The development of artificial intelligence (AI) is often approached as an essentially technological and commercial issue. Its political and geopolitical scope is nevertheless crucial, to the point of being able to modify the balance of power on the international chessboard. In this regard, the indicators and signals point to an intensification of the rivalry between China and the United States.
In 2016, the computer program of a chain of Alphabet (parent company of Google) beat the world champion Lee Sedol in Go, an extremely complex Chinese game. This victory, which shook the Middle Kingdom, kicked off an all-out engagement by the Chinese state and a race for control of AI development. Beijing announced in 2017 its objective of becoming the world leader in the field by 2030. Less explicit, American ambitions were unveiled in 2018 with the publication of an AI strategy by the Department of Defense and the creation of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence. The rivalry between China and the United States was taking shape.
The stakes of this rivalry are immense.
The development of AI is supported by a vast technological infrastructure composed of massive data, servers, networks, supercomputers, microprocessors, connected objects and, eventually, the quantum computer.
That is why, for example, there has been a lot of talk recently about Taiwan’s security and the CHIPS and Science Act in the United States: the small island, which is at the center of Beijing’s sights, provides more than 50% of the world’s production of microprocessors, essential components for the development of AI. Securing this supply is becoming a geopolitical issue.
Strategic assets
However, insofar as its development can modify the balance of power on the international scene, AI is increasingly considered in itself as a strategic lever by the Chinese and American governments.
AI has a unique attribute: like electricity, it is a general-purpose technology. It has the potential to transform all human activities, from finance and health care to agriculture and armaments. Those who innovate in AI give themselves the possibility of having an influence on these activities.
PHOTO JONATHAN ERNST, REUTERS ARCHIVES
US President Joe Biden is a signatory to the CHIPS and Science Act which aims to encourage research on semiconductors and their production in the United States.
If the race for AI is so frenetic among states, it is also because they share the idea that winning pioneer status confers major advantages. Being the first to master large-scale AI applications would eliminate all competition, in a “winner-takes-all” logic (winner-take-all).
AI thus becomes a formidable engine of economic and military development, which are the two pillars of the power of States on the international scene. Its strategic importance is therefore undeniable.
As such, the United States and China largely dominate the global AI landscape. The United Kingdom, Germany, India, France, Canada, Israel and South Korea follow.
The United States, Canada and Europe remain united in their opposition to China. And for good reason, because several indicators (talents, patents, publications and scientific conferences, etc.) signal that China is rapidly gaining ground to the detriment of the United States. The rapid growth of technology companies Baidu, Tencent and Alibaba illustrates this trend. China is thus approaching a tipping point where it would overtake the United States in the development of AI.
Conflict of values
Even more important in this rivalry is the conflict of values that arises from the nature of political regimes. According to the actors, democratic and authoritarian, different visions clash on freedom of expression, human rights, surveillance and repression, and this conflict of values translates into a conflict over rules in governance. world of AI.
Currently, there is no international regime governing the development of AI. It is China and the United States that are trying to influence in their favor the institutions that will eventually frame future practices and policies. Until the rules of the game are set at international level, the rivalry is likely to intensify. This intensification could also hinder the construction of an international regulatory regime and lead to the creation of parallel AI governance regimes, with distinct zones of influence on both sides. In this context, the European Union is trying to propose a third way.
PHOTO ALY SONG, REUTERS ARCHIVES
The Semicon China Trade Fair, in Shanghai, China. “China is approaching a tipping point where it overtakes the United States in AI development,” writes the author.
The development of AI is certainly a technological and commercial issue, but it is also fundamentally political and ideological. What is its impact on the balance of power and on the vitality of democratic or authoritarian regimes? Given its widespread use and its great transformative power, we must also reverse this question: which public policies are the most appropriate and desirable for the development of AI?
Countries like Canada that uphold democratic values in global governance would benefit from leading the discussion on these issues. There is already a lot of talk about the importance of representativeness in the production of AI, but we should also be concerned about representativeness in the governance of AI. And determining who has a voice and who does not is a fundamentally political decision.
And Canada on the world stage?
Canada is a leader in research, but could do better when it comes to commercializing AI. It is well outranked by the United States and China, although it is competitive in several respects among second-tier players. It could also play a more strategic role in the supply chain of technology infrastructure that supports AI development, especially in terms of critical materials.