Paris AI Summit: A Global Consensus Without the UK

The Paris AI Action Summit was meant to be a turning point in shaping the future of artificial intelligence, bringing nations together to establish a common set of ethical, transparent, and safety-focused AI principles. With over 60 countries, including France, Germany, China, India, and Canada, signing the Paris Declaration on AI, the world appeared to be moving towards a more unified approach to AI governance.

However, two major players stood apart, the United States and the United Kingdom.

Their refusal to sign this agreement signals a fundamental divide in AI governance. While other nations work together to build trusted, regulated AI ecosystems, the UK is now on a path that could lead to regulatory isolation, market restrictions, and a loss of global AI investment.

By choosing not to align with Europe, China, or India on AI governance, the UK has positioned itself as an AI outlier, relying heavily on the US as its sole AI partner. This decision may have severe consequences for the UK's AI ambitions, particularly for Labour’s economic growth plans, which depend heavily on AI-driven productivity gains.

So, what was actually agreed at the Paris AI Summit, why did the UK refuse to sign, and what does this mean for AI investment, exports, and long-term economic prospects?

What Was the Paris AI Summit About?

The Paris AI Action Summit, held on February 11, 2025, built upon discussions from the Bletchley Park AI Summit in 2023. While Bletchley focused on theoretical risks posed by AI, the Paris summit was action-oriented, designed to foster international cooperation on AI regulation, investment, and deployment.

The key objectives of the summit were,

• establishing common global safety and ethical standards to prevent the misuse of AI
• ensuring transparency in AI development to allow for accountability and trust
• harmonising AI regulations across nations, preventing companies from exploiting legal loopholes in weakly regulated jurisdictions
• facilitating international AI investment, ensuring that AI becomes a cornerstone of economic development

The summit acknowledged the geopolitical importance of AI. Countries like China, France, and India are rapidly advancing AI innovation, and an agreement was needed to ensure fair market conditions for AI trade, research, and infrastructure development.

The outcome? A global AI framework, but without the UK.

What Was Agreed at the Paris Summit?

The Paris Declaration on AI, signed by 60 nations, committed to,

• transparent AI models, requiring companies to disclose how their AI systems function
• global AI safety alignment, ensuring that AI cannot be used for disinformation, deepfake abuse, or autonomous warfare
• establishing governance mechanisms, allowing countries to collaborate on AI regulation
• a new AI investment framework, ensuring that AI becomes a strategic pillar of economic growth

Though the agreement is not legally binding, it creates a global AI standard, one that will likely determine market access for AI products in the future.

This poses a huge problem for the UK. If regulators across Europe, China, India, and Canada make compliance with the Paris Declaration mandatory for AI companies, UK-based AI firms may find themselves blocked from major international markets.

Why Did the UK Refuse to Sign?

1. Fear of Over-Regulation and Innovation Constraints

The UK government, aligned with the US position, claims that over-regulation could stifle AI development. Their argument is that a more flexible, self-regulated approach will allow AI companies to innovate freely rather than being tied down by strict oversight.

However, this argument is fundamentally flawed. The Paris Declaration does not prevent AI innovation, it simply creates a safety and transparency framework that companies must meet if they wish to operate in key global markets. By refusing to engage, the UK is excluding itself from shaping AI regulations that will define the future of the industry.

2. Protecting Military and Defense AI

A more likely explanation for the UK’s decision is military AI.

The UK has invested heavily in autonomous weapons, AI-driven cyber warfare, and surveillance technologies. By signing an agreement that sets ethical limitations on AI, the UK could jeopardise its ability to freely develop AI for defense applications.

Countries such as China, India, and France are also investing in military AI, but they have still chosen to sign the agreement, recognising that international standards do not necessarily restrict national security efforts. The UK, however, appears to have prioritised its military AI strategy over global cooperation.

3. A Strategic Shift Towards the US

The UK's decision to align itself solely with the US signals a major geopolitical shift. While the rest of the world is forming an AI consensus, the UK is doubling down on its reliance on the US.

This creates an increasingly dangerous economic reality. If UK AI firms can only access the US and UK markets, their growth potential is severely limited. The UK is effectively cutting itself off from the largest emerging AI economies such as China, India, and the EU where AI research, investment, and collaboration are booming.

What Are the Consequences of the UK’s Decision?

1. The UK AI Industry Becomes Dependent on US Innovation

By isolating itself from the global AI framework, the UK is making itself dependent on American AI firms.

Instead of fostering a domestic AI industry with international reach, UK companies will likely become satellites of US AI giants, meaning,

• UK AI products will be designed to fit US regulations, rather than global standards
• AI startups in the UK may struggle to scale without US backing
• the UK will have limited access to AI innovations from China, India, and the EU

This could cripple Labour’s plans for AI-driven economic growth, as AI productivity gains will be constrained by export barriers and regulatory uncertainty.

2. The UK Will Struggle to Attract Foreign Investment

At the Paris Summit, France secured €109 billion in AI investment from Canada, the UAE, Amazon, and Nvidia-backed Mistral AI.

The UK, by contrast, secured nothing.

Investors prefer regulatory certainty. With the UK now seen as an AI outlier, global investment may shift toward nations aligned with the Paris Declaration, leaving UK AI firms without crucial funding.

3. The UK Risks Falling Behind in AI Innovation

If AI companies in the UK are restricted from selling in China, India, the EU and the wider BRICS+, they will be forced to operate within a much smaller market.

This could lead to,

• AI brain drain, where the best UK talent leaves for Paris, Berlin, or Beijing
• UK AI startups struggling to secure funding, leading to acquisitions by foreign tech giants
• the UK becoming a second-tier AI market, forced to adopt US technology rather than develop its own

My Take: The UK Is on the Wrong Side of History

The UK’s decision to reject the Paris Declaration on AI is a strategic disaster.

By aligning solely with the US, the UK has made itself dependent on American AI dominance, cutting itself off from China, India, Europe and the wider BRICS+, where AI innovation is booming.

Instead of leading AI development, the UK may become a minor player in an industry it once had the chance to shape.

This is not AI sovereignty, it’s AI isolation. The rest of the world is building AI together, the UK is choosing to watch from the sidelines. History will not be kind to this decision.

?