The material and immaterial dimensions of the new geopolitics of artificial intelligence: the dynamics of US-China competition

Extended Abstract

Introduction: The competition over artificial intelligence is a fundamental struggle over the desired technological future, To understand these complex dynamics, we need an approach that is not limited to technical or economic aspects; but also explores the deep connection between technology, power, space, and discourse. This multifaceted competition, which has its roots in the struggle to control data and algorithms, presents us with new dimensions of geopolitical conflict. The present study attempts to analyze the geopolitics of artificial intelligence in the era of great power competition between the United States and China. Our main question is: How are the dynamics of the geopolitical competition in AI between the United States and China shaped by divergent approaches to governance and industrial policy, discursive dimensions and strategic symbolism, and national socio-technical imaginaries, and what are the implications for the global geopolitical order?

Theoretical Approach: By integrating three complementary schools of thought – critical geopolitics, socio-techno imaginaries, and industrial policy theory – this article provides the necessary of analytical tools to analyze the competition between the US and China. In this context, it also addresses the concept of data governance as a key area of this competition.

Method: The present study uses a qualitative approach to analyze the geopolitics of artificial intelligence in the era of great power competition between the United States and China. The complex and multifaceted nature of this phenomenon necessitates a method that can understand the deeper layers of power, discourse, and meanings; therefore, we used a qualitative comparative analytical design.

Results and Discussion: Fundamental differences in approaches to AI governance and industrial policy between China and the United States, rooted in their political systems, values, and national socio-technical imaginaries, have led to structural differences in these policies. The state-centered, centralized, and command-and-control approach in China, versus the market-oriented approach with targeted and increasing government interventions in the United States, represent distinct strategies for shaping and controlling the global technological space. These differences have directly led to the formation of distinct and divergent technological ecosystems and have profound implications for value chains, standards, and innovation orientations in the global AI industry. While China emphasizes self-sufficiency and centralized control, the United States seeks to maintain technological superiority by driving private sector innovation and limiting the access of competitors. Analyzing these differences from a combined perspective of critical geopolitics, socio-technical imaginaries, and industrial politics shows how the struggle for geopolitical power, in the form of material policies and approaches, is shaping the future of artificial intelligence and global order.

Conclusion: In line with the first sub-objective (comparative analysis of governance and industrial policy approaches), divergent state approaches in China and the increasingly market-oriented US, rooted in their different national philosophies and values, shape the material basis of competition and directly lead to consequences such as technological polarization. Also, in response to the second sub-objective (examining discursive dimensions, the role of socio-technical imaginaries and strategic semiotics), we explained how immaterial dimensions such as socio-technical imaginaries and discourses play a vital role in shaping the perception of AI, its use as strategic semiotics and the representation of competition in the context of critical geopolitics, and influence interactions between actors. Finally, in fulfilling the third sub-objective (explaining geopolitical implications), we made it clear that the complex interaction of these material and immaterial dynamics leads to far-reaching consequences for the global order; Consequences such as increased risk of conflict, disruption of trade and competition in the South are understandable from a critical geopolitical perspective and indicate the realignment of power and space in the age of AI.