The APEC Summit: The AI Arms Race on the Global Stage

Last month, a historic meeting between American President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping took place in San Francisco at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). The gathering marked a pivotal moment in the relationship between the two world powers, at a time where what lies ahead is uncertain and it’s anyone’s game to win.

But what was most noteworthy from the summit talks was that both leaders discussed the use of artificial intelligence (AI). Even if the current outcome was quite modest, the mention of the topic is remarkable. Not too long ago, the discussion of AI between world leaders would seem like science fiction. That it moved to the top of the topic list is a sign of the blistering pace of AI development.

The White House said the two leaders agreed to future formal discussions on technology and to address the safety risks surrounding AI. It’s clear that China and the U.S. will continue to work together on the issue, and it is far better that we begin the dialogue now instead of trying to make up for lost time when it is already too late.

Due to my time spent in China working on AI, I have a particularly strong stance and insight into China’s use of the technology and why it is vital that the East and the West work together before AI becomes ungovernable.

For the time being, the U.S. is lightyears ahead of China and other nations in terms of AI development. This is in large part because U.S. companies have focused on fostering AI that can let the public create their own content while “Chinese companies have instead focused on technologies with clear commercial uses, like surveillance tech”. But this is also due to the U.S., in October, moving to limit Chinese access to the state-of-the-art processing chips used by American tech companies, with the explicit goal of curtailing the rapid development of Chinese AI.

In the end, these efforts will only lead to a temporary forestalling of the inevitable; while we may lead today, China, along with other world powers, will catch up. All of the world powers will eventually need to coordinate and collaborate on an acceptable framework for AI’s geopolitical use.

Basically, the U.S. needs to approach AI as seriously as they would nuclear weapons or any other powerful, paradigm-shifting technology that could become deeply ingrained in our society. The question U.S. policy-makers should be asking on this topic (and in tech in general) is: do we really want someone else having the best tech? Being on the cutting edge of AI is not only wise because of how it would help our economy, but also because it will allow us to be the first to write the rulebook for its proper application on the international stage.

President Biden, during his summit remarks, emphasized the need to “ensure that competition does not veer into conflict.” The detente language he used underscores his stance that the economic reality is that we need China and China needs us. Whether on AI or on other topics, that context is important to keep in mind. The U.S. imports more goods from China than any other country, and that mutual reliance is unlikely to change in the near future.

Moreover, we have to widen the frame of reference here: while the U.S. and China are the two largest economies, they are not the only two AI players. Last month’s summit featured 21 countries; it’s important that we continue to strengthen our relationships with all of our allies and countries across Asia, including around the development of AI.

In any event, it’s clear that the U.S. Government is not the only one looking at the big picture. Companies like?Microsoft?have recently met with Chinese top officials to discuss cooperation. There is a growing understanding that, just as there was with nuclear proliferation, there will need to be a consensus around the use of AI.

I hope that future conversations between our countries yield more concrete, positive results, as the global AI political landscape takes shape. What it eventually will look like is anyone’s guess, but if we continue to do what needs to spur innovation, we can allow our tech companies to continue to lead.