Key Takeaways
- The United States is urging dozens of nations to choose either the U.S.–led Pax Silica AI coalition or China’s competing framework, warning that dual membership will exclude them from the American alliance.
- An internal State Department draft letter tells signatories of the June “AI Opportunity Statement” that “you can’t have it both ways” and that membership in conflicting initiatives undermines commitment to U.S. goals.
- Pax Silica, launched in 2024, seeks to secure supply chains for AI models, semiconductors, and critical minerals by deepening joint projects and export controls among U.S. allies and partners.
- About two dozen countries, including Japan, Australia, South Korea, and Kazakhstan, have joined Pax Silica; Kazakhstan is the only nation known to also belong to China’s rival “World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization.”
- The rivalry is intensifying as Chinese open‑weight AI models close the gap with proprietary U.S. systems, and both sides view control over critical minerals and chip technology as decisive for military and economic advantage.
- Beijing condemns the U.S. move as politicizing trade and technology, arguing it will stifle global AI progress, while Washington insists the binary choice is necessary to preserve a trusted AI ecosystem.
Pax Silica Summit Convened by Undersecretary Jacob Helberg
On December 12, 2025, Undersecretary of State Jacob Helberg convened the inaugural Pax Silica Summit at the Donald J. Trump Institute of Peace in Washington, D.C. The gathering was described as a “high‑level, private meeting focused on economic security and the establishment of a new grouping of partners tailored for the AI economy.” Helberg’s initiative aims to forge a coalition of nations that will jointly develop AI capabilities while reducing dependence on adversarial suppliers. The summit marked the first concrete step in turning the Pax Silica concept—originally announced in 2024—into an operational forum for policy coordination, joint investment, and export‑control alignment among participating states.
U.S. Pushes Binary Choice in Global AI Alignment
According to a U.S. official and an internal draft reviewed by Reuters, the United States is preparing to tell dozens of countries they must “pick sides” in the accelerating artificial‑intelligence race with China. The warning is stark: nations that simultaneously join the U.S.–led Pax Silica framework and China’s competing initiative risk exclusion from the American AI coalition. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the goal is to “starve China of resources” in a contest to produce the most sophisticated AI systems, which could be leveraged for military or economic dominance. This hardline approach reflects Washington’s belief that a split allegiance dilutes the credibility of any partner claiming to be a trusted member of the U.S. technology ecosystem.
State Department Draft Letter Warns Against Dual Membership
The draft letter, prepared by the State Department and addressed to the 35 signatories of the June “AI Opportunity Statement,” declares that “To be part of everything is to be part of nothing. Signature of the Pax Silica Declaration is not merely a membership subscription, but a commitment.” It urges recipients to “choose deliberately” on AI and adds, “It cannot be held alongside membership in duplicative initiatives whose expectations conflict with our own.” Although the letter does not name China directly, its wording makes clear that the United States views simultaneous participation in Beijing’s rival forum as incompatible with the obligations of Pax Silica. Reuters could not ascertain when the letter will be sent or whether it might be revised before distribution, and the State Department declined to comment on the purportedly leaked document.
Pax Silica Initiative: Securing AI Supply Chains
Launched in 2024, Pax Silica was designed to shore up supply chains for the three pillars of modern AI: advanced AI models, semiconductor chips, and the critical minerals that enable their production. By encouraging joint research‑and‑development projects, shared investment vehicles, and coordinated export controls, the initiative aims to lessen reliance on adversaries—particularly China—for these strategic inputs. Membership offers tangible benefits: access to pooled capital for AI‑related ventures, preferential treatment in U.S. technology transfer programs, and a platform for shaping international norms around AI safety and security. As of the summit, about two dozen countries have signed on, including long‑time U.S. allies Japan, Australia, and South Korea, as well as resource‑rich Kazakhstan.
China’s Counter‑Initiative and the Kazakhstan Dilemma
In July 2025, Chinese President Xi Jinping unveiled the “World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization,” promoting China’s open‑weight AI models as an alternative to the proprietary systems dominant in the United States. Beijing frames the organization as a platform for inclusive, non‑politicized collaboration, yet its emphasis on open‑weight technology directly challenges U.S. efforts to maintain control over cutting‑edge AI capabilities. The only nation known to belong to both blocs is Kazakhstan, a Central Asian state endowed with substantial reserves of lithium, rare‑earth elements, and other minerals essential for chip manufacturing. Kazakhstan’s dual enrollment has raised alarm bells in Washington, where officials fear that the country could serve as a conduit for technology transfer that undermines the strategic separation the United States seeks to enforce.
Strategic Stakes: Minerals, Chips, and Open‑Weight AI
The rivalry over AI is increasingly intertwined with contests for critical minerals and semiconductor supremacy. China’s near‑monopoly on processing rare‑earths and lithium has allowed it to wield these resources as leverage in the tariff war initiated by former President Donald Trump, who has since accelerated efforts to source minerals domestically and from allied nations. Meanwhile, Chinese firms have made rapid strides in open‑weight AI, narrowing the performance gap with proprietary models from U.S. leaders such as OpenAI and Anthropic. The ability of advanced AI systems to autonomously identify and exploit vulnerabilities has heightened concerns about misuse, prompting both Washington and Beijing to consider tighter controls on overseas access to their most powerful algorithms. For the United States, securing a reliable supply of minerals and chips through Pax Silica is seen as essential to sustaining any technological edge.
Diplomatic Reactions and Official Commentary
China’s embassy in Washington denounced the U.S. approach, asserting that “Such actions will only stifle global AI advances and serve no one’s interests.” A spokesperson added that Beijing opposes the politicization of trade and technology issues, warning that forced bifurcation harms the collective progress of the AI sector. The Kazakh embassy did not respond to requests for comment on its dual membership. U.S. officials, meanwhile, defended the binary choice as necessary for alliance integrity. One unnamed official told Reuters, “It’s difficult to see how a country can credibly position themselves as trusted partners in one technology ecosystem while simultaneously signing up for an initiative designed by China to advance a competing vision for AI.” The State Department’s refusal to address the leaked letter underscores the sensitivity of the internal deliberations surrounding the initiative.
Looking Ahead: The Future of the AI Alliance Landscape
As the United States tightens its push for exclusive alignment, the global AI landscape is poised for a period of realignment reminiscent of Cold‑Era bloc politics. Countries will weigh the economic benefits of accessing U.S.-led investment, technology sharing, and security guarantees against the potential gains from participating in China’s open‑weight, potentially more accessible AI ecosystem. The outcome will shape not only the trajectory of AI innovation but also the distribution of strategic resources that underpin the next generation of defense and commercial technologies. How nations navigate this forced choice—and whether any can successfully hedge their bets—will determine the durability of the Pax Silica coalition and the broader balance of technological power in the coming decade.
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/15/us-to-tell-allies-they-must-pick-sides-in-ai-race-with-china-reuters.html