make sure that the the US Chips Act gets bang for his buck?
Helena Fu
Yeah, I mean, I think that that is, well, firstly, I’ll start with your skepticism of the TTC. I think it’s something that we have heard from some of our stakeholders, you know, often there’s this question for what are the deliverables? What are the headline things that you’ve delivered? And I think it’s a very natural question. We, as human beings are very, you know, inclined to ask for that, that top line thing. But if you kind of think about the process of TTC, you know, it’s actually every six month cycle to develop this sort of very big splashy headline, that’s kind of an unsustainable trajectory, right? I think it doesn’t actually enable or allow for substantive, real work that takes time and, you know, bakes over years. And so, you know, what’s been happening since since Pittsburgh since the launch is the sort of gradual evolution of TTC and you’re now seeing some of those deliverables really come out and some of it is not as visible as you mentioned, you know, what is coordination look like? And I think one of the things that really have been developed through this mechanism is very top line channels to each other to make sure that each other are not surprised that we are announced, you know, talking coordinating around, activities on both of our sides. as we implement the CHIPS act here, and as we think about the various research and development activities and the supply chain considerations, so I think, you know, what does it look like, we’ll be looking at how we coordinate more on supply chains. Obviously, we have a chip office here that is very active internationally and working with counterparts in Europe. What we’d really like to do is also increased research collaboration from our NSTC and IMEC. So I think these are these are sort of the forward trajectory. But again, you talk about what is this a headline? You know, I really think this is this is ongoing technical work that unfortunately makes for sort of the dull, the dull newspaper headline, but I think is really substantive work that is very valuable.
Mark Scott
Yeah, if I pitch a story about sort of, you know, technical work on sort of telecommunication standards, it’s not going to get a green light from my editor. So I appreciate that. Alejandro, on the r&d stuff. There’s some interesting things around quantum that are in the final statement. Could you give us a sense of what that looks like? Again, maybe not just to quantum but also the r&d that is trying to be developed between both sides?
Alejandro Cainzos
Yeah, so one of the things we realized, maybe in hindsight, is that we didn’t have when we set up TTC, let’s say, and a specific vehicle for r&d. So r&d was kind of spread out in the different buckets of what we’re doing. But as we’ve made progress, and a lot of it, as Helena says, is the organic progress in different areas, we’ve seen there and new pieces popping up substantially in in all of these buckets. So you were just talking about semiconductors. So one of the things we’ve agreed on now, in addition to information exchange about our respective programs, and that falls into this much wider coordination of our Chips Act is, is to drive r&d together for to find an alternative to pee fast in semiconductor supply chains, which is extremely important in order to, to ensure that this crucial technology is is safe as safe as possible for for health. Then you have, as you mentioned, the quantum Taskforce, which is quite an ambitious project, because the first time that we’re going to be dealing with cooperation in an emerging technology in a vertical way. So that includes everything in that technology, from the r&d to the standardization all the way up potentially to export controls. So you have, you have, let’s say, a full spectrum discussion through this taskforce. And and one of the first pieces would be to identify what are the respective barriers to cooperation in r&d and try to solve them. If you mentioned r&d, I think I need to mention 6G, because that was one of the, I think, biggest deliverables of this meeting, which is our 6G outlook. So here, I think a very strong commitment to say that we will run faster if we run together on this. And we will have both a common vision between governments of how we want to get to 16 trillion for r&d and international standards, as well as an industry roadmap. So we want the we want the researchers, the companies on both sides to get together and and try to join forces because it’s clear that the more critical mass you get, the faster you can advance.
Mark Scott
It’s given me steps to get to 6G in a minute, but I suppose we would jump into it now. And Helene to you. When I look at the 6G outlook. It’s hard not to look at, you know, the underlying issue of China playing into this because of the role that you know, Chinese silicon accrued, Americans like Huawei have paid in both in 5g with their r&d. And now, you know, when over 6G comes in the next decade, with the role that China and Chinese companies will play. My cynical view is it’s very, it’s easier for the US and Europe to you know, my words going up and or collaborated as maybe a more positive way of looking at it on its standards to push back when the Chinese come to sort of the global standards bodies to push their claim for this. Am I wrong to think that, you know, any greater cooperation between the US and Europe on 6G standards is going to plays into the hands that, you know, of trying to push back China and what it’s trying to do on the global stage.
Helena Fu
You know, I think that what we’ve done across the spectrum, not just 6G, but all of these critical and emerging technologies is really think about how we come at this from our foundation of shared values, right? And so I think cooperation on standards and helping those values shapes, the sort of global rules around how technology is deployed. These are things that we actively think about and are sort of baked into the six year outlook that you that you mentioned So yes, it does cover these guiding principles and our common transatlantic vision on what what’s the 6G should look like and that it should be open as secure and trusted.
Mark Scott
But just come back to the the China question, though, two digital infrastructure projects announced with the TTC one in Costa Rica, one in the Philippines, I believe both of that is based on again, from my reading, providing US and EU funding for both 5g and cybersecurity projects. I look at who else’s funds such projects and the Chinese state banks have a role to play with Huawei, ZTE, etc. How much of this is about trying to create a transatlantic relationship? So you can also offer an alternative to that Chinese funding model?
Helena Fu
Yeah, I mean, I think that we’ve always thought that sort of having a diversity of suppliers is an important thing. It’s, it’s part of our supply chain resiliency broadly. And so yes, I think this 6G cooperation is an attempt to provide additional options, additional vendors really push the frontier for where the r&d can go. And then to bring our industry alongside
Mark Scott
Alejandro from the European perspective, though, you know, as we were in Sweden, last week, there was a very large Swedish telecom equipment maker and a Finnish one that play, you know, play big roles in this space, you know, what does international cooperation and standards mean for Europe when, frankly, a lot of that standard work has already been done by European companies.
Alejandro Cainzos
So I think our companies are very supportive of of international cooperation for standardization, including towards towards 6G, I think it’s having, I think finding the right balance between on the one hand working with those partners that are closer to us, in order to push the back the fastest paths as fast as possible. And that’s what we’re trying to do through this six year outlook. But at the same time ensuring that standardization is international in nature, including all countries, I think this is this is very important. Because Because at the end of the day, you need to have international standards. That’s what guarantees a level playing field. That’s what guarantees interoperability I you know, I think the oldest ones among us, we remember how that at some point, you had to change phones when you were traveling to a different continent. So you know, nobody wants to go back to that. So we need to, in a way, yes, cooperate, with our most trusted partners to go faster when it comes to r&d, but also keep that international standardization perspective.
Mark Scott
Just on the current standards, you know, there’s been a big us at push around so called Open RAN, mostly to allow some of this digital service providers in the US, the cloud providers, etc, to piggyback on the back of 5g infrastructure to get into that markets. Though, these are my words, there are some European companies who haven’t liked that very much, because it puts them at a very competitive disadvantage when it comes to 6G. Whenever that does happen, how do you balance the need for those international standards, while also frankly, you know, protecting some of the European companies, you don’t want to have such open standards out there?
Alejandro Cainzos
So I think those are two different questions. Right. So one thing is the deployment of existing 5g networks and open architectures within it. And there, I think there is an open discussion of how mature that technology is. And here, I think we all agree you us that the trend is to work towards virtualization of networks. But we want to make sure the security aspects of that are solid. On the other hand, we in Europe, we leave it to the market size, so we’re not actively promoting one technology or the other week, we let the market decide which which the kind of more traditional architectures are open RAN and will be taken up by the operators going forward. So we’re monitoring that process. While at the same time encouraging the R&I, needed to make sure that open architecture or virtualized networks are as secure and as energy efficient as possible going forward. So that’s one set of elements, one set of considerations. The other set is 6G and how we get to the next generation. And there I think that there is industry consensus on the fact that there will be openness from the beginning from the outset. But there we want to also make sure that this openness goes throughout the supply chain because as as networks get virtualized, of course, we need to look at openness in the cloud, we need to look at openness all throughout the 6G supply chain, and this is one of the principles we agreed within the 6G outlook.
Mark Scott
Lean I feel like I’m doing a whistlestop tour of the TTC statements and forgive me for bouncing around about a bunch of topics But the one thing that also I saw was, you know, some quite strong language around foreign interference, both from Russia and China, and their activities within Latin America and Africa. From the US perspective, what does that look like? You know, I read the statement, it talks about great information sharing, you know, standardization of what interference operation looks like. But in terms of what’s happening in the here, and now, and I checked this morning, and there’s a, you know, an ongoing, Russian disinfo campaign in Latin America based around the potential Ukraine counter offensive going on, as we speak, you know, that is still alive and kicking on a bunch of the platforms. So in terms of, you know, what the US is looking to get out of this, can you give us some details?
Helena Fu
Yeah, and I think this work within the TTC is, again, pointing to the foundation of shared values, right. So it’s very different from the discussion that we’re having around quantum, for example, or semiconductors, it really is about where we want to go together. And so, you know, being able to share information in a structured way, I think, is going to be very important so that we can take action when we need to, I think, these Joint Principles on the protection and empowerment of children and youth in online environments is also incredibly essential. And I think something that’s very, very valuable for our two countries to work together, as well as protecting human rights defenders online, right. And so, you know, as we continue to do this work, we’ll continue to work with all of our stakeholders to make sure that we’re really meeting the moment here, I understand that these threats are ongoing, and in the here and now. But that’s sort of the value of the cooperation that’s ongoing, right. So we have these direct lines of connection, and they are already actively still engaged, engaged in information exchange here.
Mark Scott
Just for that for the audience, just to give a digital not getting lost in weeds, because I reread the same this morning, and I’m not sure everyone else did. There are three components to this, there was greater cooperation within foreign interference, specifically calling out China and Russia. And then there’s a second element. In the final step, we’re looking at platforms and accountability, one looking at protection and empowerment of kids online. And the second one around data access for outside researchers. On that last point on data access, what does that look like? Because the EU, the Europeans are going to be through the digital services act coming through with some sort of regime early next year. You know, I could argue and I have talked to many US researchers and say, Well, my European counterparts get access to important information to do my job where’s my access. And when can we see something similar on the US side, based on on these principles?
Helena Fu
So I think this is going to be the hard work that we’re going to need to undertake in the next six months. I think more broadly around digital governance as well, you know, part of the thing that enables greater cooperation on quantum on AI, are around data flows, right. And so how we can really, really work together in this field is going to be really, really important.
Mark Scott
Alejandro, I’m going to play Team Europe here for a second. And I read those accountability platform principles, and they look very similar to what the DSA looks like. Again, I think sometimes the Brussels effect is over playing of a overplayed scuze me because, you know, other people have good ideas, too. But how much is that platform accountability, a so called Win for for Europe, if, you know, the US side is at least signing up to sort of those type of principles.
Alejandro Cainzos
I think it’s a it’s a win for minors, and it’s a win for transparency. And in a way, if you look at President Biden’s op-ed from beginning of this year, you will find alignment with that as well. So I think it’s also in a way speaks to the value of the TTC, that through this relationship, we you know, we are talking through these issues, we understand each other there was a tendency, sometimes I go to wrongly describe the platform legislation as anti American or something like that. Now, you see that there is more and more alignment in terms of we want to achieve but also concrete projects, as you’ve mentioned, on for instance, on the attack, researches access to data, concrete projects that will need direct benefits also for US policy goals of our legislation. So this is I think, some of the things we’re looking at in terms of how to leverage the, you know, the positive effects of the DSA when it comes to improving transparency and accountability platforms. You know, we don’t want to we don’t want to be you know, jealous about this. We want to make sure that everything that promotes more accountability, more transparency is a net positive also if it comes from your U.S. based researcher, so we’re looking at, you know, into that when we When we think about our delegated acts in the DSA, how we can promote this kind of trusted information exchange, keeping in mind what the end goal is. And the same, by the way can be said about protection of minors. I mean, I don’t see a reason just because, you know, our our CO legislators is faster or more able to finish laws than the US Congress, I don’t see that should be a reason for platforms to protect European minors and not American ones.
Mark Scott
I’m a impatient person, for unfortunately, and I’ve already turned my attention to wherever the meeting is going to be. The next TTC is going to happen sometime, I presume in December, if you want to tell us we’re out. And I’m all ears. I look at the rundown of this summit. And we’ve got semiconductors, we’ve got quantum AI platform accountability. You know, there’s also, you know, sustainable trade has mentioned on the trade side, I believe we’re maybe close to some sort of deal on the critical raw materials, that has been an issue for the Europeans with the US legislation. That is, you know, in the foreseeable future, I’m not sure when we might have that. But for next, the next round, I mean, where would you like to take? Where’s, where’s the White House looking to take this? I mean, what what do you see as a win for the 10 working groups that are now scurrying away and doing the hard work over the next six months?
Helena Fu
So I mean, I, I laugh when you say you’re an impatient person, because I think we’re all very, very impatient want to see, the fruits of all of this labor really come to light? And I think, as I said, you’re starting to see that, frankly, Pittsburgh was about setting that foundation. And since then, it’s sort of evolved. We are thinking about the most efficient and practical way to bring all this cooperation forward. I think, you know, it may make sense to think through how we can make things a little bit more streamlined. I don’t know when the next etc, will be. It will be in the United States later this year. But I’m sure you’ll find find out soon enough, Politico seems to get quite a lot of information very, very quickly. But you know, just in terms of what we really hope to see at the next TTC, really is to see this concrete cooperation taken to the next level, right? You’ve been we announced a lot of things, we hope to be able to announce some of the results or at least early results of some of that work. Some of these will be on longer versus shorter timeframe. But regardless, I really think that in each of these areas around on around AI, semiconductors, there will be good things to report.
Mark Scott
It’s hard not to look past next year’s election cycle, and the effect that may have on a variety of things, both domestically and internationally. What kind of assurances can you give, if any, to your European counterparts that whoever takes over the White House or present Biden continues in depend on what happens with the result next year, the TTC is here to stay.
Helena Fu
So I can’t prejudge any outcome. However, what I can say is that a strong transatlantic relationship is always going to be important. And so you know, the channels that we have both from NSC to the Cabinet, as well as from agency leadership to agency leadership. I mean, most of the people that are working on TTC are civil servants. Right. And so the memory will say, I think the cooperation that as I said, again, you know, pretty technical and in the weeds, that is worthwhile work that will need to keep on going whether or not it’s under this particular umbrella or another but I think in some form or fashion, there will be some forum where we’re going to need to have really open discussions about trade and technology
Mark Scott
In the weeds is my jam. So I’m looking forward to seeing what happens next. Alejandro, to you, you know, we have the Digital Services Act, the digital markets that’s coming into play very soon. The AI Act for Europe may be done potentially by the end of the year, the you know, the digital governance Act, the data act. There’s a lot coming on within the EU, there’s an EU India TTC because we can’t have enough trade and tech councils apparently, you know, in terms of, you know, capacity and focus for the commission in this work. What are you hoping to get out of the next six months before whenever the next TTC with the US happens?
Alejandro Cainzos
I think Helena is right that a lot of these areas we have will have their kind of natural progression. So some of it will will happen organically. I think semiconductors is the best example by now we have such such a close working relationship and all levels of staff that I’m confident that you know the corporation will move forward. Either way But there will be some areas where we will need to particular political attention and steer, I expect and in some cases just because of the urgency. So I think on AI, I think the urgency on generative AI is quite obvious. So I would expect that that we will be paying close attention to moving that forward. Can I expect also quantum that we will pay attention to moving that forward. I think those two are clear examples. We want to continue by the way, they’re connected the cooperation on international projects and connectivity, we’ve had the announced two now there were two in the previous one, so already four, but we need to continue. Because, as you say, there, this is high stakes and, and by coming together, we have much better offers that can compete better with some of the offers that are out there. So So yeah, this I would mention those three areas, possibly as continued areas of focus. And of course, I’m sitting here on the tech side, there’s a whole trade area, which my colleagues from the other side of the corridor are leading them there, I think we have high expectations to try to close off some of the open processes, whether it’s critical minerals, or on steel that are ongoing, by this fall.
Mark Scott
Yeah, sometimes it’s easy to forget that technology is in the BNF. And all and maybe fighting climate change is a pretty important topic, too. We’re wrapping up. So I’m gonna ask you both the same question. Just to sort of finish off to frame this a little bit. In terms of where the TTC sits now versus where it began two years ago, I get that now the principals have spent some time with each other, they had dinner, I presume this flurries of signals that WhatsApp dash text message going around, you know, to build that relationship. But wherever, from what we saw in Lulea, last week, from where it was in Pittsburgh, you know, when it began, what is the thing that’s changed the most I think for for both of you have been Helna I’ll start with you, then to Alejandro.
Helena Fu
I mean, I think, as you say, you know, when when he launched in Pittsburgh, it was really about, you know, what are the shared principles? What are the shared values, I think what changed, you know, was, frankly, Russian invasion of Ukraine. And our second TTC took place in the shadow of that in Saclay. And really, that was where you saw a lot of that export control, cooperation come to the fore, which was really built from, you know, just people getting to know each other, and building those relationships and being able to act very quickly. And so, you know, now we have this focus on concrete projects, and moving those things forward. The biggest thing that’s changed, I think, is, you know, with increased communication and trust, you know, really results in the ability to have those frank and open discussions on areas where we may not fully agree right, on areas where we need to work more together and work through things. So I think that’s probably the biggest thing that’s changed is, you know, the real partnership that we have here and the ability to drive forward outcomes.
Mark Scott
And Alejandro to you.
Alejandro Cainzos
Yeah, I would agree with with Helena’s Answer, I think there will always be exogenous factors that will affect the TTC, depending on what’s happening. Obviously, the war was the biggest one. You see also the let’s say the energy Fallout coming out of that war that has also impacted our last meeting. Now we have generative AI popping in who knows what will come in for the next one. So I think the ability of the TTC to respond to urgent needs is a key, you know, it’s a key part of this forum being successful. And the other key part that has changed dramatically is indeed the level of trust. I mean, you know, you see, after sitting through four of these meetings, how the nature of the conversations just change when they know each other so well, as you say, signal messages. They’ve been together on so many occasions, you know, you as a civil servant, you write your speeding tickets, but then the notes go to the side, and they’re just two people speaking at each other, understanding each other so quickly, and that that that makes a massive difference. And it makes us much closer to results.
Mark Scott
I think we’re going to call it an end here. So I’m Mark Scott, Politico’s chief tech correspondent and one shameless plug that I do write with the transatlantic tech news article Digital Bridge, if you do want to know what’s going on with the TTC ahead of time and with that, Helena and Alejandro, thank you so much this morning and this afternoon for joining us and hopefully we can reconvene after the next TTC thanks
