































IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

The Race for Artificial Intelligence

Anthony Valiaveedu & Peter F. Rybinski

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Abstract

As witnessed in the 1927 film Metropolis and in numerous novels before, the concept of the
Artificial Intelligence threat is not new. However, the threat of Artificial Intelligence has not
changed dramatically throughout the decades. Instead, it is becoming a greater reality. In 2016,
developers from Google created an advancement that changed the world. Upon showcasing their
Artificial Intelligence name ‘DeepMind’ in a public expo, governments and corporations around
the world instantly became interested in the effects that this creation can bring. However, this
zero-sum race to develop the first “strong AI” will have immense ramifications throughout the
world. This paper will explore the geopolitical impact of Artificial Intelligence at both, the
domestic and international, levels. Furthermore, the paper explores the various nations leading in
Artificial development and the potential they have in their quest for Artificial Intelligence
dominance. More specifically, as the United States and China are the current leaders in Artificial
Intelligence research and development, the majority of this paper will analyze the effect
Artificial Intelligence will have in the future between and within these two nations.

52



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

Introduction

“Artificial intelligence is the future... for all humankind. It comes with colossal opportunities, but
also threats that are difficult to predict. Whoever becomes the leader in this sphere will become

the ruler of the world.” - Russian President Vladimir Putin

In 2016, Google engineers pioneered the beginnings of modern artificial intelligence
development. Under the company called “DeepMind”, the engineers constructed “AlphaGo” to
showcase the power Artificial intelligence can have. Through a process of machine learning,
AlphaGo was fed many Go games and was able to compete at a competitive level. This was
showcased in 2016 in the Google DeepMind Challenge Match where AlphaGo won against 18
time world champion Lee Sodel. Unlike former computers, AlphaGo’s use of neural networks
meant that it “learned” how the game was played and was able to out compute a human (Xu).
This testament began a shift in the global mindset towards Artificial intelligence.

The Google DeepMind Challenge Match became a landmark in Artificial Intelligence
development. Soon afterwards, many governments and corporations became interested in how
such computational power can be put to use. Thus began the race for Artificial Intelligence
dominance.

At the time of this paper, there are two clear leaders in Artificial Intelligence
development, the first being the United States and the second China. These two counties have
dedicated a significant amount of resources to develop Artificial Intelligence. This has fostered a
new great-power competition that pits two very diverse ideologies against one another. With
China posed to become an Artificial Intelligence superpower by 2030, the timeline is short
between these two world powers (Goujon).  This will be explored in the later sections.

Potential for Artificial Intelligence within Industries
The race for completing the first real AI is a critical point in humanity’s societal and

technological evolution, as it has the potential to redefine the structure of modern society by
streamlining nearly every factor associated with modern society and governance. Among the
most recent developments of civilization stands mass surveillance, which currently revolves
around networks of cameras and programs that collect keywords from calls, tweets, messages,
and other forms of communications data. However, this data is normally analyzed by people to
identify real and potential threats. AI promises to cut out the middle man, and bridges the gap
between surveillance and action. Already, corporations are pursuing the means towards
minimizing costs through automation, but one company, Anduril Industries, promises AI for
federal government use. Anduril is currently working on numerous projects, but perhaps the
most ambitious one is their virtual border wall.

The virtual border wall is a project that has been in development since June, 2020, in
cooperation between Anduril and US Customs and Border Protection. It is a project that has
received bipartisan support, which only lends to its feasibility and efficiency. The project intends
to create a large network of solar powered sensor towers that are managed by their proprietary
Lattice Platform, a software that approaches true AI by utilizing a fusion of sensors, machine
learning and a massive mesh network between all operating instances in order to create a single
autonomous operating system capable not only of collecting surrounding thermal signatures, but
also using its machine learning functions to differentiate between wildlife and people. With this

53



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

network established, the United States will be able to drastically reduce the operating cost of
border protection, which will allow funds to be allocated elsewhere.

Furthermore, Anduril has been contracted by the US Air Force and the UK Royal Navy
to create automated surveillance mechanisms capable of maintaining constant watch over
battlefield conditions and hostile territories 24/7, which frees up a great deal of already limited
manpower that would have been wasted on patrolling vast quantities of land. Already, “the
artificial intelligence and ISR systems from Anduril are game changing technologies for the
Royal Marines Future Commando Force. Anduril is now part of the UK NavyX accelerator
program to get battle winning technology straight into the hands of our warfighters,” said
Colonel Dan Cheeseman, Royal Navy Chief Technology Officer (Allison). AI promises to
deliver war changing tactical information to deployed units in a matter of minutes, which allows
whichever force that controls a suitable AI to counter any attempted hostile maneuvers. True AI
systems could scout an entire country and map out ambushes, IEDs, and hostile bases at rates
faster than any human-only force could ever attain, which will reduce casualties and will make
guerilla warfare almost obsolete

In addition to the socio-political effects of Artificial Intelligence, AI has the potential to
change the health and science sectors as well. In the biotech industry, Artificial Intelligence
could be harnessed to detect various diseases. Research done under Cardiff University found that
the potential for AI in detection can provide better risk assessments to patients and prolong
patient lives. Aside from the diagnosis and prognosis benefits, AI can help reduce hospital costs
and reduce medicare costs (Cardiff University). In addition, Artificial Intelligence can be
uniquely used for disease mapping. This can help track a pandemic and provide essential data at
hyper-speeds. Artificial Intelligence can also transform the process of how to fight pandemics
too. Instead of a passive approach, AI can predict future models for disease spread and analyze
the effectiveness of various counter-measures (Mahmoud AAF and Pray LA).

With the ease of data mapping explained earlier, AI has the potential to revolutionize
current climate sciences. Machine learning can help understand the current state of the
environment and predict weather patterns. This will provide effect tools necessary to stall the
current climate trajectory. Furthermore, the possibility of new products and services that AI
brings to the table can help minimize humanity’s climate footprint and potentially reverse
climate trajectories (Marr).

United States
The United States has been seen as a forerunner in developing innovative technologies

for a long time. In the context of Artificial Intelligence, it is no different. Recent data shows that
the United States still has the largest amount of AI startups in the world and is considered to have
a far more nurturing economy for growth in AI development (Barhat) (Chun). Furthermore, a
recent Stanford report recognized that the United States has more conference papers in Artificial
Intelligence. In addition, a majority of AI Ph.D. graduates in the United States are from abroad
(Zhang et al.). This creates an interesting dynamic of outside influence in AI development within
the United States.

In regards to social and political views about Artificial Intelligence, the United States has
similar (if not the same) views about AI and AI development as other western nations. In terms
of military capabilities, the United States primarily views AI as an enabler and as a means of data
analysis. Many reports on AI being used in the US military have  been on tracking targets and

54



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

generally reconnaissance activities (Siddiqui). Furthermore, the current ecosystem of the United
States economy fosters open dialogue and communication. This ecosystem not only provides
clarity in AI development, but it also promotes discussion in AI ethics (Kania). This is valuable
because it can promote healthy AI development.

During the Trump Administration, there were significant pushes for AI development.
Specifically, under a massive initiative by the administration, AI funding and development
became more streamlined under the creation of the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative
Office under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. The administration
pushed to create a coalition between the private, public and academic sectors in order to develop
AI faster. Furthermore, under the administration, there was a large push for allocating more
research and development spending towards AI (Cordell). However, as mentioned earlier, most
of the research done on AI has been by foreign graduates. Given the administration's harsh
rhetoric and actions on immigration policy, the administration potentially reduced its potential in
achieving effective AI development by dissuading or barring potential experts from entering the
nation and contributing to the United States’ intellectual capital.

With the new administration illustrating new goals in regards to AI, a few steps would be
beneficial for keeping the US at the forefront of AI development. The utmost priority should be
on further development of AI ethics domestically and abroad. This could counter potentially
unethical uses of Artificial Intelligence, such as mass surveillance that infringes on civil liberties
or espionage against other nations, and promote safe development of AI. Given the United
States’s standing in international law and various multilateral institutions, the United States
should promote its engagement in various institutions to enforce ethical uses of artificial
intelligence. Furthermore, developing pathlines to foster more domestic graduates can help the
United States to be sustainable in this endeavour. The other option would be to ease immigration
policy for these individuals. A streamlined and more attainable path to citizenship would provide
a large incentive for attracting more of these high-skilled workers from abroad. However, the
large dependency of foreign graduates puts the US in a dependent position in future AI
development. In addition, the writing above indicates that the main aspect of the United States in
being ahead in this race is because of its relatively democratic ecosystem. Promoting that
ecosystem can help promote further AI start-ups.

Also, it is paramount that the United States employs a massive effort to strengthen its
cybersecurity capabilities. Over the last decade, cyber attacks have steadily been rising
internationally from nearly every direction. Between Russian hackers constantly probing and
striking at US systems, terrorist groups attacking telecom companies, and Chinese corporate
espionage (CSIS), US research is far from safe. If the United States is to maintain its lead in AI,
it needs to create active measures for monitoring any breaches in cybersecurity as the
consequences of detecting them too late could be severe. Some have put forward the idea of
utilizing AI research to create automated defenses against cyberattacks; using AI to protect
current AI research as well as the rest of the nation, which will strengthen current cybersecurity
protocols if implemented correctly, but achieving a functional and secure implementation,
especially while the US still has yet to develop a true AI, will be a great challenge. Among the
most glaring flaws of making a totally automated cybersecurity system is that the program will
become a very clear target for hackers, and even one successful attack could cripple the nation’s
cybersecurity capabilities, leaving a wealth of data and research unprotected. At the moment, the
US has yet to create any meaningful solutions to this critical issue, with the National Security

55



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

Commision on Artificial Intelligence saying that AI processes, functions, and parameters need to
be properly documented in a transparent and standardized manner so that all AIs may be
properly audited, however they have yet to indicate how this documentation should actually be
used in order to improve cybersecurity. While the NSCAI has not elaborated on how detailed
documentation aids in maintaining security, proper documentation is still key to maintaining the
integrity of AI and preventing hacking. The best use of this documentation would be to pursue a
policy of accountability where AI developers make the details of their programs readily available
so as to facilitate third party stress testing and vulnerability probing (Wolff). Only if the US
maintains a free and innovative sphere where AI security may constantly be challenged and
advanced will it be able to preserve its lead in the current AI race.

More physical threats also exist to the United States’ AI lead. History has shown that
research that can be stolen in order to bolster the capabilities of a foreign actor. The most notable
and pervasive threat of this comes from both the Chinese government and their tech giants. For
example, in 2019, the US Justice Department charged the company Huawei with deliberately
incentivising theft of foreign technology by offering employees a substantial bonus if they were
able to procure foreign technologies; in this case the theft was of telecommunications technology
from T-Mobile. Later, in 2020, it was found that Charles Lieber, head of Harvard University’s
chemistry department, lied about receiving money from the Chinese government while receiving
a federal grant. As a pioneer in the field of nanotechnology, Lieber is the most prominent
individual to date that the CCP has managed to buy out onto their side of the tech rivalry (Holt).
While there are not any known instances of AI espionage by the Chinese government, their
“whole of society” espionage strategy, as well as their dedication to rapid AI development and
dominance, are strong indicators that the Chinese government is attempting to to infiltrate and
subvert US research programs. The “whole of society” approach focuses on accepting anyone as
a field agent towards the goal of having an overwhelmingly high volume of implanted people
throughout all strata of a target country pursuing their ends (Eftimiades) In order to counter this
program, the US government needs to either attempt its own infiltration of Chinese intelligence
operations in order to root out agents and compromised individuals, or closely monitor anyone
across both the public and private sectors that is involved in critical AI research. Also, a strong
working relationship between the public and private sector is necessary to ensure that corporate
entities do not misuse AI data. However, the US should take caution, as witch hunts and paranoia
against researchers may prevent espionage but will ultimately hamper both the speed and quality
of AI research, in a similar way  to how McCarthyism led to a period of paranoia and ideological
conformity that shook people’s ability to cooperate.

China
The Chinese Communist Party rules with a focus on driving the nation forward in one

direction, without deviation, that will ultimately result in the nation’s dominance of the
international geopolitical stage. The CCP has historically viewed AI as a tool towards
consolidating their power and as a weapon, where other nations focus on the benefits to scientific
development. Among the many tools of the CCP’s arsenal is the system of civil-military
relations(CMR), which is based on the joint focus and cooperation of civilian and defense
industries in order to advance one goal. This system is dangerous, as it promotes China’s
development of an aggressive AI (Allen). The CMR system also makes Chinese AI development

56



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

unpredictable, because “[the] same facility might support testing of a luxury self-driving car one
week, and a self-driving tank the next” (Allen).

In theory, all of Chinese society operating towards one goal, in this case the development
of a true AI, is a scientific and industrial machine that is poised to overtake the US in AI
development within the next decade, should they meet the goals outlined in their 2017 AI
Development Plan (AIDP). That goal is to surpass the United States by 2025, and to become the
uncontested primary center of AI innovation in the world by 2030.

In the pursuit of this goal, China has taken several steps towards advancing their interests.
First, the CCP adopted a “wish list” of AI technologies and functions that prompted 15 of 31
local provincial governments in China to establish their AI plans following the AIDP’s
announcement. This has created a massive flow of both local and national government funding
towards AI. They have also created a “national team” of tech giants (Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent)
and innovative startups (iFlytek) in 2017, with facial recognition startup Sensetime being
included in 2018 and 10 companies in 2019, including tech titans (Huawei, JD.com, Xiaomi and
other)  in order to coordinate AI development across China’s largest and most innovative hybrid
firms (Dai). While these companies still compete with each other in numerous fields, the CCP’s
ownership of portions of these companies will ensure that they are still able to make joint
headway in the future.

Second, the Chinese government has opted to learn from past mistakes, such as their
2014 semiconductor plan, and has made the standardization of AI research a priority within the
nation. On page six of the 2018 AI Standardization White Paper, a Chinese document outlining
standardized guidelines for domestic AI development, it states that “AI standardization is still in
its infancy, and this white paper only serves as an initial link connecting AI technologies, AI
industries, and standardization. It will be revised constantly in the future based on the developing
requirements of technologies, industries, and standardization” (CESI), which illustrates the
forward thinking and innovative approach that China is taking towards AI development, as they
were already laying the groundwork for their coordinated development in 2018, while remaining
cognizant of the constantly shifting demands and dilemmas that arise over the course of any
project. This flexible approach stands in sharp contrast to the US which has yet to take any
definitive steps towards creating a focused AI policy.

Third, China has recognized the human capital necessary to maintain pace with the US
and has taken proactive steps to recruit and train AI specialists both domestically and abroad.
The AIDP focuses on both “gathering” manpower by establishing international research centers
abroad in order to recruit foreign specialists that could spur innovation, while also establishing a
“training” approach in the long term, which begins at the creation of the "Intelligent Science and
Technology major” that has been adopted by over 50 universities with the goal of cultivating
environments that will eventually allow China to have a massive, highly skilled pool of domestic
AI experts, which they currently severely lack (Ding).

These programs are already bearing fruit  From 2017 to 2020, China surpassed the US in
quantity of academic journals being published in regards to AI technologies (Zhang). While
some will be quick to point out that the quality of these journals is sub par, given that these
papers are rarely cited while US papers are some of the most cited in the world, the Chinese
government is already trying to rectify this issue through their “gathering and training” approach.
China is building a very large foundational infrastructure for future AI research that is ready to
accommodate any experts they may recruit or train in the future.

57



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

The Chinese government has pursued AI development vigorously, though in their efforts
towards being the first to develop AI, they have neglected dialogues on the ethical questions
associated with AI development. The West has for the most part committed to avoiding the
development of AI weaponry and promoting testing AI in a safe manner, while also thinking
about the potential of AI sentience. No such dialogue has been popularized in China. Its
disregard for the ethical components of AI development has the potential for many unintended
side effects. Among these side effects is the threat of rogue AI, or an AI which has deviated from
its directives and is instead a potential threat to all computerized systems, which would have the
capabilities of compromising entire systems internationally due to the interconnected nature of
the internet (The Economist).

In the past, China’s large technological projects have run into many pitfalls. As shown by
their 2014 semiconductor fund, the CCP is more than capable of setting ambitious goals, though
delivering on them has proven more difficult. The 2014 plan illustrated that the politicized nature
of Chinese research has prevented real progress, as fundings were typically allocated towards
politically connected research institutions rather than those that have shown merit in R&D. Also,
they failed to allocate the promised funds towards research institutes, giving only a fraction of
the $150 billion promised. Finally, the local governments were also associated with this project,
and the local projects often resulted in duplicates and shoddy works (Ding).

In order to succeed this time, the CCP will need to maintain accountability while also
cracking down on local corruption. Furthermore, they will need to deliver on the promised funds
while also allocating the money to institutions that show the most potential, rewarding skill and
innovation over party connections. Also, a rogue AI could cripple a nation if they are incapable
of containing it, so the CCP needs to ensure that ethical and safety questions are asked and
answered throughout the entire development process. Above all, the Chinese government needs
to be cautious about their “wishlist”, as groups rushing to curry favor will rush out these projects
without proper testing. If the CCP could properly foster the cooperation that they are trying to
build through the national team, it may avoid the issues of duplication and politically motivated
rushed projects, which would set them on a steady path towards properly harnessing the powers
of AI.

Areas of Escalation
As the race for creating artificial intelligence becomes the new cold war, this competition

creates the situations for various potentials of conflict escalation to occur. Four primary issues
with the current race for AI supremacy are: Hyper-war, Nuclear deterrence, Unipolarity, and
Rogue AI.

As explained previously, China’s current vision of Artificial intelligence is a view
towards an integration of civilian and militaristic technology. This push changes how AI will be
viewed. This push towards civil-military fusion changes warfare from informatized warfare to
what PLA thinkers call “intelligentized” warfare. Not only would this type of artificial
intelligence promote authoritarianism by offering AI as a means of militaristic control, but it also
changes how future AI will be developed. By viewing AI as a militaristic tool, other nations will
promote its use as the same. That would change AI from a tool of peaceful change to an
offensive weapon (Kania). This causes issues because the change in how other nations view AI
can lead to full scale arms-race similar to the ColdWar. Only by disentangling military
applications from AI and clearly separating those two can AI be developed safely. Furthermore,

58



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

opening dialogues and providing deep engagement can provide engagements on the risks
towards security applications that AI poses. However, this is not the case in the status-quo. As AI
becomes more dual-use and entangled with militaristic applications, it risks sparking a new
arms-race dynamic (Kania). The issue of a strong militaristic approach towards Artificial
Intelligence is that it risks removing the human factor in warfare and pushes for rapid response
without evaluating consequences. This hyper-speed can accelerate war into a hyper-war. Not
only will this risk miscalculations that can lead to annihilation, but it also risks a world where
there is no human safeguard as a fail safe. Only by promoting safe democratic development of
artificial intelligence can it be possible to slowly integrate its power to provide stability in the
future (Siddiqui).

Aside from the possibilities of hyper-war, Artificial intelligence has the potential to
change current nuclear deterrence policies and has the possibility to create shifts with the current
unipolar system. In the aspect of nuclear deterrence, AI provides the chance for other nations to
circumvent traditional modes of nuclear deterrence due to the diverse applications it can provide
from automation to cybersecurity. AI cyberweapons can cripple key infrastructure through its
fast computation and rapid response times. Due to the effectiveness that AI provides, it may be
possible that AI can guarantee nuclear and non-nuclear retaliation, and strengthen a nation’s
deterrent capabilities (Straub). This change in deterrence policy might shift how great-powers
view each other and provide the rise of other powers.

In addition to the change in deterrence policies, Artificial intelligence has the potential to
change the current unipolar order. Not only through the economic means as explained earlier, but
also through the militaristic means as well. AI is considered by many to be a conflict enabler,
since it allows conflict to happen with increased effectiveness. By shifting through data at
hyper-speeds, AI can provide speed and accuracy to planning wars. This can provide
sustainability for military overreach for a Unipole. By providing effective decision-making, this
can help reduce costs and allow shifting resources to hotspots. Furthermore, it allows change in
command and control centers to exercise real time control and transform electronic warfare.
However, this means of control and military power can disrupt the global order. If another nation
develops AI first, it can disrupt and potentially upend the current United States military
supremacy (Horowitz) (Valantin).

Another issue that might arise during the race for AI supremacy is the potential for rogue
AI development to occur. The current lack of strict ethics in the current state of artificial
intelligence development poses a risk for other nations to unintentionally create a rogue system
that can develop ungoverned. This poses a risk to the global system. One scenario can potentially
become a Terminator-like plot (Siddiqui).

Conclusion
Artificial intelligence will soon shift the international balance of power in favor of

whichever nation is able to properly harness it first. It has the potential to revolutionize daily life
if handled properly, however the advances that will likely develop in surveillance technology are
vulnerable to being misused. In addition, the potential in data analysis by AI can reshape current
biotech industries by developing solutions and promoting hospital efficiencies. The current
status-quo showcases a race of AI supremacy between the United States and China. Both nations
have the same drive to develop AI, but they have different views of it. While the United States
views AI primarily as a means of data processing, the current view of the Chinese AI industry is

59



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

the militaristic fusion of AI. This race can pose significant effects in the future. Focused
development of civil-military fused AI systems can spark a new arms-race for autonomous
weapons, which can cause “hyper-war”. It can also shift the current unipolar system by upending
traditional modes of deterrence and disrupting current United States military superiority.
Conversely, it can also strengthen the current geopolitical order and allow the United States a
path to a sustainable hegemony. All in all, artificial intelligence will change the geopolitical
landscape in the future. Without a strong base for ethics, the race for AI runs the possibility of
posing an existential risk. Strong efforts need to be maintained among all parties interested in AI
development in order to maintain the stable and safe growth of AI technology so that it may be
used for humanity’s advancement in the future, instead of its regression.

60



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

References

Allen, Gregory C. “China’s Artificial Intelligence Strategy Poses a Credible Threat to U.S. Tech

Leadership.” Council on Foreign Relations, Council on Foreign Relations, 4 December

2017,

https://www.cfr.org/blog/chinas-artificial-intelligence-strategy-poses-credible-threat-us-te

ch-leadership. Accessed 5 March 2021.

Allison, George. “Royal Navy partners with Anduril Industries.” UK Defence Journal, UK

Defence Journal, 14 June 2019,

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/royal-navy-partners-with-anduril-industries/#comments.

Accessed 5 March 2021.

Barhat, Vikram. “China is determined to steal A.I. crown from US and nothing, not even a trade

war, will stop it.” CNBC, NBC, 4 May 2018,

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/04/china-aims-to-steal-us-a-i-crown-and-not-even-trade-

war-will-stop-it.html. Accessed 4 March 2021.

Cardiff University. “Could artificial intelligence improve patient care in the NHS?” Phys,

ScienceX, 29 Janurary 2019,

https://phys.org/news/2019-01-artificial-intelligence-patient-nhs.html. Accessed 6 March

2021.

Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Significant Cyber Incidents.” Center for

Strategic and International Studies, Center for Strategic and International Studies,

https://www.csis.org/programs/strategic-technologies-program/significant-cyber-incidents

. Accessed 7 March 2021.

61



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

China Electronics Standardization Institute (CESI). “Original CSET Translation of "Artificial

Intelligence Standardization White Paper" [人工智能标准化白皮书（2018版)],.”Center

for Security and Emerging Technology, China Electronics Standardization Institute, 12

May 2020,

https://cset.georgetown.edu/research/artificial-intelligence-standardization-white-pape.

Accessed 5 March 2021.

Chun, Andy. “China’s AI dream is well on its way to becoming a reality.” South China Morning

Post, South China Morning Post, 28 April 2018,

https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/2142641/chinas-ai-dream-well-it

s-way-becoming-reality. Accessed 4 March 2021.

Cordell, Carten. “White House continues push for public-private collaboration on AI.”

FedScoop, Scoop News Group, 10 July 2018,

https://www.fedscoop.com/ostp-chief-says-white-house-wants-public-private-collaboratio

n-ai/. Accessed 6 March 2021.

Dai, Sarah. “China adds Huawei, Hikvision to expanded ‘national team’ spearheading country’s

AI efforts.” South China Morning Post, outh China Morning Post Publishers Ltd, 30

August 2019,

https://www.scmp.com/tech/big-tech/article/3024966/china-adds-huawei-hikvision-expan

ded-national-team-spearheading. Accessed 5 March 2021.

Ding, Jeffery. “China’s Current Capabilities, Policies, and Industrial Ecosystem in AI.” Center

for Security and Emerging Technology, Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and

Security Review Commission, 7 June 2019,

62



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/Chinas-Capabilities-Policies-and-Industr

ial-Ecosystem-in-AI.pdf. Accessed 5 March 2021.

The Economist. “Why China’s AI push is worrying.” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper

Limited, 29 July 2017,

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2017/07/27/why-chinas-ai-push-is-worrying.

Accessed 6 March 2021.

Eftimiades, Nick. “The 5 Faces Of Chinese Espionage: The World’s First ‘Digital Authoritarian

State.” Breaking Defense, Breaking Defense, 22 October 2020,

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/10/the-5-faces-of-chinese-espionage-the-worlds-first-d

igital-authoritarian-state/. Accessed 7 March 2021.

Goujon, Reva. “AI and the Return of Great Power Competition.” Stratfor, Stratfor, 2 August

2018, https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/ai-and-return-great-power-competition.

Accessed 5 March 2021.

Holt, Alexander. “A brief history of US-China espionage entanglements.” MIT Technology

Review, massachusetts institute of technology, 3 September 2020,

https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/09/03/1007609/trade-secrets-china-us-espionag

e-timeline/. Accessed 7 March 2021.

Horowitz, Michael C. “The promise and peril of military applications of artificial intelligence.”

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, The Bulletin, 23 April 2018,

https://thebulletin.org/2018/04/the-promise-and-peril-of-military-applications-of-artificial

-intelligence/. Accessed 6 March 2018.

63



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

Kania, Elsa B. “China Is On a Whole-of-Nation Push for AI. The US Must Match It.” Defense

One, Defense One, 8 December 2017,

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2017/12/us-china-artificial-intelligence/144414/.

Accessed 6 March 2021.

Kania, Elsa B. “China’s AI Giants Can’t Say No to the Party.” Foreign Policy, Foreign Policy, 2

August 2018,

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/02/chinas-ai-giants-cant-say-no-to-the-party/.

Accessed 6 March 2021.

Kania, Elsa B. “Tech entanglement—China, the United States, and artificial intelligence.”

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, The Bulletin, 6 Feburary 2018,

https://thebulletin.org/2018/02/tech-entanglement-china-the-united-states-and-artificial-in

telligence/. Accessed 6 March 2021.

Mahmoud AAF, and Pray LA. “Scientific and Policy Tools for Countering Bioterrorism.” Edited

by Knobler SL. Biological Threats and Terrorism: Assessing The Science and Response

Capabilities: Workshop Summary, National Academies Press (US), 2002. NCBI,

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK98397/#_ch6_s1_. Accessed 6 March 2021.

Marr, Bernard. “The Amazing Ways We Can Use AI To Tackle Climate Change.” Forbes,

Forbes, 21 Feburary 2018,

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2018/02/21/the-amazing-ways-we-can-use-ai-t

o-tackle-climate-change/?sh=44990ff4a357. Accessed 6 March 2021.

Siddiqui, Sabena. “Artificial intelligence and the risks of a ‘hyper-war.’” Asia Times, Asia Times,

12 July 2018,

64



IJOIS Spring 2021, Volume VIII Program in Arms Control &
Domestic and International Security

https://asiatimes.com/2018/07/artificial-intelligence-and-the-risks-of-a-hyper-war/.

Accessed 06 March 2021.

Straub, Jeremy. “Artificial intelligence is the weapon of the next Cold War.” The Conversation,

The Conversation, 29 Janurary 2018,

https://theconversation.com/artificial-intelligence-is-the-weapon-of-the-next-cold-war-86

086. Accessed 6 March 2021.

Valantin, Dr. Jean-Michel. “Militarizing Artificial Intelligence – China (1).” The Red Team

Analysis Society, The Red Team Analysis Society, 23 April 2018,

https://www.redanalysis.org/2018/04/23/militarizing-artificial-intelligence-china-1/.

Accessed 6 March 2021.

Wolff, Josephine. “How to improve cybersecurity for artificial intelligence.” Brookings Institute,

Brookings Institute, 9 June 2020,

https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-to-improve-cybersecurity-for-artificial-intellige

nce/. Accessed 7 March 2021.

Xu, Yiqing. “AI Behind AlphaGo: Machine Learning and Neural Network.” Illumin, University

of Southern California, 7 March 2019,

https://illumin.usc.edu/ai-behind-alphago-machine-learning-and-neural-network/.

Accessed 4 March 2021.

Zhang, Daniel, et al. “The AI Index 2021 Annual Report.” AI Index Steering Committee,

Human-Centered AI Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, March 2021. Accessed

5 March 2021.

65


