Skip to content
Longterm Wiki
Back

open cooperation with fewer conditions

web

Published on China-US Focus, a platform associated with the China-United States Exchange Foundation; relevant for understanding geopolitical dimensions of AI governance competition that affect global safety standard adoption.

Metadata

Importance: 42/100opinion pieceanalysis

Summary

This article analyzes the divergent AI development strategies of the United States and China, contrasting the US approach of conditional cooperation with China's model of more open, less conditional international engagement. It examines how these competing visions shape global AI governance and influence other nations' technology partnerships.

Key Points

  • China promotes AI cooperation with fewer political or regulatory conditions, appealing to developing nations seeking technology partnerships
  • The US approach tends to attach conditions around security, human rights, or standards compliance to AI collaboration
  • These competing models create geopolitical tension over which governance norms will define global AI development
  • Developing countries may face pressure to choose between US and Chinese AI ecosystems and standards
  • The rivalry has implications for international AI safety standards and which frameworks gain global adoption

Cited by 1 page

PageTypeQuality
AI Structural Risk CruxesCrux66.0

Cached Content Preview

HTTP 200Fetched Apr 9, 202611 KB
U.S. and Chinese AI Strategies – Competing Global Approaches - Leonardo Dinic - CHINA US Focus 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 Language : English 简体 繁體 
 
 Home 

 Topics 

 Videos 

 Podcasts 

 Columnists 

 Focus This Week 

 
 
 Publications :

 Research Reports 

 Focus Digest 

 Focus Recommends 

 
 
 Microsites

 China-US Trade 

 South China Sea 

 
 
 
 
 Go 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Search 
 


 简体 繁體 


 
 
 
 CHINA US Focus 
 
 
 Topics 
 
 
 Videos 
 
 
 Podcasts 
 
 
 Columnists 
 
 
 Focus This Week 
 
 
 Publications 
 
 Research Reports 

 Focus Digest 

 Focus Recommends 

 
 
 
 Microsites 
 
 China-US Trade 

 South China Sea 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 Economy 
 
 
 U.S. and Chinese AI Strategies – Competing Global Approaches


 Aug 01, 2025 
 
 
 X 
 LinkedIn 
 Facebook 
 copylink 
 print 
 Listen 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 Leonardo Dinic 

Expert in Geopolitics and International Business, the Future of Work, and Emerging Technologies 



 ​​In July 2025, the U.S. and China released national AI strategies with global aims: the U.S. ties AI exports to political alignment, while China promotes open cooperation with fewer conditions. These contrasting approaches reflect broader political differences and may give China an edge in global AI influence. 


 


 The full PLAN here 


 


 National-Scale AI Roadmaps and Industrial Mobilization 


 Both Beijing and Washington rolled out ambitious AI strategies in July 2025, signaling centralized, top-down coordination. On July 23, the U.S. released America’s AI Action Plan, detailing over 90 federal actions to accelerate innovation, build infrastructure, and assert international leadership. A few days later, at the World AI Conference in Shanghai, China unveiled its own global AI governance and action plan, emphasizing international cooperation and open-source sharing. 


 At first glance, the U.S. and Chinese plans appear to be quite similar. Both countries recognize that leading in AI requires heavy investments in computing infrastructure, data centers, and high-quality workforce development. The U.S. plan calls for deregulating data-center permitting, boosting grid capacity and overall energy output, and investing in domestic chipmaking and AI talent pipelines. China, continuing its long-standing industrial policy (echoing Made in China 2025), aims to subsidize research in data science and machine learning, while pushing rapid commercialization of newly developed AI products across sectors like robotics, healthcare, and autonomous vehicles. 


 Emphasis on Global Reach and Influence 


 Both strategies are globally ambitious, but this is where their differences become clear. The U.S. explicitly promotes the export of its full-stack AI technology (hardware, models, sof

... (truncated, 11 KB total)
Resource ID: e9935ef386bdfb23 | Stable ID: sid_Dw8oNUnY4D