AI: who will impose their law on the geopolitical scene?

Beyond the announcements of investments and engagements on ethics, the real lesson of the last Paris summit on AI is the splitting of the world into two or three blocs that are not fighting for technological supremacy but for political and economic supremacy (AI Summit: a real success or a smokescreen for Europe?) through technology ([FR] “Techno-feudalism was a hypothesis, with the Trump-Musk tandem, we have its realization”).

AI is the new Berlin

In this article, I took the liberty of comparing this summit to the blockade of Berlin, which at the time marked the division of the world into two irreconcilable ideological blocs that would fight to impose their domination by any means with the same message sent by the leader of each bloc to the satellite countries: “I will enslave you or you are an enemy”.

Berlin was not a subject but a playground, as technology and in particular AI is here in terms of its potential.

So we end up with three blocks with shifting boundaries.

One is made up of the United States, which has now decided to go it alone.

For the rest, the boundaries are more fluid and only time will tell.

One might have thought that on one side there would be China and then countries refusing to align themselves with either of the two, with Europe in the lead, but the fact that the Chinese have signed the declaration on ethics with Europe and without the USA raises questions about the real strength of the alliance.

AI is therefore the new Berlin, and history will tell us whether ethics and regulation are the new Iron Curtain.

A clear dividing line

In any case, the divide between the USA on one side and Europe at least on the other is clear and it is embodied in an antagonism that could be summarized as “ethics versus freedom of expression” and “regulation versus innovation”.

Afterwards, I don’t think we should say anything to these great concepts that goes beyond what they mean. As has been said, we are in a logic of domination/submission, both political and economic, and knowing that to date the advance of the USA is indisputable, each bloc takes refuge behind the values that correspond best to its situation.

The one who has the advantage and is the strongest wants to fight in open terrain and assert his power, the weaker one erects protections to avoid frontal confrontation while, who knows, strengthening himself.

Show me someone who is protecting himself and I will show you someone in a position of weakness… this is not a criticism but an observation and a logical behavior that proves a certain situational intelligence.

Now that all that has been said, what scenarios can the future hold for us, knowing that as Pierre Dac said, “Forecasts are difficult, especially when they concern the future”?

What factors will shape the future?

I see five factors that will influence what the future holds.

Politics and diplomacy.

This refers to the ability or otherwise of decision-makers to set aside their ideological and political differences and agree on common standards.

Pressure from public opinion.

In Europe, sensitivity to data protection and fear of uncontrolled technology (a fortiori when it is foreign) is historically high, while the United States leans more towards innovation and free enterprise, even if the pendulum can swing back and forth with changes in the majority.

But while Trump is only there for 4 years, there is every reason to believe that the movement that brought him to the White House (anti woke, pro free speech, pro US businesses) is here to stay.

• Research and innovation.

The importance of investment in R&D, the availability of talent, but above all the ability to convert research into something operational and marketable will be key to the competitiveness of each region.

• Businesses

Tech giants such as GAFAM, processor manufacturers such as Nvidia, etc. have strong lobbying power, although certain European industrialists should not be excluded, who even outside of tech proper have the ability to carry weight and make themselves heard (Airbus, etc.).

• National security

Cybersecurity, the collection and analysis of personal data, autonomous systems can crystallize opposition and generate both hyper-protectionist positions and unlikely alliances.

Depending on all this, this is what we can expect.

#1: Europe imposes its vision

In this scenario, the European AI Act (The European AI Act for dummies) becomes a de facto standard, as the GDPR has been for data protection, and by virtue of the “Brussels Effect” (The Brussels Effect. How the European Union Rules the World) third countries adopt similar rules to facilitate access to the European market.

In this case, Europe asserts regulatory leadership, tensions will arise with American businesses and especially GAFAM, which will have to comply but will slow down the commercialization of the most advanced technologies in Europe, and the implementation of various control/sanction mechanisms will strengthen the confidence of the population in the technology.

#2: The United States retains technological supremacy and calls the shots

In this scenario, the US ecosystem (businesses, but also investment funds, universities and research labs in support) maintains its lead and, above all, sticks to a self-regulating regulatory framework that benefits fast innovation.

In this context, the EU will struggle to create champions, let alone unicorns, and, above all, will not retain its talents, who will join the ranks of the American leaders.

Minimum regulation will be put in place at the global level with low standards, particularly in terms of ethics, allowing American tech to invade the world by innovating faster, even if it means remaining on the outskirts of an ostracizing Europe. We end up with a fragmented market due to different standards, but with its high standards Europe is gradually weakening alone in its corner.

#3: A new victory for transatlantic cooperation

We tend to forget it in our current context, but transatlantic cooperation has some great results to its credit.

In this scenario, pressure from another bloc, presumably China, pushes Europeans and Americans to stop opposing each other and form a common front against a danger that they consider greater than their differences, notably with strengthened cooperation forums.

Without going as far as total standardization, shared technical and ethical standards are being put in place, even if room is left for local specificities with a kind of subsidiarity principle.

This common front will have beneficial collateral effects such as the end of certain disputes on issues such as digital responsibility, digital taxation, customs duties on key materials, etc.

Better still, the USA and the EU together carry weight in bodies such as the G7 to impose global standards.

#4: Fragmentation of the world and markets

In this scenario, no one agrees on anything regarding ethics, the military uses of AI, responsibility, etc.

Here we see several blocs forming based on their vision of regulation: USA (weak), Europe (strong), China (political) and others that align themselves on a case-by-case basis.

This scenario is a commercial catastrophe with a balkanized market where the costs of adapting technology to each market are enormous because each bloc develops its own technological and ethical standards that lead to de facto protectionism.

As in the “great” era of the Cold War, the great powers will try to export their influence to others. This is the end of an era of economic and technological progress that will end up mired in diplomacy and power struggles.

In the worst-case scenario, we may even see the European bloc break up. An extreme scenario, yes, but at the last summit in Paris, France was clearly tiring of European red tape and starting to play its cards, sometimes solo.

Bottom line

History teaches us that divergence is often followed by reason and convergence, except when it doesn’t happen, in which case it teaches us that the worst is always possible. And given the current situation, there is no reason to believe that the past can tell us much about the past.

European “victory” is a fantasy worthy of a science fiction scenario, and American hegemony is as undesirable as it is improbable, because China is there. Reason would lead us to bet on transatlantic cooperation and pragmatism to prepare for the possibility of destructive fragmentation.

Image : UE vs USA by rawf8 via Shutterstock.