• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Montreal AI Ethics Institute

Montreal AI Ethics Institute

Democratizing AI ethics literacy

  • Articles
    • Public Policy
    • Privacy & Security
    • Human Rights
      • Ethics
      • JEDI (Justice, Equity, Diversity, Inclusion
    • Climate
    • Design
      • Emerging Technology
    • Application & Adoption
      • Health
      • Education
      • Government
        • Military
        • Public Works
      • Labour
    • Arts & Culture
      • Film & TV
      • Music
      • Pop Culture
      • Digital Art
  • Columns
    • AI Policy Corner
    • Recess
    • Tech Futures
  • The AI Ethics Brief
  • AI Literacy
    • Research Summaries
    • AI Ethics Living Dictionary
    • Learning Community
  • The State of AI Ethics Report
    • State of AI Ethics Report Volume 8 (2026): Call for Contributors
    • Volume 7 (November 2025)
    • Volume 6 (February 2022)
    • Volume 5 (July 2021)
    • Volume 4 (April 2021)
    • Volume 3 (Jan 2021)
    • Volume 2 (Oct 2020)
    • Volume 1 (June 2020)
  • About
    • Our Contributions Policy
    • Our Open Access Policy
    • Contact
    • Donate

AI Policy Corner: Are U.S. AI Policies Strengthening Security or Weakening Global Influence?

May 11, 2026

✍️By Alexandria Workman

Alexandria is an Undergraduate Student in Political Science and minoring in Business at Indiana University, as well as an Undergraduate Affiliate at the Governance and Responsible AI Lab (GRAIL), Purdue University.


📌 Editor’s Note: This article is part of our AI Policy Corner series, a collaboration between the Montreal AI Ethics Institute (MAIEI) and the Governance and Responsible AI Lab (GRAIL) at Purdue University. The series provides concise insights into critical AI policy developments from the local to international levels, helping our readers stay informed about the evolving landscape of AI governance. This article will explore how U.S. AI policies aimed at restricting China may protect national security, but they risk weakening global influence by pushing other countries toward China’s more cooperative and accessible approach to AI development.


Major powers like the United States and China are often portrayed as being in a race for technological dominance on the global stage. This narrative appears frequently in political discourse and media coverage. However, the U.S. and China frame this competition differently, shaping not only their domestic policies but also their relationships with the rest of the world.

When looking at current U.S. federal legislation, there are several bills that focus on monitoring and restricting China’s technological development. For example, measures such as the Fair Trade with China Enforcement Act aim to strengthen oversight of trade practices and ensure that China is complying with international rules, particularly in areas related to technology and intellectual property. Similarly, the Bureau of Industry and Security Information Technology Modernization Act focuses on improving the government’s ability to track and regulate the export of sensitive technologies, including those tied to artificial intelligence.

The U.S. has taken a more restrictive approach, at least in part due to concerns over intellectual property theft and national security. When observing the U.S. and China, however, a contrasting approach emerges. The U.S. is primarily focused on limiting a rival, while China presents itself as expanding opportunities for others. As the U.S. leads in AI and seeks to slow China’s progress, China presents itself as a cooperative partner to gain a strategic advantage.

China’s Global AI Governance Initiative presents AI development as a collaborative effort focused on fairness, shared growth, and broader access. This messaging plays a strategic purpose for China by positioning itself as a supportive global partner. This is an effective strategy for China because, from an outsider’s point of view, it sounds diplomatic and cooperative.

While the U.S. strives to maintain AI dominance, the American policies can create the perception among other countries that access to advanced AI can include political coercion. This perception is reinforced by U.S. export controls that support chip manufacturing, aimed to slow China’s AI development and maintain a technological advantage. With AI development relying on chip manufacturing and exports, these policies limit both industries and allies, such as those found in the Netherlands, Taiwan, and Japan. The result is that allies could back away from America due to the constant changing political winds. 

China, on the other hand, is framing their policy in a more attractive way for other countries, especially developing countries, seeking rapid technological growth. For example, they proposed a resolution during the 78th United Nations General Assembly in 2024 to “strengthen international AI capabilities” within countries around the world.  We can also see China providing AI capacity-building workshops that are being held with international participants, especially in Central Asia and Arab countries, and Southeast Asia.

The contrasting approaches create a situation where countries will need to choose which global power they will want to get their AI technology from. It is also true that countries are trying to prevent being permanently dependent on foreign AI systems because it is domestically safer to use AI systems that are locally developed and managed. AI can impact a country’s language, culture, politics, education, surveillance, and military power. The U.S. government approach risks accelerating other countries’ interest in sovereign AI development and implementations, instead of investing in and adopting the American AI stack.

If the United States does not adjust its strategy in the near future, the increasing coercion and uncertainty may lead to more tension between the U.S. and potential AI partners. This would create more risk since countries would be more likely to not adopt the American AI stack and instead buy into, or be amenable to the Chinese stack. Although U.S. policy is designed to preserve U.S. advantages over China and other countries, these policies may weaken U.S. influence if other countries see American AI as politically coercive to their own goals. As a result, American messaging may cause them to look elsewhere for AI support and technology.

Further Readings:

  • Opinion: The U.S. needs to go on AI offense – Washington Post
  • US to safety test new AI models from Google, Microsoft, xAI – BBC
  • Opinion: The US can’t just invent a future with AI — it must deploy it. – The Hill
  • America’s AI Action Plan – White House

Image link: https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/06/19/us-china-ai-race-regulation-artificial-intelligence/

Want quick summaries of the latest research & reporting in AI ethics delivered to your inbox? Subscribe to the AI Ethics Brief. We publish bi-weekly.

Primary Sidebar

SAIER Volume 8 (2026)

SAIER Volume 8 (2026) Call for Contributors

🔍 SEARCH

Spotlight

Vertically- and horizontally-placed chess boards and chess pieces

Tech Futures: At the Frontier of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt

Tech Futures: Introducing the Resist List

An abstract spiral of dark circles appears at the centre, resembling a tornado. Several vintage magazine covers and advertisements are being drawn toward the spiral. The artworks that have already been pulled into it are becoming distorted and replaced with clusters of numbers representing their numerical embeddings.

Tech Futures: Better Imagination for Better Tech Futures

This image is a collage with a colourful Japanese vintage landscape showing a mountain, hills, flowers and other plants and a small stream. There are 3 large black data servers placed in the bottom half of the image, with a cloud of black smoke emitting from them, partly obscuring the scenery.

Tech Futures: Crafting Participatory Tech Futures

A network diagram with lots of little emojis, organised in clusters.

Tech Futures: AI For and Against Knowledge

related posts

  • Regulating Artificial Intelligence: The EU AI Act - Part 1 (i)

    Regulating Artificial Intelligence: The EU AI Act - Part 1 (i)

  • AI Policy Corner: Discussing the White House’s 2025 AI Action Plan

    AI Policy Corner: Discussing the White House’s 2025 AI Action Plan

  • AI Policy Corner: Executive Order: Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Securit...

    AI Policy Corner: Executive Order: Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Securit...

  • AI Policy Corner: From proposed mandatory guardrails to the National AI Plan: AI governance in Austr...

    AI Policy Corner: From proposed mandatory guardrails to the National AI Plan: AI governance in Austr...

  • ISED Launches AI Risk Management Guide Based on Voluntary Code

    ISED Launches AI Risk Management Guide Based on Voluntary Code

  • A rock embedded with intricate circuit board patterns, held delicately by pale hands drawn in a ghostly style. The contrast between the rough, metallic mineral and the sleek, artificial circuit board illustrates the relationship between raw natural resources and modern technological development. The hands evoke human involvement in the extraction and manufacturing processes.

    Tech Futures: The Fossil Fuels Playbook for Big Tech: Part I

  • This image shows a large white, traditional, old building. The top half of the building represents the humanities (which is symbolised by the embedded text from classic literature which is faintly shown ontop the building). The bottom section of the building is embossed with mathematical formulas to represent the sciences. The middle layer of the image is heavily pixelated. On the steps at the front of the building there is a group of scholars, wearing formal suits and tie attire, who are standing around at the enternace talking and some of them are sitting on the steps. There are two stone, statute-like hands that are stretching the building apart from the left side. In the forefront of the image, there are 8 students - which can only be seen from the back. Their graduation gowns have bright blue hoods and they all look as though they are walking towards the old building which is in the background at a distance. There are a mix of students in the foreground.

    Tech Futures: Co-opting Research and Education

  • Social Context of LLMs - the BigScience Approach, Part 4:Model Governance and Responsible Use

    Social Context of LLMs - the BigScience Approach, Part 4:Model Governance and Responsible Use

  • The undying sun hangs in the sky, as people gather around signal towers, working through their digital devices.

    Dreams and Realities in Modi's AI Impact Summit

  • AI Policy Corner: Restriction vs. Regulation: Comparing State Approaches to AI Mental Health Legisla...

    AI Policy Corner: Restriction vs. Regulation: Comparing State Approaches to AI Mental Health Legisla...

Partners

  •  
    U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute Consortium (AISIC) at NIST

  • Partnership on AI

  • The LF AI & Data Foundation

  • The AI Alliance

Footer


Articles

Columns

AI Literacy

The State of AI Ethics Report


 

About Us


Founded in 2018, the Montreal AI Ethics Institute (MAIEI) is an international non-profit organization equipping citizens concerned about artificial intelligence and its impact on society to take action.

Contact

Donate


  • © 2025 MONTREAL AI ETHICS INSTITUTE.
  • This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
  • Learn more about our open access policy here.
  • Creative Commons License

    Save hours of work and stay on top of Responsible AI research and reporting with our bi-weekly email newsletter.