Why AI Governance Can't Be Left to the US and China Alone

Jan de Vries · 2026-09-15

### The AI Governance Gap: Why Two Countries Can't Call the Shots Imagine a technology so powerful it could reshape economies, societies, and even the course of human history. Now imagine leaving its rules to just two players. That's the situation we're in with artificial intelligence, and it's a recipe for disaster. Vendan Ananda Kumararajah, a voice in the European tech policy space, recently made a compelling case: if the US and China dominate AI governance, we're sleepwalking toward an AI apocalypse. Strong words? Maybe. But when you consider the stakes, they're not far-fetched. ### The Problem with a Two-Horse Race AI isn't just another tech trend. It's a general-purpose technology that will touch every aspect of our lives—from healthcare to warfare. When only two countries set the rules, those rules reflect their interests, not necessarily global ones. The US tends to favor innovation-first, light-touch regulation. China leans toward state control and social stability. Neither approach adequately addresses the full spectrum of risks: bias, privacy, autonomous weapons, or existential threats. And here's the kicker: AI doesn't respect borders. A model trained in one country can be deployed anywhere. So if governance is fragmented, we're all vulnerable. ### Why Europe Matters More Than Ever Europe has a unique role to play. The EU's GDPR set a global standard for data privacy. Now, with the EU Inc proposal and similar initiatives, Europe is trying to carve out a third way—one that balances innovation with precaution. But it's not just about Europe. Countries like India, Brazil, and Japan have a stake too. AI governance needs diverse voices, not just the loudest ones. > "The future of AI shouldn't be decided by a handful of nations. It's a global challenge that demands global solutions." — Vendan Ananda Kumararajah That quote sums it up. We need a multilateral approach, one that includes safeguards against catastrophic risks while fostering innovation. ### What Can Be Done? So what's the path forward? Here are a few key steps: - **Establish international AI safety standards**: Similar to nuclear non-proliferation treaties, but for AI. - **Create a global AI observatory**: A body that monitors AI development and flags risks. - **Promote inclusive governance**: Ensure developing countries have a seat at the table. - **Encourage corporate responsibility**: Tech companies must adhere to ethical guidelines, not just profit motives. These aren't just nice ideas. They're necessities. Without them, we risk a future where AI amplifies existing inequalities and creates new ones. ### The Bottom Line Leaving AI governance to the US and China alone isn't just risky—it's irresponsible. We need a global conversation, diverse perspectives, and robust safeguards. Europe, with its regulatory experience and commitment to human rights, can lead the charge. But it can't do it alone. The choices we make today will shape the AI landscape for decades. Let's make sure they're the right ones. *This article was inspired by discussions around the EU Inc proposal and the need for global AI governance.*