The 2025 Paris AI Action Summit marked a pivotal moment in global artificial intelligence governance, convening over 1,000 participants from 100 nations to address AI’s societal, economic, and environmental impacts. While the summit produced a landmark declaration signed by 58 countries[1]—including France, China, and India—the absence of the United States and United Kingdom from the agreement underscored deepening ideological fractures over AI’s future. This post analyzes the summit’s outcomes, the rationale behind Western abstentions, and the implications for international AI policy.
The Summit’s Shift from Safety to Economic Action
Held at Paris’ Grand Palais from February 10–11, 2025, the AI Action Summit deliberately distanced itself from prior gatherings focused on existential risks. Unlike the 2023 Bletchley Park Summit, which emphasized “frontier AI” safety[2], the Paris event prioritized economic opportunities, inclusivity, and sustainability. French President Emmanuel Macron framed the agenda as a corrective to “science fiction” fears about AI surpassing human control, instead urging nations to harness the technology for healthcare, energy, and societal transformation.
This pivot reflected growing recognition of AI’s dual role as both a disruptor and enabler of progress. The First International AI Safety Report[3], published a few weeks earlier, had warned of biases, misinformation, and catastrophic misuse risks. Yet summit organizers sidelined these concerns, focusing instead on bridging digital divides and democratizing access to AI tools. French envoy Anne Bouverot encapsulated this ethos, declaring that AI’s current energy-intensive trajectory was “unsustainable” but solvable through global cooperation[4].
Key initiatives emerged to operationalize these goals:
- Current AI Foundation: A $400 million endowment by France and nine partner nations to develop open-source AI datasets and infrastructure, backed by Google and Salesforce.
- Global Observatories Network: A system to monitor AI’s labor market impacts, aiming to preempt job displacement while maximizing economic opportunities.
- Sustainability Commitments: Binding targets to reduce AI’s energy consumption, which projections suggest could grow tenfold by 2026.
These measures aimed to counter market concentration in AI development, a recurring theme in summit discussions. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has previously stressed the need to “democratize technology” for the Global South, while signatories pledged to prevent monopolies that “hinder industrial recovery”[5].
The Paris Declaration: Principles vs. Practicality
The Statement on Inclusive and Sustainable Artificial Intelligence for People and the Planet outlined six priorities:
- Accessibility: Reducing digital divides through capacity-building in developing nations.
- Ethical Governance: Ensuring AI systems are transparent, safe, and aligned with human rights.
- Market Diversity: Preventing monopolistic practices to foster innovation.
- Labor Protections: Deploying AI to enhance—not erode—workplace opportunities.
- Environmental Sustainability: Developing energy-efficient AI systems.
- Global Cooperation: Strengthening multilateral governance frameworks.
While laudable in scope, the declaration drew criticism for its vagueness. The UK government argued it lacked “practical clarity” on enforcing these principles, particularly regarding national security and governance mechanisms[6].
The US-UK Abstention: Sovereignty vs. Solidarity
The refusal of Washington and London to endorse the declaration revealed a fundamental clash over AI’s governance. US Vice President JD Vance framed the agreement as a threat to innovation, warning that excessive regulation could “kill a transformative industry”[7]. His remarks echoed the Trump administration’s deregulatory playbook, prioritizing private-sector leadership over multilateral constraints.
The UK’s stance proved more paradoxical. Despite hosting the 2023 AI Safety Summit, Britain now cited concerns about “ceding control” to global bodies. A Downing Street spokesperson emphasized preserving “national interest” and security autonomy, rejecting one-size-fits-all governance. This alignment with US skepticism alarmed European partners, with French officials accusing both nations of undermining collective action.[8]
Three factors drove the Anglo-American position:
- National Security Apprehensions: Unspecified fears about AI’s military and surveillance applications, exacerbated by US-China tensions.
- Regulatory Sovereignty: Resistance to binding commitments that might conflict with domestic policies, such as the UK’s pro-innovation agenda.
- Energy Realism: Skepticism about sustainability targets, given AI’s escalating computational demands.
These objections underscored a broader transatlantic divide. While the EU pushed for precautionary AI regulation under its Digital Services Act framework, the US and UK favored market-driven models—a schism Vance exacerbated by criticizing European “trepidation”[9].
Geopolitical Undercurrents and China’s Role
China’s endorsement of the Paris Declaration added geopolitical intrigue. Beijing positioned itself as a responsible stakeholder, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun condemning “ideological lines” in AI development—a veiled rebuke to Vance’s accusations of Chinese “authoritarian” AI misuse[10]. By aligning with French-led inclusivity principles, China sought to counter US technological dominance while appealing to Global South nations.
This dynamic highlighted AI’s role as a new arena for great-power competition. The US and UK’s absence from the declaration risked ceding soft power to Sino-European blocs, particularly in shaping emerging markets’ AI policies.
Pathways Forward: Fragmentation or Cooperation?
The summit’s legacy will ultimately depend on its ability to reconcile two competing visions for the future of AI governance. On one hand, there is the vision of multilateral inclusivity, as outlined in the Paris Declaration, which emphasizes equitable access to AI technologies and the establishment of ethical guardrails to ensure responsible development. On the other hand, there is the sovereigntist innovation model championed by countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, which prioritizes national flexibility and private-sector leadership in driving AI advancements.
Bridging this divide will require addressing several unresolved challenges that remain at the heart of global AI governance. First, there is the issue of governance mechanisms—how to develop enforceable international standards that can effectively regulate AI without stifling innovation. This delicate balance was highlighted as both critical and elusive in the Bletchley Report. Second, security dilemmas must be tackled, particularly by establishing robust protocols to prevent the militarization of AI technologies, a concern that has been conspicuously absent from current agreements. Finally, resource equity presents a significant challenge: ensuring that developing nations are not left behind in the race for AI development, especially given existing shortages in computational resources and skilled talent.
Conclusion: Navigating AI’s Crossroads
The Paris AI Action Summit crystallized global aspirations for responsible AI development while exposing fissures in their realization. For signatories, the declaration offers a roadmap to harness AI for public good—if paired with concrete implementation. For the US and UK, their gamble rests on proving that innovation-centric approaches can deliver inclusive progress without multilateral constraints.
As Macron warned, breaking trust in AI’s governance risks entrenching divisions that mirror broader geopolitical rivalries. The path forward demands iterative dialogue, recognizing that neither sovereignty nor solidarity alone can tackle AI’s complexities. Policymakers must now translate principles into practice, ensuring the technology’s promise outweighs its perils—for all nations, not just a privileged few.
[1] https://www.elysee.fr/en/emmanuel-macron/2025/02/11/statement-on-inclusive-and-sustainable-artificial-intelligence-for-people-and-the-planet
[2] https://www.gov.uk/government/topical-events/ai-safety-summit-2023
[3] https://ceuli.com/navigating-the-risks-and-governance-of-advanced-ai-insights-from-the-2025-international-ai-safety-report/
[4] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/feb/10/ai-artificial-intelligence-widen-global-inequality-climate-crisis-lead-paris-summit
[5] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/pm-modi-at-g7-end-monopoly-on-tech-all-should-get-access/articleshow/111006549.cms
[6] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8edn0n58gwo
[7] https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/europe-looks-embrace-ai-paris-summits-2nd-day-while-global-consensus-unclear-2025-02-11/
[8] https://www.cityam.com/uk-and-us-refuse-to-sign-ai-summit-agreement/
[9] https://www.politico.eu/article/vp-jd-vance-calls-europe-row-back-tech-regulation-ai-action-summit/
[10] https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/paris-ai-summit-why-did-us-uk-not-sign-global-pact/3482520
