N※N

US Rejects Global AI Governance, Prioritizes 'Sovereign Stack'

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. l-ai-governance-prioritizes-sovereign-stack.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Friday, February 20th 2026 at 3:53 GMT by The New Indian Express
      Locales:

Washington, DC - February 20, 2026 - The United States government has delivered a firm rejection of international efforts to establish a unified global framework for governing Artificial Intelligence (AI), opting instead to prioritize the development of a self-reliant, 'sovereign American AI stack.' The decision, made public late Thursday, signals a deepening divide between the US and European nations - particularly France and Germany - who have been leading the charge for internationally coordinated AI regulation.

The core of the disagreement lies in differing philosophies regarding innovation and security. European proposals, frequently referred to within US policy circles as the 'Euro-tone,' advocate for a comprehensive treaty establishing ethical guidelines, safety protocols, and consistent regulatory oversight for AI development and deployment. US officials, however, argue that such a top-down, globally mandated approach would unduly constrain American innovation, cede strategic advantage to geopolitical rivals, and prove ultimately counterproductive.

"The United States believes that fostering responsible AI development is best achieved through a national approach, allowing individual countries to tailor regulations to their specific needs and priorities," explained a senior Commerce Department official during a press briefing. "A rigid, one-size-fits-all global framework is not practical, nor is it in the best interest of the United States. We must empower American businesses and researchers to lead in this critical field."

The Biden administration's strategy centers on substantial investments in domestic AI research and development. Key initiatives focus on strengthening the entire AI ecosystem, from foundational research to practical application. This includes significant financial incentives for American companies to build and maintain independent AI infrastructure, including crucial datasets - often the most valuable and guarded asset in the AI landscape. A critical component of this 'sovereign stack' is securing access to vital resources such as semiconductors, rare earth minerals, and advanced computing power, essential for the production of AI hardware.

The US approach isn't solely about technological development; it's intrinsically linked to national security concerns. Washington views control over AI technology as a key determinant of future geopolitical power. Allowing international bodies to dictate standards could, according to US policymakers, jeopardize military applications and critical infrastructure reliant on AI systems. The fear is that overly restrictive regulations, even if well-intentioned, could inadvertently disadvantage the US in a rapidly evolving strategic landscape.

However, the US stance has drawn considerable criticism, both domestically and internationally. Detractors warn that a fragmented global AI landscape creates significant risks. Without international cooperation, addressing critical issues like algorithmic bias, the spread of disinformation, and the potential misuse of AI for malicious purposes becomes exponentially more challenging. The potential for AI-powered cyberattacks, autonomous weapons systems, and sophisticated surveillance technologies raises the stakes considerably.

Dr. Anya Sharma, a leading AI ethicist at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, described the US decision as "short-sighted and dangerous." "AI is inherently a global technology," Dr. Sharma argued. "Its benefits and risks transcend national borders. Ignoring the need for international coordination will only exacerbate existing challenges and create entirely new ones. We need collaborative frameworks for data sharing, ethical review, and safety testing to ensure AI benefits all of humanity."

The EU is poised to formally present its comprehensive AI governance proposal at the upcoming G20 summit in March. This proposal, building on the groundwork laid in January 2026, is expected to outline a tiered risk-based approach to AI regulation, classifying AI systems based on their potential impact and applying correspondingly stringent rules. Whether the US will demonstrate any willingness to compromise or engage in meaningful dialogue remains unclear. Indications suggest that Washington is prepared to maintain its independent course, despite growing pressure from allies.

The divergence in approaches isn't simply a policy disagreement; it reflects a broader geopolitical battleground. As highlighted in recent reports (December 2025 & November 2025), China is rapidly emerging as a major AI power, investing heavily in research and development and challenging US dominance in key areas. This competitive landscape further reinforces the US inclination to protect its technological advantage and avoid any perceived weakening of its position. The future of AI development and regulation is thus shaping up to be a defining feature of the 21st-century world order, and the current trajectory suggests a prolonged period of fragmented governance and escalating technological rivalry.