Executive Summary
This academic paper analyzes international governance models for advancing artificial intelligence (AI), considering its dual-use nature and potential for rapid transformation. It develops a taxonomy of governance forms (subnational, national, international) and evaluates their suitability for managing AI's development, proliferation, and deployment. The authors compare AI governance challenges to historical precedents like nuclear weapons, concluding that options range from non-proliferation regimes to an international monopoly, but it is too early to determine the most feasible path.
Why It Matters
This document is crucial for defense and geopolitical analysts as it directly addresses the strategic challenges of governing advanced AI, a technology with profound military implications, and explores historical precedents for international control. Understanding these governance frameworks is vital for anticipating future geopolitical stability and arms control efforts.
Key Takeaways
- Subnational and national AI governance are insufficient for dual-use AI due to 'race-to-the-bottom' incentives and the high rewards of risky actions.
- A non-proliferation regime (NPT+) is a strong historical precedent for powerful military technologies, but AI's characteristics may limit its effectiveness compared to nuclear weapons.
- An International Monopoly, though eroding national sovereignty, offers less invasive monitoring and was considered for nuclear weapons, making it a viable, albeit challenging, option for AI.
- No single governance approach is perfect, and a combination of policies is likely needed to manage the risks and opportunities of advanced AI effectively.
Strategic Relevance
The strategic relevance lies in the exploration of international frameworks to control a potentially transformative military technology. The paper directly addresses the challenges of preventing an AI arms race, ensuring global stability, and managing the dual-use nature of AI, drawing parallels with nuclear non-proliferation efforts. This directly impacts future defense policy, arms control treaties, and international security dynamics.