In China’s creation of new global AI body, a push for lead role in governance

At the core of this alternative perspective is the creation of a new international institution called World AI Cooperation Organisation, or WAICO. It is meant to ensure that developments in (and benefits of) AI are accessible to everyone, even developing countries that lack the resources or capability to build their own AI systems from scratch. It also commits to “extensive consultation and joint contribution for shared benefit”.

WAICO was proposed at last year’s conference and has now been made operational. Along with China, 29 countries (including Pakistan and Russia) signed an agreement for its creation. It is being projected as a more “inclusive” alternative to the AI governance frameworks proposed by Western countries, which heavily emphasise ethics, values, safety and responsibility.

In this context, Xi’s keynote speech on the opening day of the conference about the need to guard against “overstretching” of national security concerns is being widely quoted.

“AI development should not be a solo performance by a single country, but a symphony of international cooperation… we should jointly oppose overstretching the national security concept in the field of AI and placing one country’s security over that of others,” he said.

Cornering technology

It is undeniable that AI, like other powerful technologies with wide-ranging impacts, has a very high risk of potential misuse. Nuclear technology, for instance, produces clean electricity, has applications in healthcare, agriculture and research, and is also behind the most devastating weapons known to the world.

The misuse of AI is seen to have even more profound consequences for humanity. It is no surprise, therefore, that in conversations on governance or regulatory frameworks, issues of safety, ethics and responsibility are often emphasised.

But there is also a growing concern that these legitimate issues might become a cloak for technology denial or exclusion of countries. Such concerns are not unfounded. Historically, issues concerning environmental standards, child labour, or intellectual property protection have been used to deny certain technologies, or impose trade restrictions and other sanctions. Case in point, the sudden shutdown of the US-based Anthropic’s new Mythos 5 and Fable 5 AI models last month, following a US government directive to suspend its access to all non-US nationals.

Since a bulk of AI development is happening in the United States, it is also spearheading public debates on governance and regulation, alongside like-minded countries in Europe and elsewhere. Globally, a disparate set of conversations on governance frameworks is ongoing. There is the UN-initiated Global Dialogue, and the recent AI Summit in New Delhi, which saw a group of countries facilitating these discussions.

These debates have resulted in several declarations, task forces, frameworks, documents on principles and even the creation of institutions that are moving the dialogue forward. They point to a world that is in the process of writing the rules of AI governance. Who gets to write these rules is a fundamental question that will decide who will benefit from and dominate the sector in the coming years. It is not just about access to a revolutionary technology, but also access to the entire ecosystem and the supply chains.

Early mover advantage

The governance model that WAICO represents is the latest addition to this conversation. Despite the number of nations involved, the initiative will undoubtedly carry the stamp of China — the only country in this group with notable capabilities and presence in the AI space.

Seen in geopolitical terms, China is also attempting to seize the opportunity to project itself as a champion of the Global South, which found a mention in Xi’s speech. In the post-Second World War global order, Western countries have decided the rules for all kinds of international engagement, from trade to finance to nuclear matters. It is only in recent years that China has begun to challenge this arrangement.

For example, the creation of multilateral financial institutions like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank or the BRICS Bank was meant to break the dominance of the IMF, World Bank and related institutions in matters of international finance. But it has had limited success.

AI, however, is a newer field. This is the first time that China is making an intervention at the rule-making stage itself. Its capabilities are probably second only to those of the US. China’s emphasis on universal access and inclusivity is likely to find immense appeal among developing countries, which have often been disadvantaged by West-led institutions. WAICO could thus have a formidable influence on how AI technology is deployed and distributed.