Get audio access with any FP subscription. Subscribe Now ALREADY AN FP SUBSCRIBER? LOGIN

Get audio access with any FP subscription.

ALREADY AN FP SUBSCRIBER? LOGIN

The U.S. debate over how to navigate China’s role in developing and governing advanced artificial intelligence is stuck between two extremes. One camp calls for full-blown international treaties even though the two countries cannot yet agree on AI’s most serious risks, let alone how to manage them. The other is deeply skeptical of dialogue, believing progress will only be possible if the Chinese side is desperate.

A grand bargain may be too ambitious, yet focusing only on what can be agreed on today could lock both sides into a policy regime that becomes obsolete as technology evolves. Doing nothing is even worse because regardless of whether it was developed in San Francisco or Hangzhou, an AI model that makes it easier for terrorists to synthesize deadly pathogens or hack into the infrastructure that underpins financial markets threatens everyone. These risks are becoming all too real as AI systems demonstrate cyber- and biological capabilities that match or exceed those of human experts on increasingly complex tasks.

The U.S. debate over how to navigate China’s role in developing and governing advanced artificial intelligence is stuck between two extremes. One camp calls for full-blown international treaties even though the two countries cannot yet agree on AI’s most serious risks, let alone how to manage them. The other is deeply skeptical of dialogue, believing progress will only be possible if the Chinese side is desperate.

A grand bargain may be too ambitious, yet focusing only on what can be agreed on today could lock both sides into a policy regime that becomes obsolete as technology evolves. Doing nothing is even worse because regardless of whether it was developed in San Francisco or Hangzhou, an AI model that makes it easier for terrorists to synthesize deadly pathogens or hack into the infrastructure that underpins financial markets threatens everyone. These risks are becoming all too real as AI systems demonstrate cyber- and biological capabilities that match or exceed those of human experts on increasingly complex tasks.

The recent OpenAI-Hugging Face incident, in which AI agents collaborated to break out of their testing environment and gain access to the internal infrastructure of external organizations, made clear that AI already operates beyond human control in ways that can unwittingly impact third parties. It is only a matter of time before these threats cross borders, and Beijing will certainly want clarity from Washington should one of its companies become the next accidental victim of a U.S. model going rogue—and vice versa.

As Tsinghua University’s Xiao Qian recently wrote in Foreign Policy, “Sustained dialogue is a strategic necessity.” She is right. And there is a middle path forward. When U.S. and Chinese delegations gather this month to discuss AI risks, rather than pursuing a comprehensive agreement, they should start with a series of narrower measures focused on preventing extreme risks, managing crises, and investing in verification tools. Each small........

© Foreign Policy