The AI Revolution (AIR) is historic. It has taken us beyond all human frailties and boundaries. The UN Independent International Scientific Panel on AI in its Preliminary Report while outlining the significance of the AI notes: ‘We are at an inflection point. Artificial Intelligence is not simply another emerging technology; it is the first to compress adoption from decades into months, industrialize cognitive work at scale and concentrate transformative capability in the hands of a few global actors ‘ (2026). Indeed true. The threat perception around AI production and function that are widely echoed are not simply disturbing trivialities. Dario Amodei, of Anthropic says: ‘We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models’. But why? Why are we scared of the machines and tools that we only have created? These AI tools must listen to and work the way we wish and do things for the betterment of humanity.
Who is Responsible for the Current AI Conundrum?
Is there a comprehensive regulatory mechanism to halt the advancement of these AI models? Probably none. Then, what will be the use of simple appeals and statements making in public to create unnecessary hassles? Amodei and other AI topnotch like Sam Altman and Elon Musk know and understand their business well. They are well aware that all businesses are done with public and their actions are in public square.
Meanwhile, AI experts and including some from the UN Artificial Intelligence Committee are struggling to clear the air around the danger of AI spreading across the world. The UN AI experts warn against apocalyptic rhetoric on risks. Its fast becoming a massive terror in public that the rogue AI agents may destroy humanity. Joelle Barral, an executive at Google DeepMind and a Member of the International Scientific Panel on AI, an independent body rightly argued: ‘As scientists, it is very important to invest in the science, to really understand what we know (from) what we do not know and investing in fear is not that helpful’. Thus, it is clear that rampaging fear around AI risks could finally disrupt the noble and revolutionary services offered by several AI models so far.
What is the most striking aspect in this AI conundrum is that there are four groups of people/experts who are either raising red flags regarding a potential showdown from AI or highlighting the AI apocalypse as non-existent-first, the big AI companies and their bosses like Musk, Altman and Amodei, second, the UN, its some of the agencies and their respective heads including the Secretary General, third, researchers or former employees of top AI companies and finally, the American Congressmen and officials. Interestingly and to our utter dismay, it is noted that all these four groups of experts/lawmakers/industry barons once used to be votaries for an all-encompassing AI world, are now turning against the same. However, some of the lawmakers specially the Republicans are not in favour of slowing down AI production, instead they are solely pushing the burden of safety of AI models on the companies which are making it.
AI Race: US vs China
The recent AI Summit between the two AI power houses, have signalled ever greater cooperation than intense conflict. Both Washington and Beijing are charting a novel course of action for making the world a much safer place even though they are veering around the problems and prospects of three T’s-Trade, Technology and Taiwan. When it comes to technology i.e. AI for now, both are arch rivals, but they need to work in tandem simply to keep the growing menace of this technology in check.
Notwithstanding the current bonhomie between Trump and Xi, the fast expansion and rapid growth of cost-effective AI models in China is serious cause of concern in Washington and among all the AI giants in the US. To naysayers, this competition between two economic superpowers, is nothing sort of an existential threat to each other. Of course, ‘the US has an obvious edge, with pioneering AI labs, the most advanced chips and deep-pocketed investors (like the world’s only trillionaire Elon Musk)’ (Llu 2026). But the problem is that US and China are increasingly dividing the countries into two new camps-this time, the digital divide is leading nations into new AI Camps under the two superpowers. Further, Llu argues ‘China has a vision, that for many, may be more compelling. Even as it trails the US in frontier AI models, it is rapidly narrowing the technology gap while championing a more open ecosystem centered on accessibility and lower cost’ (Ibid). That is where both the titans clash and compete for dominance and growth in the fastest growing AI world.
The recent Trump-Xi Summit did not do much for a comprehensive framework either to regulate AI or to reach out to a final communication between the two super powers to iron out their differences in regard to AI safety. ‘Substance of the summit was frugal. The Chinese made the right noises, but few real commitments. They understand this US Administration reneges on deals, makes additional demands, and imposes new conditions. They are in no hurry to close the deal’ (Gokhale 2026). This highlights the fact that President Xi Jinping did pause like Deng Ziaoping, his legendary predecessor during the meeting and kept the White House guessing what will come next from Beijing. But he made Trump realize that the his ‘Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation’ is equally important like that of ‘Make America Great Again’ (MAGA). However the bottom line was clear after the summit that both the leaders wanted to avoid the historic ‘Thucydides Trap’, an inevitable confrontation between the two hegemons. But what had brought them together is that ‘Leaders in both countries are spooked by increasing cyber capabilities of AI models and especially agents acting autonomously to escape containment and breach websites’ (Mehta 2026). It’s a clandestine design and threat for human race.
Ironically, not surprisingly, immediately after the bilateral summit, Trump announced America.gov, an AI-driven govt website, meant to serve as a one-stop-shop for people, trying to accomplish basic tasks. Also he said that he does not want to integrate with China on AI. To him, the US should not join efforts with China on the technology. Around the same time, he officially renames AI as ‘Super Intelligence’ (SI) and calls it much bigger than the ‘Internet’. so an unpredictable Trump goes on speaking and stating what he wants on AI, but one thing is clear from him that he does not want to regulate AI. To him, AI killing humanity is a ‘hoax’. It’s the world that needs to give a call for calming down AI, the same cant be expected neither from Trump nor from Xi.
Need of the Hour
The AI is a transformative technology for humanity. According to the UN Report, the challenge is ‘finding a way to unlock AI’s enormous benefits while preventing its growing risks’ (Dickinson 2026). Time is to exercise restraint by the mega AI corporations like the Anthropic, OpenAI and xAI while planning their next move for an advanced AI model. With the massive rise of investment in the AI, the industry is projected to reach ‘4.8 trillion in market value by 2033, becoming a prominent force in digital transformation’ as the UNCTAD predicted in the beginning of 2025 (UNCTAD 2025). Looking at the current confusion and chaos, can a fresh and responsible global governance framework be claimed without confronting the harm done just in the cases of Hugging Face Incident of July 2026, the recent AI agent hacking of the Health Department of the Australian Government, and several key offices of the US Federal Administration- Department of Education, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Census Bureau. These are serious cyber security breaches which could be potentially dangerous for any government or international organizations.
Slow-pacing superior AI models will not lead us to invincible optimism. Its offering the leading tech giants a breathing space. But this could directly help the Chinese AI industry to spearhead their efforts not to beat but simply to make cheaper AI models for mostly developing nations. And eventually, such an effort might harm the larger American market in AI and especially, the sole dominance of the Silicon Valley in the long run.
Besides, the American companies need to pose and rethink its current AI development strategy to stay in the lead role. But some experts say that ‘yet there is reason to think the American way of developing AI is reaching its limits. Those limits will likely become increasingly evident in the coming months and years, and they will start to erode and perhaps even end US dominance. Eventually, they will place the United States at a disadvantage against China, which has an alternative approach to the AI contest’ (Buchanan and Collins, 2025). It is strongly argued that Trump Administration or any future establishment in the Capitol Hill must embrace novel means to expand and sustain the AI development and research by taking recourse to public-private partnership.
Further, since Chinese advancement in the development of AI is not slowing down or not known what is precisely planned and executed within the four walls of the People’s Republic of China, the Americans do not need to stop the AI race altogether as Trump said. Only precaution, the AI makers must take is to see to it that their agents do not get out of human control.
Road Ahead
The bottom line is clear. The development of frontier AI models needed to be slowed down. It rightly underlines the grave danger underneath the rapid AI development industry primarily lead by the US. At AI high table, what Amodei, Altman and Musk are preaching, must practice the same for their respective business models. Their gestures are not expected to be making more business out of the current fluid moment of AI world. We trust their leadership and they are not lending evil counsel at this critical juncture. They should not compel the globe to choose between harsh and hard.
The national Governments and international agencies in collaboration with major AI firms must work out a unique and single Global AI Governance Model so as to avoid the future AI disasters before its too late. Especially, national law courts and legislatures should start setting up enough guardrails to prevent AI catastrophes like the ones in Hugging Face Incident.
Time now to introspect. Shall we allow the AI-a human creation to push humanity to extinction? Fears about AI agents are intensifying, but tensions have not been dissipated. The whole world is waiting impatiently for sustained solutions. It’s a moment for quick and prudent action.
References
Buchanan, Ben and Collins, Tantum (2025), The AI Grand Bargain, Foreign Affairs, Nov-Dec.
Dickinson, Daniel (2026), AI Explained: Why the World Needs to Act Now? (Available at: https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/07/1167848
Llu, John (2026), The US Wants the World to Pick a Side on AI (Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/26/tech/us-china-ai-explainer-intl-hnk)
Nicol-Schwarz, Kai (2026), Trump-Xi Summit Puts AI Safety Talks on the Table but Neither Side Wants to Slow down, (Quoted Aalok Mehta), (Avaialable at: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/23/trump-xi-meeting-ai-safety-chips-us-china-dialogue.html?msokid=0d54971bd811623d0f4e80ded9b96300)
UNCTAD (2025), AI’s $4.8 Trillion Future, UN Trade and Development Alerts on Divides, Urges Action (UNCTAD/PRESS/PR/2025/003). (Available at: https://unctad.org/press-material/ais-4.8-trillion-future-un-trade-and-development-alerts-divides-urges-action)
UN (2026), Preliminary Report of the UN Independent International Scientific Panel (Available at: https://www.un.org/independent-international-scientific-panel-ai/sites/default/files/2026-07/en_Preliminary%20Report_.pdf
Anthropic Warns off AI Mad Race: But Why?
The AI Revolution (AIR) is historic. It has taken us beyond all human frailties and boundaries. The UN Independent International Scientific Panel on AI in its Preliminary Report while outlining the significance of the AI notes: ‘We are at an inflection point. Artificial Intelligence is not simply another emerging technology; it is the first to compress adoption from decades into months, industrialize cognitive work at scale and concentrate transformative capability in the hands of a few global actors ‘ (2026). Indeed true. The threat perception around AI production and function that are widely echoed are not simply disturbing trivialities. Dario Amodei, of Anthropic says: ‘We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models’. But why? Why are we scared of the machines and tools that we only have created? These AI tools must listen to and work the way we wish and do things for the betterment of humanity.
Who is Responsible for the Current AI Conundrum?
Is there a comprehensive regulatory mechanism to halt the advancement of these AI models? Probably none. Then, what will be the use of simple appeals and statements making in public to create unnecessary hassles? Amodei and other AI topnotch like Sam Altman and Elon Musk know and understand their business well. They are well aware that all businesses are done with public and their actions are in public square.
Meanwhile, AI experts and including some from the UN Artificial Intelligence Committee are struggling to clear the air around the danger of AI spreading across the world. The UN AI experts warn against apocalyptic rhetoric on risks. Its fast becoming a massive terror in public that the rogue AI agents may destroy humanity. Joelle Barral, an executive at Google DeepMind and a Member of the International Scientific Panel on AI, an independent body rightly argued: ‘As scientists, it is very important to invest in the science, to really understand what we know (from) what we do not know and investing in fear is not that helpful’. Thus, it is clear that rampaging fear around AI risks could finally disrupt the noble and revolutionary services offered by several AI models so far.
What is the most striking aspect in this AI conundrum is that there are four groups of people/experts who are either raising red flags regarding a potential showdown from AI or highlighting the AI apocalypse as non-existent-first, the big AI companies and their bosses like Musk, Altman and Amodei, second, the UN, its some of the agencies and their respective heads including the Secretary General, third, researchers or former employees of top AI companies and finally, the American Congressmen and officials. Interestingly and to our utter dismay, it is noted that all these four groups of experts/lawmakers/industry barons once used to be votaries for an all-encompassing AI world, are now turning against the same. However, some of the lawmakers specially the Republicans are not in favour of slowing down AI production, instead they are solely pushing the burden of safety of AI models on the companies which are making it.
AI Race: US vs China
The recent AI Summit between the two AI power houses, have signalled ever greater cooperation than intense conflict. Both Washington and Beijing are charting a novel course of action for making the world a much safer place even though they are veering around the problems and prospects of three T’s-Trade, Technology and Taiwan. When it comes to technology i.e. AI for now, both are arch rivals, but they need to work in tandem simply to keep the growing menace of this technology in check.
Notwithstanding the current bonhomie between Trump and Xi, the fast expansion and rapid growth of cost-effective AI models in China is serious cause of concern in Washington and among all the AI giants in the US. To naysayers, this competition between two economic superpowers, is nothing sort of an existential threat to each other. Of course, ‘the US has an obvious edge, with pioneering AI labs, the most advanced chips and deep-pocketed investors (like the world’s only trillionaire Elon Musk)’ (Llu 2026). But the problem is that US and China are increasingly dividing the countries into two new camps-this time, the digital divide is leading nations into new AI Camps under the two superpowers. Further, Llu argues ‘China has a vision, that for many, may be more compelling. Even as it trails the US in frontier AI models, it is rapidly narrowing the technology gap while championing a more open ecosystem centered on accessibility and lower cost’ (Ibid). That is where both the titans clash and compete for dominance and growth in the fastest growing AI world.
The recent Trump-Xi Summit did not do much for a comprehensive framework either to regulate AI or to reach out to a final communication between the two super powers to iron out their differences in regard to AI safety. ‘Substance of the summit was frugal. The Chinese made the right noises, but few real commitments. They understand this US Administration reneges on deals, makes additional demands, and imposes new conditions. They are in no hurry to close the deal’ (Gokhale 2026). This highlights the fact that President Xi Jinping did pause like Deng Ziaoping, his legendary predecessor during the meeting and kept the White House guessing what will come next from Beijing. But he made Trump realize that the his ‘Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation’ is equally important like that of ‘Make America Great Again’ (MAGA). However the bottom line was clear after the summit that both the leaders wanted to avoid the historic ‘Thucydides Trap’, an inevitable confrontation between the two hegemons. But what had brought them together is that ‘Leaders in both countries are spooked by increasing cyber capabilities of AI models and especially agents acting autonomously to escape containment and breach websites’ (Mehta 2026). It’s a clandestine design and threat for human race.
Ironically, not surprisingly, immediately after the bilateral summit, Trump announced America.gov, an AI-driven govt website, meant to serve as a one-stop-shop for people, trying to accomplish basic tasks. Also he said that he does not want to integrate with China on AI. To him, the US should not join efforts with China on the technology. Around the same time, he officially renames AI as ‘Super Intelligence’ (SI) and calls it much bigger than the ‘Internet’. so an unpredictable Trump goes on speaking and stating what he wants on AI, but one thing is clear from him that he does not want to regulate AI. To him, AI killing humanity is a ‘hoax’. It’s the world that needs to give a call for calming down AI, the same cant be expected neither from Trump nor from Xi.
Need of the Hour
The AI is a transformative technology for humanity. According to the UN Report, the challenge is ‘finding a way to unlock AI’s enormous benefits while preventing its growing risks’ (Dickinson 2026). Time is to exercise restraint by the mega AI corporations like the Anthropic, OpenAI and xAI while planning their next move for an advanced AI model. With the massive rise of investment in the AI, the industry is projected to reach ‘4.8 trillion in market value by 2033, becoming a prominent force in digital transformation’ as the UNCTAD predicted in the beginning of 2025 (UNCTAD 2025). Looking at the current confusion and chaos, can a fresh and responsible global governance framework be claimed without confronting the harm done just in the cases of Hugging Face Incident of July 2026, the recent AI agent hacking of the Health Department of the Australian Government, and several key offices of the US Federal Administration- Department of Education, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Census Bureau. These are serious cyber security breaches which could be potentially dangerous for any government or international organizations.
Slow-pacing superior AI models will not lead us to invincible optimism. Its offering the leading tech giants a breathing space. But this could directly help the Chinese AI industry to spearhead their efforts not to beat but simply to make cheaper AI models for mostly developing nations. And eventually, such an effort might harm the larger American market in AI and especially, the sole dominance of the Silicon Valley in the long run.
Besides, the American companies need to pose and rethink its current AI development strategy to stay in the lead role. But some experts say that ‘yet there is reason to think the American way of developing AI is reaching its limits. Those limits will likely become increasingly evident in the coming months and years, and they will start to erode and perhaps even end US dominance. Eventually, they will place the United States at a disadvantage against China, which has an alternative approach to the AI contest’ (Buchanan and Collins, 2025). It is strongly argued that Trump Administration or any future establishment in the Capitol Hill must embrace novel means to expand and sustain the AI development and research by taking recourse to public-private partnership.
Further, since Chinese advancement in the development of AI is not slowing down or not known what is precisely planned and executed within the four walls of the People’s Republic of China, the Americans do not need to stop the AI race altogether as Trump said. Only precaution, the AI makers must take is to see to it that their agents do not get out of human control.
Road Ahead
The bottom line is clear. The development of frontier AI models needed to be slowed down. It rightly underlines the grave danger underneath the rapid AI development industry primarily lead by the US. At AI high table, what Amodei, Altman and Musk are preaching, must practice the same for their respective business models. Their gestures are not expected to be making more business out of the current fluid moment of AI world. We trust their leadership and they are not lending evil counsel at this critical juncture. They should not compel the globe to choose between harsh and hard.
The national Governments and international agencies in collaboration with major AI firms must work out a unique and single Global AI Governance Model so as to avoid the future AI disasters before its too late. Especially, national law courts and legislatures should start setting up enough guardrails to prevent AI catastrophes like the ones in Hugging Face Incident.
Time now to introspect. Shall we allow the AI-a human creation to push humanity to extinction? Fears about AI agents are intensifying, but tensions have not been dissipated. The whole world is waiting impatiently for sustained solutions. It’s a moment for quick and prudent action.
References
Buchanan, Ben and Collins, Tantum (2025), The AI Grand Bargain, Foreign Affairs, Nov-Dec.
Dickinson, Daniel (2026), AI Explained: Why the World Needs to Act Now? (Available at: https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/07/1167848
Llu, John (2026), The US Wants the World to Pick a Side on AI (Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/26/tech/us-china-ai-explainer-intl-hnk)
Nicol-Schwarz, Kai (2026), Trump-Xi Summit Puts AI Safety Talks on the Table but Neither Side Wants to Slow down, (Quoted Aalok Mehta), (Avaialable at: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/23/trump-xi-meeting-ai-safety-chips-us-china-dialogue.html?msokid=0d54971bd811623d0f4e80ded9b96300)
UNCTAD (2025), AI’s $4.8 Trillion Future, UN Trade and Development Alerts on Divides, Urges Action (UNCTAD/PRESS/PR/2025/003). (Available at: https://unctad.org/press-material/ais-4.8-trillion-future-un-trade-and-development-alerts-divides-urges-action)
UN (2026), Preliminary Report of the UN Independent International Scientific Panel (Available at: https://www.un.org/independent-international-scientific-panel-ai/sites/default/files/2026-07/en_Preliminary%20Report_.pdf
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Keep in touch with our news & offers
Prof. Makhan Saikia
What to read next...
V4+India: The new way to Europe
Anthropic Warns off AI Mad Race: But Why?
Beyond the Dollar: Why BRICS Needs Trust Before it Can Offer Asia an Alternative
Culture Beyond Economics:BRICS Cooperation through Traditional Knowledge and Holistic Development
Role of BRICS in the Global Governance of AI
BRICS as a guiding force in the global power landscape
Beyond the Record: Embodied Connectivity and BRICS Peace
BRICS 2026: What the New Delhi Declaration Leaves Unsaid