Source: Just Security

Just Security features an in-depth analysis comparing the distinct strategic "playbooks" of the United States and China regarding the development and governance of artificial intelligence. The article argues that the two nations' approaches are fundamentally shaped by their differing political systems, economic models, and national priorities. The Chinese playbook is characterized by a state-led, top-down strategy that heavily emphasizes national security, social stability, and achieving technological supremacy. This is evidenced by significant government investment in AI research, the close integration of private tech companies with state objectives, and the development of comprehensive regulations that prioritize data control and censorship, as seen in its rules on generative AI and recommendation algorithms.

In contrast, the United States' playbook is more fragmented and market-driven, reflecting its democratic values and capitalist economy. The U.S. approach relies heavily on private sector innovation, with a regulatory environment that has traditionally been more permissive, often described as "soft law" or a sector-specific approach. The article highlights recent U.S. efforts, like the White House's AI Bill of Rights and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, as attempts to create a more cohesive national strategy that balances innovation with the protection of civil rights and liberties. The author contends that this divergence in governance models has profound implications for the future of global technology standards and geopolitical competition. The "Beijing model" of AI governance, with its focus on control, is contrasted with the emerging "Washington model," which seeks to promote trustworthy and rights-preserving AI, setting the stage for a global ideological contest over the rules that will govern this transformative technology.