The world seems to be hurling towards World War III in all the possible scenarios: hot war, cold war, and proxy war. The battleground seems to have expanded beyond physical to digital or virtual/mixed reality with technology like drones. Moreover, the line between civilian and military targets seems to have blurred (especially in Ukraine) with the use of technology or internet connectivity to target critical infrastructure such as water and electricity. The use of consumer technology such as Starlink is directly or indirectly shaping the battle fronts. More hidden uses of psychological warfare such as fake news all seem fair game to shake the foundation of some societies. Even our minds and dreams might not remain safe amidst this onslaught. If Havana Syndrome is any indication then we can expect the scope to expand to affect the whole population. It’s unclear whether we are at war or just victims of phishing attempts anymore as lines become more and more fuzzy between everything.

Thus, it’s inevitable that a new arms race around AI as the latest general technology will emerge as the next battle ground, if nothing else but for defensive or deterrent purposes. Big tech companies in Seattle and Silicon Valley are also trying to take over the whole technology stack from hardware, software, and apps to AI. So many entities, not just nation-states, will be vying for supremacy in this era with unknown winners. It used to be that technologists didn't have to worry about things such as ethics until the ramifications of the technology became clear years after like social media’s effect on young adults. Their education and background make it so they usually don’t have enough liberal arts education to appreciate these deeper aspects nor does their work have that much reach. However, in this era, technology is so persuasive that it would be disingenuous to say technologists can ignore issues like history and geopolitics. Moreover, decision-makers of all these entities (nations, companies, organizations) do not or will not have a deep understanding of all the issues. Yet they’ll be tasked with making critical decisions, especially investments, with long-term and huge ramifications for the future.

Investment to be a real AI at a fundamental level is expensive but once something is made, access is cheap(er). Without existing rich investment funds or resources, a small player cannot hope to enter the race. Only someone with a bold plan and an understanding of the complexity and scale of the investment required would be able to even have a chance. So far, market forces have only created two real players in the AI race.

The two big elephants in the room are the US and China. In terms of the technology lead and know-how, they’re the current two best in the world. Other candidates seem to have missed out on the AI opportunity window. We can see trade war, tariffs, and other tactics being used by both giants to win this. But the battleground is vast with places like Taiwan unexpectedly being so critical in the international chip industry. Manufacturing equipment from ASML Netherlands is caught in the crosshair. NVIDIA GPU chips are specifically banned from being sold to Chinese companies to delay their ability to train their own AI models. In other words, the US is doing what it can to maintain its lead. But there’s an inherent instability in the governance structure with underlying forces undermining its policies. Moreover, the populist rhetoric of political leaders could spill over to actual policy going against monopolist actions of big tech firms. It could not be arriving at the worst time for the US since the type of scale and coordination needed to win this AI race favors scale.

Meanwhile, historical trends and how empires rise and fall as analyzed by Ray Dalio in Changing World Order seem to imply the inevitable decline of the sole superpower status of the US, and the best it can hope to maintain is shared power or regional hegemony. The US is also using its reserve currency status as an instrument of war which further motivates other players to deleverage themselves from being dependent on the US dollar. In Dalio’s analysis, it’s a lagging indicator and will be the last thing for a superpower to lose and it seems to be trending that way. Whereas China is only reaching its peak now and has strong central decision-making to weather the weaknesses.

China's vision seems to rely on the Surveillance state especially its firewall and ability to shape its physical or digital border as it chooses. Due to its economics, the technology companies have no choice but to comply. It is trying to export the vision, technology, and policies to other countries in Africa or Asia. But ultimately, it’s a very inward-focused approach while trying to wield its power as an international player who can bend the rules. Manufacturing and engineering capabilities domestically or abroad of its members who want to help the motherland abound. Systematic IP transfer as a second-place player is also strong since once the objective and technology are clear, they can out-execute. The only flaw will be whether China can innovate as a first-place player with truly innovative technology while caring about hidden issues such as citizen rights or privacy. It will not be readying its population for potential attacks but rather try to create a citizenry that can be controlled easily.

AI is more than just a technological change facing humanity. It's a fork in the road for the type of society anyone would be happy to live in. While economics and security are basic needs that people might initially care for, other values might rise in importance as more abundant societies are created. Western countries, including but not limited to the US, seem a bit bankrupt in terms of higher spiritual pursuits that people seem to yearn for in their souls. The type of tech utopia usually espoused by Westerners is nothing more than a materialistic, virtual hedonistic meaningless existence.

But if a country isn’t strong, and has enough energy to protect itself and its residences then it’ll be easily taken by others in this world. The temptation to create an autonomous robot army will be high but ultimately the incentive structure of the world has to be fixed so people’s inner demons can be addressed or at least channeled so everyone can partake in a prosperous and meaningful future.

The world needs a viable third option beyond the USA and China. Can India play that role?

Dr Badri Narayanan Gopalakrishnan is Distinguished Fellow, Pahle India Foundation, and Kelvin Lwin is Founder and CEO, Alin.ai, San Francisco.