← OSINT Library

The Strategist's Dilemma: Agent-Neutral and Agent-Relative Reasons in U.S. AI Strategy

RAND · Beba Cibralic ·

Executive Summary

This paper applies philosopher Thomas Nagel's distinction between agent-relative and agent-neutral reasons to U.S. AI strategy. It argues that national leaders face a 'strategist's dilemma' where obligations to protect citizens (agent-relative) conflict with universal duties to prevent catastrophic AI harms (agent-neutral). The author proposes a framework where catastrophic risk avoidance has lexical priority, while agent-relative reasons retain moral weight within that safety envelope.

Why It Matters

This document is crucial for defense and geopolitical analysts as it provides a philosophical framework to navigate the complex ethical and strategic tensions in developing national AI policies, balancing national interests with global catastrophic risk prevention. It offers a structured approach to integrate universal safety concerns with sovereign obligations in the context of transformative AI.

Key Takeaways

  • U.S. AI strategy must balance agent-relative obligations to citizens with agent-neutral duties to prevent global catastrophic AI harms.
  • Catastrophic and irreversible AI risks should have lexical priority, acting as a non-negotiable constraint on permissible national strategies.
  • Agent-relative reasons, such as national security and citizen welfare, are morally weighty and provide motivational resources for international cooperation.
  • The framework helps clarify the structure of the 'strategist's dilemma' and avoids treating global risk as merely another national interest or national duties as mere political obstacles.
  • The tension between agent-neutral and agent-relative reasons maps onto existing debates between the AI safety and national security communities.

Strategic Relevance

This paper offers a critical framework for understanding and formulating national AI strategy, particularly for the U.S. It highlights the inherent tension between national competitive advantage and global catastrophic risk mitigation, proposing a structured approach to decision-making that prioritizes humanity-wide safety while acknowledging sovereign responsibilities. This directly impacts policy formulation, international cooperation, and the ethical deployment of advanced AI systems.

Source Website View PDF

Key Entities

Thomas NagelEstados UnidosInteligência Artificial (IA)RAND CorporationCenter for the Geopolitics of Artificial General IntelligenceAI SafetyNational SecurityAgent-Neutral ReasonsAgent-Relative ReasonsChina

Best For

Policy MakersDefense StrategistsAI EthicistsNational Security AnalystsInternational Relations Scholars

Related Themes

AI GovernanceExistential RiskTechnological CompetitionInternational CooperationEthics of AINational Security PolicyFuture of Warfare

Get the week's most relevant defense documents

Subscribe to our free newsletter to receive curated OSINT reports, analysis, and strategic updates directly in your inbox.

Join the briefing Subscribe