U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping are expected to meet this week as the two nations compete for dominance in artificial intelligence, with both sides expressing concerns about the potential threats rogue AI poses to humanity. While the geopolitical rivalry continues to define the relationship, officials have indicated that discussions may focus on establishing mechanisms to manage shared risks, such as AI-enabled cyberattacks and loss of human control.
The upcoming talks follow meetings in New York between U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, where the two discussed setting up an AI dialogue mechanism. Bessent stated that the U.S. proposed a new "notification mechanism" for AI incidents that could impact national security, aiming for a "shared vision of common goals and common threats."
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative voices and administration officials emphasize maintaining a technological edge over China while managing risks. President Trump has repeatedly stated that "whoever wins AI, wins," insisting that the U.S. must keep its lead. Michael Kratsios, Trump's science and technology adviser, told Fox News that the goal is to have a "fruitful conversation" about avoiding shared risks.
The administration has maintained strict export controls on advanced technologies, with analysts like Alfredo Montufar-Helu of Ankura noting that loosening these restrictions is likely off the table. The U.S. government and American AI companies have stepped up allegations that Chinese labs are engaging in "distillation," or the "malicious" extraction of capabilities from top American AI models, a claim Beijing has rejected.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive analysts and international relations experts argue that dismissing AI safety debates as purely geopolitical competition is a mistake. Sun Chenghao, a senior fellow at the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University, noted that there is "meaningful room for cooperation" regarding risks that harm both nations, such as biological misuse and major model failures.
Xiao Qian, vice dean of the Institute for AI International Governance at Tsinghua University, argued that disagreements make dialogue even more necessary. She stated, "We cannot expect meaningful cooperation on AI safety if one side increasingly treats the other side's technological progress as a national security threat." Xiao emphasized that discussing how to report and communicate during AI-related emergencies can help build technical confidence over time.
What the Numbers Show
Data on AI development indicates that despite U.S. export controls limiting compute power, Chinese AI models led by Moonshot AI and DeepSeek have shown they can be, by some measures, as powerful as U.S. rivals like Anthropic and OpenAI, often at a lower cost. Professor Will Cong of Nanyang Technological University noted that while controls have not stopped China from developing frontier-competitive models, they have slowed its rate of expansion.
Chinese governance documents identify finance, electricity, telecommunications, and transportation as areas potentially exposed to frontier-AI risks, according to Sun Chenghao. Meanwhile, Chinese chip developers have been catching up with the U.S., with companies increasingly turning to domestic chips, which analysts say gives Xi Jinping more confidence in negotiations.
The Bottom Line
The meeting between Trump and Xi represents a critical juncture for global AI governance, with both sides acknowledging that AI threats transcend borders. While the U.S. seeks to maintain its technological advantage through export controls and accusations of IP theft, and China pushes back against what it calls "fearmongering," the proposal for a notification mechanism suggests a potential pathway for de-escalation.
Experts warn that the broader ups and downs of the U.S.-China relationship continue to constrain the AI conversation. Scott Singer, co-director of the China AI Initiative at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, stated that the AI dialogue is getting caught in these broader geopolitical tensions. The success of the talks may depend on whether the leaders can separate safety cooperation from competitive dominance strategies.