On Dec. ninth, U.S. President Donald Trump introduced that the U.S. would enable Nvidia’s H200 processors to be exported to China, topic to a 25% charge on all gross sales. The transfer has despatched ripples by way of the American institution, with many (together with Senator Elizabeth Warren) charging that Trump is “promoting out” nationwide safety.
There is no such thing as a scarcity of such zero-sum or aggressive framing in relation to the worldwide AI area. Certainly, whereas Anthropic has emphasised AI security at dwelling, the corporate’s co-founder and CEO, Dario Amodei, has stoked a story of an arms race overseas, arguing that export controls are important to decelerate China’s improvement and be sure that the U.S. wins the AI race. Equally, Chip Struggle creator Chris Miller argues that the U.S. chip export controls, such because the prohibition on the sale to China of probably the most superior GPUs just like the NVIDIA H100s, have “succeeded … [by] considerably gradual[ing] the expansion of China’s chipmaking functionality”. Certainly, Trump himself declared in July that America began the AI race, and it’ll win it.
Such arguments recommend that the 2 nice powers are engaged in a two-player race—that one in every of them will win and the opposite will lose—and that the winner will receive important advantages on the expense of the loser. But from a rational selection perspective, the “AI race” is a misnomer. A two-party race usually entails an surroundings characterised by a rivalrous useful resource (which can’t be loved by each events) that’s non-excludable (neither participant can simply forestall the opposite from utilizing it), and the gamers compete over who would be the first to that useful resource.
Within the 1955 movie, Insurgent With out a Trigger, Jim Stark (James Dean) races towards a cliff in opposition to his nemesis Buzz (Corey Allen). If each youngsters drive straight, they each die. The one who swerves first loses. If one driver swerves and the opposite continues racing to the cliff’s edge, neither can enhance his place by altering technique—we name this a Nash Equilibrium. This consequence is non-cooperative: If one swerves, the opposite ought to race; but when one switches to racing, the opposite ought to swerve.
The geopolitical AI ecosystem will not be like this. Using AI fashions is excludable—certainly, final 12 months Sam Altman determined to exclude Chinese language customers from OpenAI’s GPT—however such use will not be strictly rivalrous (DeepSeek’s fashions are launched beneath open-source licenses and might be run regionally by anybody). A mannequin’s implementations are arguably rivalrous, in that the marginal person imposes an power/knowledge value, however that was not the motivating concern for Altman’s choice: He excluded Chinese language customers as a result of he believed that the U.S. shouldn’t cooperate with China.
So maybe the argument is that promoting chips to China would embolden Beijing and render the U.S. worse off. But this ignores the advantages accrued to bizarre U.S. middle-class households by way of larger entry to main electronics at decrease costs, or the amount of leverage afforded by way of world dependence on the American tech panorama.
Some economists check with a state of affairs characterised by non-rivalrous however excludable sources, as a substitute of rivalrous however non-excludable sources, as a “stag hunt”, drawing upon a parable in thinker Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s A Discourse on Inequality. Think about a gaggle of hunters who can select to hunt a big prey collectively (the stag), or a small prey alone (the rabbit). The trick is that they will solely catch the stag in the event that they cooperate whereas everybody can hunt a rabbit on their very own. This recreation has two Nash equilibria: Both we work collectively to hunt the stag, or we every work alone to catch a single rabbit. But one in every of these equilibria is healthier than the opposite: We should always work collectively to hunt the stag.
International AI competitors appears to be like extra like a stag hunt than it does like a race. Whether or not in coverage, governance, or commerce, cooperation between nations can yield larger advantages than working alone. In distinction, a breakdown in communication breeds distrust, which might give rise to dangerous errors, akin to an escalatory spiral from overestimating the risk posed by the opposite aspect, or a reckless deployment of AI in conflicts. The “stag” within the U.S.-China AI recreation, due to this fact, lies partially with the mutual prevention of such errors and the positive aspects from mutually advantageous industrial improvement of AI for the good thing about the broader public.
There exist loads of frequent challenges that China, the U.S., and the world should confront, from AI manipulation, deception, and coercion, to the displacement of labor led to by AI’s implementation within the workforce. Such mutually useful cooperation requires belief, transparency, and cooperation, versus erratic politicization—that is how we transfer from looking the rabbit, to looking the stag.
To get there, policymakers should search to domesticate efficient multilateral AI governance establishments, together with establishing and monitoring dispute decision mechanisms. Bargaining capital additionally arises by way of unconventional alignments of medium-size powers, every with their distinctive niches.
As an illustration, energy-rich Saudi Arabia is striving to turn out to be the third largest AI market on the planet, whereas main gamers in France and Israel are pledging to steer in specialised AI functions. With its immense inhabitants and rising emphasis upon training, India is shaping to be among the many main suppliers of engineering and pc science expertise.
The worldwide order is turning into extra multi-polar, and the AI world isn’t any exception. As an alternative of making an attempt to “win the AI race” at any value in opposition to its rival, each the U.S. and China ought to construct bridges and search frequent floor with buddies and rivals alike.
This essay is customized from the authors’ forthcoming guide, Geopolitics of Synthetic Intelligence, to be printed in 2026 by Cambridge College Press as a part of its Parts collection.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary items are solely the views of their authors and don’t essentially mirror the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
