Interviews | Economy | East Asia

The Geopolitics of AI in the Asia-Pacific

Insights from Jouko Ahvenainen.

The Diplomat author Mercy Kuo regularly engages subject-matter experts, policy practitioners, and strategic thinkers across the globe for their diverse insights into U.S. Asia policy. This conversation with Jouko Ahvenainen – founder and chairman of Mission Grey and serial entrepreneur in data analytics, fintech, and external intelligence – is the 528th in “The Trans-Pacific View Insight Series.” 

In what ways is artificial intelligence shaping geopolitical trends in the Asia-Pacific?

AI is increasingly connecting technology policy, national security, industrial policy, and geopolitics. Nowhere is this more visible than in the Asia-Pacific.

It is important, however, not to see the region simply through a China-U.S. lens. Taiwan is critical to advanced semiconductor manufacturing; South Korea and Japan have major positions in semiconductors, materials, and industrial technology; India is building its own AI capabilities; and Singapore and other ASEAN countries are developing their own approaches to AI infrastructure, governance, and investment.

China is particularly important because of its ability to combine technology development with hardware manufacturing, industrial scale, and rapid deployment. We already see this with electric vehicles and many other technologies: Chinese companies are increasingly selling globally, including throughout Europe despite trade frictions. AI will become another layer in this industrial and commercial expansion.

This creates a much more complex geopolitical network. Countries are asking where their compute comes from, whose models they use, where their data resides, what hardware and infrastructure they depend on, and how dependent they want to become on any single technology ecosystem.

I divide my own time between Asia, Europe, and the Americas, and one thing I see clearly is that AI development is happening in all of these regions. The differences are often in emphasis, speed, business culture, and the relationship between government and industry rather than simply in technological capability.

For businesses, these developments are no longer abstract geopolitical questions. They can quickly affect suppliers, market access, regulation, cybersecurity and investment. This is why at Mission Grey we see external intelligence becoming increasingly important: technology signals need to be understood together with political, economic, industrial, and supply chain signals.

Share your perspective on a recent comment from European technology chief Henna Virkkunen that “AI is a geopolitical weapon.”

I understand her point, and the concern behind it is real: Europe’s dependency on foreign models and infrastructure, and the leverage that dependency creates. I share that concern. But I would not describe AI itself as a weapon.

It is a general-purpose technology that is becoming strategically very important. There is a useful comparison with aviation and drone technologies. They can clearly have major military applications, but the technologies themselves are much broader than weapons. They also transform transportation, logistics, agriculture, communications, and many other areas. AI is similar, although potentially even broader in its impact.

AI can certainly be weaponized. It can strengthen military systems, intelligence capabilities, cyber operations, and information influence. Access to advanced chips, computing infrastructure, cloud services, or models can also be restricted and used as geopolitical leverage. This is where Virkkunen’s warning is most relevant, and it is a legitimate one.

But AI’s strategic importance goes much further. It will influence productivity, scientific research, industrial competitiveness, education, healthcare, and the ability to create new companies and services. Its geopolitical significance may ultimately come as much from these economic and societal effects as from direct military applications.

I would say AI is becoming a strategic capability and source of geopolitical power. That is broader, and in my view more important, than simply calling it a weapon.

What is the geopolitical impact of Asia’s AI developments on the United States and Europe?

The first impact is that Asia should no longer be viewed simply as a manufacturing base or market for Western technology. It is increasingly a source of technology, capital, standards, products, and AI ecosystems itself.

China is the most obvious example. Its strength is not only in AI models, but also in combining software with hardware, manufacturing capacity, and the ability to scale products very quickly. Its electric vehicle industry, which I mentioned earlier, shows how rapidly this can become a global commercial force. Similar dynamics can emerge around robotics, autonomous systems, and AI-enabled products.

But the broader Asian picture matters just as much. Japan and South Korea remain major technology powers, Taiwan has an exceptional position in semiconductors, India is building significant AI capabilities, and Singapore has positioned itself as an international technology and AI hub.

For the United States, maintaining leadership therefore increasingly depends not only on domestic innovation but also on partnerships and supply chains throughout Asia.

Europe faces a somewhat different challenge, but I........

© The Diplomat