Road Divide: The Chinese Model in Artificial Intelligence

Chinese Premier Li Qiang officially announced Global Artificial Intelligence Governance Action Plan as the opening speaker at the World Artificial Intelligence Conference on 26 July 2025. Three days before the conference held in Shanghai introduced its action plan, the United States had also announced a artificial intelligence action plan. The close timing of the publication of these two plans and the numerous contradictions between them have led many to perceive China’s plan as a response to the United States. However, the long-term planning processes inherent in artificial intelligence policies and the consistency of China’s plan with its longstanding state policies strengthen the argument that this is not coincidental.

When comparing the two countries’ action plans, the United States’ effort to maintain its leadership in AI technologies announces a revival of Cold War-era space race dynamics, adopting an aggressive and exclusionary approach. This stance aligns with the broader trend of the United States distancing itself from the liberal international order. In contrast, China’s document prioritizes international cooperation and institutions, reflecting its goal of becoming a new center within the existing global order. This position can also be seen as consistent with China’s broader foreign policy.

Speaking at the opening ceremony of the conference, Chinese Premier Li Qiang emphasized that artificial intelligence presents both opportunities and risks for humanity and stressed the urgent need for the international community to establish a globally accepted framework for the development and governance of AI through cooperation at the global level. In this context, found called for the implementation of the principles outlined in the United Nations framework for AI governance.

China’s action plan, which employs a notably inclusive tone compared to American Plan, argues that China views artificial intelligence as a tool that must serve the common good of humanity. As a result, it advocates a balanced approach between rapid technological advancement and the necessary safeguards for security and ethics. Given China’s current prominence in surveillance technologies and its efforts to cultivate a positive image in global public opinion, one may question how much of the image drawn in the 2025 Action Plan reflects reality.

Since the announcement of New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan in 2017, Beijing has alternated between a regulatory and a proactive stance on AI, depending on economic and political circumstances. The 2025 Action Plan reflects both these approaches simultaneously. It presents a balanced, cautious, complex, and novel reflects the strategy that emphasizes both opportunities and risks. China has introduced binding regulations targeting various AI applications, including algorithmic guidelines and content generation. Previous regulations have covered areas such as controlling and monitoring online-generated content and information, protecting personal data and security, regulating algorithmic influence in consumer decision-making, and mandating labeling of AI-generated content on social media platforms. Key documents underpinning these regulations, such as the Cyberspace Administration of China’s (CAC) “People's Republic of China Cybersecurity Law” (2017) and “White Paper on Reliable Artificial Intelligence Standardization” (2021), can be viewed as precursors to the security and controllability principles of the 2025 Global AI Action Plan.

The Global AI Governance Action Plan employs a general policy language common in China’s policy documents but lacks clear specificity. In this regard, declaring its commitment to placing AI at the service of humanity is a recurring rhetorical theme in China’s official documents. In addition to such statements, the plan encourages the development, adoption, and implementation of AI through the participation of all actors—states, private sector, academia, etc. The document, consistent with China’s strong conception of national sovereignty^【1】, foregrounds national sovereignty in global AI development and governance. This emphasis can be understood as part of China’s broader struggle to counter international accusations of human rights violations and to manage its global image on these issues.

China states that the opportunities offered by artificial intelligence can accelerate sustainable economic and social development and green transition, as outlined in the principles of United Nations 2030 Goal, and views this as a crucial opportunity in the fight against the climate crisis. China’s emphasis on international institutions is highly significant in today’s geopolitical context. While under the Trump administration the United States withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement, suspended financial support for international institutions, imposed sanctions on the International Criminal Court, and sought to reshape the global order established after World War II, China has adopted a stance in favor of preserving that order. This presents a picture contrary to the widespread perception that positions China as a revisionist power opposing the status quo represented by the United States.

The Global Action Plan argues that, alongside international cooperation in regulation, a favorable innovation ecosystem must be created to support AI development. The plan references the “AI Plus” initiative launched in 2024, aimed at integrating AI with the private sector, and asserts that enhancing technological collaboration and researching and realizing the potential domains of AI are essential for the growth of the digital economy expresses that it will be supported. In promoting international scientific and technological cooperation and removing barriers in areas such as technological infrastructure and access to high-quality data, China appears to adopt a “laissez-faire” approach to technological development, in contrast to the exclusionary ethos of the American Action Plan. For China, which already possesses a $83.45 billion AI industry as of April 2025, high-tech industries are critically important not only for enhancing its international competitiveness in science and technology but also for economic development.

Another notable feature of the Global AI Governance Action Plan is its emphasis on preventing the monopolization of AI technologies and the importance of sharing new technologies with Global South^【2】 countries. Premier Li underscored this point in his speech, stating, “As long as key resources and capabilities for AI remain concentrated in a few countries and companies, and technological monopolies, controls, and restrictions persist, AI will become an exclusive game for a small group.”^【3】 In this spirit, China has announced its readiness to share its experience and technological products to help countries worldwide build their AI capacities. As expected, realizing this goal requires establishing digital infrastructure covering areas such as clean energy, next-generation networks, and intelligent computing power. Considering China’s dominant position in regulation and its market share in these sectors, this rhetoric can be seen as both an attempt to portray itself as a benevolent steward of the developing world and a strategic move to create new markets. In documents presented to the international public, unlike its domestic documents, tolerant and use of a bilingual approach supports this stance. When viewed as a strategic maneuver to gain international legitimacy and form a bloc aligned with its own vision to challenge existing Western-dominated governance models, China's popularity has recently surpassed that of the United States appears to be progressing successfully so far.

To understand China’s AI Action Plan, it is useful to examine it alongside U.S. Artificial Intelligence Action Plan within the context of China-US competition. Although the Chinese and American AI action documents, published three days apart, share some commonalities—such as emphasizing the opportunities of AI, encouraging open-source AI models, and acknowledging potential risks like unemployment—they also exhibit significant differences. While China’s plan repeatedly highlights terms such as “Globalization, International Cooperation, Partnership,” the American plan is titled “Win the Race,” clearly revealing this contrast. The proportion of the population in In China, it is 80%, and in the United States, it is 40%. who believe AI will positively impact their country’s future may help us understand the social basis of this divergence. Like China’s plan, the American document begins by emphasizing the importance of AI but asserts that the United States must maintain a dominant position in advanced technologies and do whatever is necessary to achieve this.

The American Action Plan follows a different path from China’s balanced approach of control and development. It argues that regulations should be reduced and that initiative, unlike China’s centralized governance model, should reside in the private sector. Departing from China’s emphasis on global cooperation, the American plan calls for sharing AI technological advances only with allied countries and for undermining China’s influence in international institutions regarding AI governance. While China’s plan envisions AI playing a potential role in the green transition, the American plan explicitly rejects the “climate dogma” and advocates adopting the “Build, Baby, Build!” approach for AI infrastructure. In any case, it is clear that these two action plans, with their many contradictions, will shape the future of global AI governance. Only time will reveal which of the two approaches is more sustainable and will prevail in the competition.

Written by Musap Ergani and Emirhan Kartal.