Is the AI Cold War a genuine geopolitical shift or a self-fulfilling prophecy?

Science · Published 20 October 2026 · Updated 21 October 2026 Swipe more like this →

In short: The narrative of an AI Cold War between the United States and China has reshaped global industrial policy and trade. While proponents argue this rivalry is essential for national security, critics warn that framing technology as a zero-sum game risks destroying international scientific collaboration and fueling unnecessary, costly global tensions.

The term AI Cold War emerged in 2018, tracing back to China’s 2017 AI Development Plan, which set a goal to lead the world in artificial intelligence by 2030. This narrative suggests a shift away from nuclear or ideological competition toward a struggle for dominance in AI and the advanced semiconductors that power it. Figures like Eric Schmidt have argued that China is already ahead in critical areas, while US policymakers have used this perceived threat to justify massive industrial interventions, such as the 2022 Chips and Science Act, which allocated 280 billion dollars to bolster domestic technology and manufacturing.

Central to this conflict is the semiconductor supply chain, with Taiwan—home to the world’s largest chipmaker, TSMC—serving as a critical focal point. The US has actively restricted the export of advanced equipment, such as the extreme ultraviolet lithography systems manufactured by the Netherlands-based company ASML, to prevent China from accessing state-of-the-art chip technology. These moves have prompted concerns about protectionism and a potential race to the bottom regarding government subsidies, as both the US and the European Union launch their own initiatives to secure strategic autonomy in chip production.

However, the validity of the AI Cold War narrative remains contested. Some researchers argue that the binary framing of this rivalry is inaccurate and potentially destructive. A 2021 study by the International Institute for Strategic Studies suggested that China’s cyber power has been significantly exaggerated and remains at least a decade behind the US. Furthermore, critics like Joanna Bryson and Helena Malikova suggest that Big Tech companies may be promoting the narrative to lobby for lighter regulation. As of July 2026, the world has effectively split into two camps: the US-led Pax Silica and the China-led World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization, marking a departure from the previous unipolar global order.

General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.

Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?

Related

• Will AI create trillionaires, trigger wars, or serve the common good?
• The sovereign race to secure the AI frontier
• The AI boom is reshaping global power, energy grids, and the future of work
• Is the corporate arms race killing the next AI revolution?
• The tiny silicon square shaping global power and economic dominance
• The complex reality of Asian Australians: beyond the model minority and bamboo ceiling myths.
• A teacher told this future mathematical giant to quit math and do something else.
• The Asiento de Negros was a state-sponsored monopoly that fueled the transatlantic slave trade.
• Can a university degree double as a rigorous training ground for military leadership?
• Why a simple braking maneuver turned a routine landing into a fatal aviation disaster
• How a diaspora of merchants and artisans became a pillar of Russian cultural life
• How a self-taught Norwegian mathematician shattered the boundaries of prime number theory

More in Mathematicians · More in Science · Latest · A–Z · All topics