The AI arms race between global superpowers is a risky gamble with existential stakes

The potential AI arms race between global superpowers presents profound risks to humanity beyond typical geopolitical competition. Recent analyses suggest that pursuing a decisive strategic advantage through AI could trigger catastrophic unintended consequences, including loss of control over the technology itself, escalation of great power conflict, and dangerous concentration of power in the hands of a few. This critical examination challenges the assumption that winning an AI race would necessarily secure beneficial outcomes, even for the victor.

The big picture: The idea that a superpower could develop AI that grants a decisive strategic advantage (DSA) over rivals has gained traction, but carries significant risks that may outweigh potential benefits.

• The article analyzes four key theses around a potential US-China AI arms race, including whether DSA-AI is theoretically possible, whether US hegemony would be beneficial, and whether racing is practically viable or strategically optimal.
• Rather than securing a nation’s values for the future, an accelerated AI development race might fundamentally threaten human civilization through several distinct mechanisms.

Key risks identified: Pursuing a DSA-AI strategy could trigger three principal dangers that transcend typical geopolitical competition concerns.

• Racing encourages cutting corners on safety measures, increasing the likelihood of losing control over advanced AI systems and potentially creating catastrophic risks for humanity.
• The competitive dynamics might incentivize extreme measures, including preemptive strikes against rival powers to prevent them from developing their own DSA-AI.
• Even if successful, the development of DSA-AI might concentrate effective power in a small “ruling class,” potentially corrupting the democratic values it ostensibly aims to protect.

The authors’ conclusion: The pursuit of decisive strategic advantage through AI represents a high-stakes gamble with potentially devastating consequences.

• The article argues that DSA-AI is likely not practically viable in the current technological and geopolitical landscape.
• Instead of accelerating competition, the authors advocate for de-escalation of AI development races and focusing on reducing catastrophic risks through transparency and verifiable commitments.
• This approach recognizes that in a race where the consequences of failure include existential risk, conventional competitive strategies may be fundamentally misaligned with human flourishing.