- New paper from Institute warns against AI
isolationism in pursuit of sovereignty.
- Authored by government technology advisors, the
paper argues AI sovereignty is about strategic
agency, not self-sufficiency.
- Paper
recommends new ‘Control, Steer, Depend'
framework for governments
to identify and leverage AI strengths.
-
: “Countries that treat AI as a
central pillar of their national purpose, deploying it widely
and negotiating their place in the global ecosystem with
clarity and ambition, will not see their sovereignty eroded.”
Pursuing AI isolationist policies to protect
sovereignty would be a mistake for most
countries, according to the Institute for Global Change
(TBI).
‘Sovereignty in the Age of AI', published today by
the former British Prime Minister's
Institute, argues that no country can be
fully sovereign on AI – and
that attempts to have complete control over
its infrastructure risk weakening, rather than
strengthening, national power.
The report is co-authored by Hilda Barasa, PeiChin
Tay, Keegan McBride, Alexander Iosad and Jakob
Mökander, who have advised governments
across multiple continents, and
features a foreword written by .
Frontier AI development is increasingly concentrated among a
small number of firms and countries, with costs and energy
demands beyond the reach of most states. However, as the
technology grows in geopolitical and
economic importance, failing to access and
deploy AI presents a major threat to economic
development, public services and
global competitiveness.
Today's report warns that responding to
this reality with isolationist
approaches, such as attempts to build
fully sovereign AI stacks from chips to frontier
models, is too slow, too expensive and, for most
countries, unachievable. More importantly, such
strategies could cut countries off from the most
advanced AI capabilities, undermining economic competitiveness,
public-service delivery and national
security.
The authors argue that sovereignty in the age of
AI is instead about agency,
not maintaining total control and
independence. Every country can make strategic decisions
about where to build domestic strength, where to shape markets
and standards, and where to rely on trusted partners.
For example, Nordic countries, where it costs less to
cool and therefore run data centres, have
a strong bargaining chip for nations that lack this capacity
but excel in other areas such
as semiconductor production or research and
development.
The paper calls for a more realistic and strategic
approach that embraces managed interdependence while
expanding national agility.
In his foreword to the paper, said:
“No state can dominate every layer of the AI stack. Leaders
must make deliberate choices about where they want to build
strength and influence. And by becoming indispensable
in specific parts of the AI
ecosystem – whether in data assets, specialised models,
regulatory standards, energy capacity or talent
pipelines – countries gain leverage across it, even if
they do not control it all…
“Countries that treat AI as a central pillar of their
national purpose, deploying it widely and
negotiating their place in the global ecosystem with
clarity and ambition, will not see their sovereignty
eroded. They will renew it for a new age.”
To help governments navigate these choices, the paper proposes a
new ‘Control, Steer, Depend'
framework for exercising agency in an
interdependent AI ecosystem.
The framework acknowledges that governments need direct
control over certain critical systems, such as sensitive data or
mission-critical public-sector applications, in
addition to country-specific strengths such
as research capabilities or clean energy that can
be leveraged for export.
In some areas, they can steer outcomes through regulation,
procurement, standards and partnerships. And where
dependence on external providers is unavoidable -
particularly for frontier capabilities - they can depend in ways
that are negotiated, diversified and
resilient, avoiding excessive concentration and vendor
lock-in.
By deliberately and strategically balancing which parts of
the stack they will control, steer and depend,
nations can maintain their sovereignty and sphere
of influence without building a fully sovereign AI
ecosystem.
Dr Keegan McBride, Senior Policy Advisor for Emerging
Technology and Geopolitics at the Institute and one of the paper's
authors, said:
“No country can do this on their own: what is important is being
able to act strategically, striking agreements, and forging
new tech-alliances.”
An embargoed copy of the report can be seen here
