America and China can be allies against AI catastrophe

Thomas Greminger

Thomas Greminger is Executive Director of the Geneva Centre for Security Policy.

The essay is co-published with the South China Morning Post: https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/opinion/article/3362572/america-and-china-can-be-allies-against-ai-catastrophe

1  August  2026

In the latest salvo of hostile rhetoric surrounding AI, Donald Trump told reporters last month that “America’s goal must be to dominate the future, and that includes being the No 1 superpower in artificial intelligence”.

“Whoever wins that race, is probably going to win, period,” the US president said.

While it may be politically expedient to frame AI development as a zero-sum geopolitical race, such rhetoric is concerning given the extreme risks the technology poses.

In May 2023, a group of scientists and public figures, brought together by the Centre for AI Safety, issued a stark warning that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war”.

Most of us rarely stop to even consider such possibilities. But AI is evolving so quickly that we must be aware of the dangers and try to prevent them before it is too late, because the consequences of an unrestrained AI race could be devastating – and irreversible.

Out of the loop 

Thus far, AI has been developing under human oversight. But what happens when humans are no longer in the decision-making loop? 

Scientists warn we may lose control of autonomous AI systems altogether. The most acute risks are in cybersecurity, biotechnology and disinformation, but AI could also raise the odds of military escalation and even nuclear war. Lethal automated weapon systems, or robot wars, are no longer science fiction. 

Recent experience has already shown the dangers of overreliance on big data when making split-second decisions about military targets. Who is accountable when the algorithm gets it wrong? How do we preserve human agency amid the unchecked growth of agentic AI? 

AI can reason and plan, but it cannot feel empathy. Left unregulated, or placed in the wrong hands, it could unleash cyber escalation, ease access to biological or chemical weapons, enable mass manipulation and produce unpredictable autonomous systems that can wreak havoc.

Stronger safeguards and more regulation are urgently required.  

Limiting the risks  

There have been multiple high-level attempts to push for greater AI regulation. In May 2023, the Elders – a group of senior global statespeople – issued a statement calling on world leaders to “work together urgently on the design of strong international governance, to allow all humanity to take advantage of the opportunities of AI, while limiting the enormous risks”.

This was followed by The Bletchley Declaration at the AI Safety Summit of November 2023, which stated that “many risks arising from AI are inherently international in nature, and so are best addressed through international cooperation”. 

The UN General Assembly has since established an Independent Scientific Panel on AI and a Global Dialogue on AI Governance, while the UN Security Council has looked into AI’s implications for peace and security.  

The Netherlands and South Korea have spearheaded a series of worldwide consultations on responsible AI in the military domain, producing declarations endorsing the centrality of human control over critical military technologies. 

Unfortunately, these efforts have been mostly disjointed and reactive. Great powers and powerful companies want to exploit AI’s potential for their own advantage, after all. 

That said, no responsible country wants to unleash catastrophic risk. This shared instinct for self-preservation may be the very thing that makes cooperation possible, even where formal regulation proves elusive. 

Self-interested cooperation 

The challenge now is assembling enough influential stakeholders pulling in the same direction. China and the United States – the world’s two AI superpowers – appear to be exploring guardrails, particularly to keep the most powerful models away from malign actors.

As recently as July 16, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for measures to prevent AI risks. That same day, the Global Nobel Laureates Assembly on Artificial Intelligence and Nuclear War, hosted by the Vatican, issued the Rome Declaration on disarming AI. Beneath the bellicose rhetoric of an AI arms race, a quiet convergence on containing extreme risks might be possible.

Sceptics will no doubt argue that today’s fractured geopolitics is hardly fertile ground for brokering new international agreements. Yet history offers plenty of precedent: states with fundamentally different world views have still found ways to tackle shared threats, whether it be the thinning of the ozone layer, the spread of infectious disease, climate change or nuclear proliferation.

Even in the past two years, in an increasingly fragmented world, states have agreed to a UN Convention against Cybercrime and a Global Ocean Conservation Treaty. Cooperation is possible when states see a self-interest in working together.  

The bar for cooperation need not be high. A shared perception of threat may be sufficient to bring even strategic rivals to the table, as may yet prove true for Washington and Beijing.

Time for a global compact 

A recent report by the Strategic Foresight Group, entitled The Essential Convergence, calls for a Global Compact on Extreme AI Risk.

Instead of heavy-handed regulation, it calls for a light, coordinated framework through which states can align around shared definitions of extreme risks, minimum safeguards and collective response mechanisms. This could lead to interoperable global mechanisms capable of managing extreme risks collectively. Such an essential convergence can help ensure minimum safeguards against the maximum dangers to humanity posed by advanced AI.

AI is advancing at a pace unprecedented in technological history. This will generate many benefits, but it also poses serious threats, some of which are existential. The longer we delay, the greater the risks and the lower our chance of containing them. The time to act is now. 

 


The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore.

Latest

The East Asia Summit should take the lead to address the growing challenges of nuclear proliferation
By Peter Varghese

What Can Southeast Asia Get Out of China’s— and Everyone’s—Shift to the Region?
By Meg Rithmire

Small states are the best best for keeping world at peace
By Danny Quah

Indonesia-Timor Leste Reconciliation: 'Through Memory Towards Hope'
By I Gusti Agung Wesaka Puja

India’s Role in a Disordered World
By Shivshankar Menon

Why Japan-China ties can benefit from promoting people-to-people exchanges
By Akio Takahara 

The Thailand-Cambodia conflict: A Thai and Cambodian perspective on peace
by In Sokhuon and Pattharapong Rattanasevee

The Busan silence: how great-power pragmatism is rewriting Taiwan’s future
by Robin Hu

ASEAN Between China and the US: Navigating a 'No Single Power' Global Order
by Lili Yan Ing

Breaking the Loop: Why India and China Need Political Imagination to Rebuild Trust and Relationship
by Tansen Sen 

Building Resilience for a New World
by Arunabha Ghosh

India, Pakistan, and Breaking out of the 'Continent of Circe'
by Akbar Ahmed

Southeast Asia's "Anatomy of Choice" Between the Great Powers
by Joseph Chinyong Liow & Yuen Foong Khong

Integrated Supply Chains - A Possible Citadel for Peace in Southeast Asia
by Cameron Johnson

How to Fix the Cracks in the Nuclear Dam
by Adam Thomson

Persuading for Peace, Protecting Its Interests: China’s Conflict Diplomacy
by Andrew Cainey and Chengkai Xie 

US ASEAN Policy Must Be Rooted in Economics, Not Just Defense
by Abhinav Seetharaman

South Korea: Is it time for a more balanced strategy?
by Soon Ok-Shin

A nuclear war started by AI sounds like sci-fiction. It isn’t
by Sundeep Waslekar

Ports, politics, and peace: The engineering of stability
by Guru Madhavan 

It's Time for Europe to Do the Unthinkable
Kishore Mahbubani

Can Young Americans and Chinese Build Bridges Over Troubled Waters?
Brian Wong

Trump 2:0: Getting US-China ties right despite the odds
Zhiqun Zhu

How Malaysia can boost Asean agency and centrality amid global challenges
Elina Noor

Why India-Pakistan relations need a new era of engagement
Farhan Hanif Siddiqi

Reconceptualizing Asia's Security Challenges
Jean Dong

Asia should take the Lead on Global Health
K. Srinath Reddy and Priya Balasubramaniam

Rabindranath Tagore: A Man for a New Asian Future
Archishman Raju

Securing China-US Relations within the Wider Asia-Pacific
Sourabh Gupta

Biden-Xi summit: A positive step in managing complex US-China ties
Chan Heng Chee

Singapore's Role as Neutral Interpreter of China to the West
Walter Woon

The US, China, and the Philippines in Between
Andrea Chloe Wong

Crisis Management in Asia: A Middle Power Imperative
Brendan Taylor

America can't stop China's rise
Tony Chan, Ben Harburg, and Kishore Mahbubani

Civilisational Futures and the Role of Southeast Asia
Tim Winter

US-China rivalry will be stern test for Vietnam's diplomatic juggle
Nguyen Cong Tung

Coexistence: The only realistic path to peace
Stephen M. Walt

Cyclone Mocha in conflict-ridden Myanmar is another warning to take climate security seriously
Sarang Shidore

Doubts about AUKUS
Hugh White

Averting the Grandest Collision of all time
Graham Allison

India Can Still Be a Bridge to the Global South
Sanjaya Baru

U.S.-China Trade and Investment Cooperation Amid Great Power Rivalry
Yuhan Zhang

Managing expectations: Indonesia navigating its international roles
Shafiah F. Muhibat

Caught in the middle? Not necessarily Non-alignment could help Southeast Asian regional integration
Xue Gong

It’s Dangerous Salami Slicing on the Taiwan Issue
Richard W. Hu

Navigating Troubled Waters: Ideas for managing tensions in the Taiwan Strait
Ryan Hass

The EU and ASEAN: Partners to Manage Great Power Rivalry?
Tan York Chor

Countering Moro Youth Extremism in the Philippines
Joseph Franco

India-China relations: Getting Beyond the Military Stalemate
C. Raja Mohan

America Needs an Economic Peace Strategy for Asia
Van Jackson

India-Pakistan: Peace by Pieces
Kanti Bajpai

HADR as a Diplomatic Tool in Southeast Asia-China Relations amid Changing Security Dynamics
Lina Gong

Technocratic Deliberation and Asian Peace
Parag Khanna

Safer Together: Why South and Southeast Asia Must Cooperate to Prevent a New Cold War in Asia
Sarang Shidore

Asia, say no to Nato: The Pacific has no need of the destructive militaristic culture of the Atlantic alliance
Kishore Mahbubani

Can Biden bring peace to Southeast Asia?
Dino Djalal

An India-Pakistan ceasefire that can stick
Ameya Kilara

An antidote against narrow nationalism? Why regional history matters
Farish A Noor

Can South Asia put India-Pakistan hostilities behind to unite for greater good?
Ramesh Thakur

Nuclear Deterrence 3.0
Rakesh Sood

The Biden era: challenges and opportunities for Southeast Asia
Michael Vatikiotis

Asian Peace Programme

About Us