From “Crisis” to “Alliance”? The Korean Media’s Sudden Shift on Elon Musk and Samsung

Samsung Electronics Executive Chairman Lee Jae-yong, center, poses with Tesla CEO Elon Musk, sixth from left, during the latter's visit to Samsung Electronics' semiconductor lab in Silicon Valley, Calif., May 10, 2023.

Not long ago, Korean media outlets were obsessed with portraying Elon Musk as a liability. From raising concerns over his erratic behavior to amplifying political friction after his party formation and clash with Donald Trump, many headlines painted Tesla as a company in crisis.

But now, seemingly overnight, the narrative has shifted—Musk is suddenly a “strategic ally.” Why? Because Samsung Electronics just landed a deal to manufacture Tesla’s next-gen AI chips. And in promoting Samsung, the media has gone as far as to reframe this straightforward business deal as a bilateral alliance.

A Curious Word Choice: “Alliance” for a Supply Contract?

Let’s be clear: calling this an “alliance” stretches the term to its breaking point.

When Samsung sources hard drives from Fujitsu or communication chips from Qualcomm, no one refers to those relationships as “alliances.” Even when the suppliers are multinational giants larger than Samsung in market cap, the Korean tech behemoth never framed them as equals—it was always a clear vendor-client dynamic.

This mindset has long trickled down to how Samsung treats domestic suppliers, who are often referred to using the Korean term “hacheong” (하청), roughly translating to “subcontractor”—a word with distinctly hierarchical overtones, historically borrowed from Japanese. In Korea, being a hacheong firm has often meant being in a dependent, sometimes even exploitative, relationship with a larger buyer.

So, why now the sudden diplomatic language when Samsung is the supplier, not the buyer?

Supply ≠ Alliance: Understanding the Tesla-Samsung Deal

Let’s put this in perspective.

Tesla didn’t choose Samsung Electronics out of sentiment or shared values. It was a competitive bidding process. Tesla initially approached TSMC to manufacture its upcoming AI6 chips, but TSMC—already at capacity with massive orders from Nvidia—declined. That’s when Tesla began exploring Samsung as an alternative, leading to the agreement announced post-CES 2025.

Samsung then coordinated with partners like Soulbrain to assess feasibility, repurposed parts of its production line, and successfully secured the contract six months later.

But calling that outcome a “strategic alliance”? That’s wishful branding at best.

TSMC and Nvidia: The Bigger Picture

It’s also worth scrutinizing why TSMC, despite the scale of Tesla’s $17 billion order, turned it down. Was it just about capacity?

Unlikely.

TSMC has already aligned itself closely with Nvidia’s road map, focusing on high-bandwidth memory (HBM) production and AI chip development. With Nvidia publicly committing to centralizing AI semiconductor production in Taiwan, TSMC had little incentive to divert focus to Tesla’s niche AI6 chips. In contrast, Samsung is still building out its AI semiconductor client base—and it needed the win.

Ironically, Samsung’s very commitment to Tesla might reduce its ability to prioritize HBM development, making it even harder to compete with TSMC for Nvidia’s business down the line.

So… Where Will These Chips Actually Go?

Even with the deal in place, Tesla’s chips won’t roll off Samsung’s lines for a few more years. That makes the deal irrelevant to Tesla’s short-term challenges—namely, its declining EV sales and the uncertain roadmap for its much-hyped robotaxi platform.

Still, it’s a step Musk had to take. The AI6 chips are expected to power Tesla’s autonomous vehicles and the Optimus humanoid robot. Their massive computing capacity may also open up wider applications in AI inference, a core growth area. Inference chips, after all, are designed to run AI models and make real-time decisions.

Markets responded positively: Tesla shares jumped 4.2% on the day the deal was announced.

The Real Strategic Player? It Might Be Nvidia

There’s reason to suspect that Nvidia is watching all of this very closely.

Rumors suggest that Nvidia may be deliberately slow-walking Samsung’s HBM certification process—not to stall, but to maintain flexibility. By keeping Samsung in the loop (but not yet fully qualified), Nvidia gains more leverage in managing supply volume and geographic distribution. At some point, Nvidia might even lean on Samsung for AI chips destined for the Chinese market.

This is speculative, but one thing is clear: Samsung is no longer in a dominant position. It must chase deals like this and label them “alliances” to maintain strategic relevance.

Samsung, Politics, and Optics

There’s also a domestic political angle.

The Korean media’s glowing coverage of the Tesla deal—complete with talk of alliances and historic partnerships—conveniently comes just after Samsung Chairman Lee Jae-yong emerged from years of legal battles. The implication being floated? “Free Lee, and business booms.”

It’s a neat narrative—but one that masks a more complex reality: this is not a partnership of equals, but a business transaction born out of opportunity, timing, and necessity.