THE LONG VIEW

INTELLIGENCE BRIEFING: AI Governance at a Crossroads — EU, US, and China’s Regulatory Divisions and Global Implications Executive Summary: As artificial intelligence reshapes global power dynamics, the regulatory strategies of the EU, US, and China reveal divergent value systems and strategic ambitions. The EU emphasizes fundamental rights and risk-based regulation, the US prioritizes innovation through market-led development, and China advances state-centric control with strategic industrial policy. Despite apparent contrasts, all three powers seek technological supremacy, raising urgent questions about ethical AI, international alignment, and the future of digital sovereignty. This briefing unpacks their institutional frameworks, exposes contradictions in dominant narratives, and assesses risks to global governance coherence. Primary Indicators: - The EU’s AI Act institutionalizes a risk-tiered, rights-protective model with strict transparency obligations - The US lacks federal AI legislation but promotes sectoral self-regulation and innovation-friendly policies through executive guidance and private-sector leadership - China implements top-down, centralized AI governance with emphasis on national security, social stability, and technological self-reliance - All three jurisdictions issue ethical guidelines, yet enforcement mechanisms vary significantly - Strategic documents from each region reveal convergent ambitions for global AI dominance despite ideological differences Recommended Actions: - Monitor implementation of the EU AI Act for extraterritorial effects on global compliance standards - Assess US federal regulatory momentum, particularly in critical sectors like healthcare and defense - Track Chinese integration of AI into surveillance and military-civil fusion programs - Support multilateral dialogues to identify areas for interoperability in AI risk classification and auditing - Invest in independent analysis of 'ethics-washing' in corporate and state-led AI initiatives Risk Assessment: The fragmentation of AI governance frameworks among leading powers threatens the emergence of a coherent international regime, increasing the likelihood of regulatory arbitrage, technological decoupling, and normative conflict. While the EU positions itself as a moral regulator, its enforcement capacity remains untested. The US risks ceding soft power due to legislative inertia, relying too heavily on private actors with opaque accountability structures. China’s surveillance-infused model poses systemic challenges to liberal democratic norms, yet its efficiency in scaling AI applications cannot be ignored. Without coordinated efforts to reconcile differences, the world may drift toward competing AI spheres—one rights-based, one market-driven, one authoritarian—each projecting its own vision of digital order. The absence of binding international agreements amplifies strategic uncertainty, making ethical AI a battleground rather than a shared aspiration. —Sir Edward Pemberton