Forcing countries to choose between the US’ and China’s initiatives would be counterproductive to global AI governance
Artificial intelligence (AI) poses risks that do not respect national borders, from cyberattacks and misinformation to system malfunction and potentially dangerous misuse. In a geopolitically charged world, does greater incompatibility between countries make AI safer?
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres offered a clear answer at the inaugural UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance: “When countries align on how to test systems, measure risk and assign responsibility, safety travels with the technology.” By contrast, “a patchwork of incompatible rules raises costs, divides the world – and protects no one”.
threatensto pull the world apart. World AI Cooperation Organization(Waico) last month with 29 founding members. Besides AI cooperation and governance, it aims to help developing countries bridge the AI divide. The United States, meanwhile, has developed the
Pax Silicainitiative around AI, technology and supply-chain security.
Both initiatives overlap but do not primarily seek to address the same problems. Waico can promote development and cooperation while strengthening China’s influence in global AI governance; Pax Silica can address genuine concerns about critical technologies and supply-chain resilience while consolidating a US-centred network of trusted partners.
Because these initiatives come from fierce competitors, an analytical problem arises when geopolitical rivalry is treated as sufficient to explain their entire meaning.