Most business leaders will never make an international incident in their lifetime. Elon Musk did it twice this September.
Days later, after Musk's Taiwan-related comments drew fire from Taiwan, where he said the People's Republic of China viewed Taiwan in the same way the United States viewed Hawaii, Taiwan's Foreign Ministry posted on the Musk-owned X platform (formerly Twitter) : "Taiwan is not part of China, of course it is not for sale!"
The controversies were just a small part of Musk's diplomatic schedule this month, which also included meetings with the leaders of Israel, Turkey and Hungary.
Musk's international clout is a double-edged sword for the United States. In a world where geopolitical leadership is increasingly dependent on technology, Musk deserves to be one of America's most important assets. In reality, however, he is a loner who does not listen to orders.
Of course, business and state policy have been intertwined for centuries. In the 18th century, the East India Company was like a country in its own right, colonizing India for profit. Robert Clive, the de facto leader of the East India Company, once told the British parliament: "A great prince rests on my nose and a rich city is at my mercy."
Turning to the United States, William Randolph Hearst urged the United States to go to war with Spain, in part to sell newspapers. Henry Ford was a strong proponent of isolationism, and he tried to keep the United States out of two world wars. In 1940, Ford vetoed a contract to build engines for British fighter jets needed to fight Nazi Germany.
During the Cold War, Armand Hammer used his leadership of Occidental Petroleum (OXY) to facilitate detente between the former Soviet Union and the United States. George Soros has used his wealth from shorting the currencies of some countries to promote democracy and human rights in others.
Musk's influence is not in controlling oil, capital, or private armies, but in mastering technologies that are critical to economic competitiveness, national security, and public opinion.
NASA and the Pentagon rely heavily on SpaceX, which Musk owns, for access to space. As Gregory Allen of the Center for Strategic and International Studies points out, SpaceX does not rely almost exclusively on U.S. government-approved sales, as traditional defense contractors do; That means Musk feels less obligated to align himself with Washington's views.
The Ukrainians expressed gratitude for the fact that they relied on Musk's Starlink terminals to restore communications on the battlefield after Russia destroyed other Ukrainian satellite services in the early days of its February 2022 invasion, helping to avert defeat. Musk has said he turned down a request to fly Starlink over Crimea to avoid "explicit association with a major act of war and escalation."
Tesla (TSLA) is not the only electric car manufacturer in the world, but it is the most advanced and prestigious. Some state leaders believe that a Tesla factory could allow the country to seize the future of the auto industry. The thinking is understandable. That's why China allowed Tesla to open a wholly owned subsidiary in Shanghai in 2019, a first for a foreign car company, and its bet that bringing in Tesla would energize domestic brands was right. That's why Saudi Arabia is in talks with Tesla to invest, according to The Wall Street Journal. Musk said the report was untrue.
Finally, while Musk's acquisition of X has proved hugely dilutive financially, it has been politically accretive, giving him the power to decide whose words are heard, amplified, filtered or banned on the world's most influential social media platform.
Only the United States can produce entrepreneurs like Musk, who emigrated from South Africa to Canada as a teenager and later to the United States. "America," he told Isaacson, "is really a high ground where the human spirit of exploration is tempered."
Perhaps only in the United States could Musk have such political autonomy. From the Federal Trade Commission to the Justice Department, Musk has run afoul of the U.S. government almost constantly. In a one-man China or Russia, doing what Mr Musk did would cost a person either their business, their personal freedom, or both. In the United States, where power is spread across departments and parties, Musk has thrived.
Mr Musk's influence on foreign policy scares many; While companies often speak out on such issues, they don't elicit the same response as Musk, a highly controversial figure.
More significant than Musk's lack of beholden to the US government is his vulnerability to Chinese government influence.
Isaacson writes in Musk's biography that China and then California forced Tesla to close local factories in order to contain the coronavirus outbreak, and such moves "inspired Musk's anti-authority tendency." But Musk has only publicly vented his frustration with California; He said California's action to close the plant was fascism and that the officials who made the decision were ignorant. He has not publicly made similar remarks about China, even though Tesla's Shanghai factory was shut down for 22 days last year.
Musk's deference to China extends to his policy toward X's predecessor, Twitter. Isaacson wrote that shortly after the acquisition of Twitter, Musk told journalist Bari Weiss that the platform had to be careful with "the words about China because Tesla's business could be threatened."
Mr. Musk should not be singled out for fighting American politicians while cozying up to the Chinese government; The same can be said for ceos of many U.S. companies, from Walt Disney (DIS) to JPMorgan Chase (JPM).
The difference, of course, is that the fate of nations depends more on who has the best technology than on who has the best bank loans or cartoons.
The surest way to dilute Musk's influence on international relations is to dilute his influence on technology. Now, various competitors are trying to undermine SpaceX's market share in satellite launches and X's market share in social media. As for the electric car industry, Chinese brands have now caught up, and Tesla, like other foreign companies, can be expected to be squeezed out of the Chinese market once the Chinese government decides that the foreign companies it once imported are no longer useful. When Musk no longer needs to protect Tesla's sales in the Chinese market, he may be less vulnerable to China's influence.