The rapid development of artificial intelligence is raising increasingly serious questions about who controls the technology, how far its development should go and whether the race between the United States and China could create a new form of global technological confrontation.
In a discussion hosted by Ayaz Khan Lohani, Business Intelligence Analyst Kareem Shehadeh-Rifai examined the growing concerns within the US technology industry over the pace of AI development, the strategic competition with China and the possibility that governments could eventually seek greater control over advanced artificial intelligence.
The discussion followed recent warnings from leading figures in the AI industry, including Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, who has argued that the development of AI may need to be slowed or its progress at the technological frontier carefully managed. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Elon Musk have also previously raised concerns about the potential risks associated with increasingly powerful AI systems.
Can AI development still be controlled?
Ayaz Khan Lohani opened the discussion by questioning why several major AI figures appear to be expressing similar concerns at a time when the technology is advancing at extraordinary speed.
Kareem Shehadeh-Rifai argued that AI systems are increasingly capable of finding unexpected ways around limitations established by their creators. He stressed, however, that this does not necessarily mean that AI has developed an independent personality or identity. Rather, advanced systems can use statistical processes to identify loopholes and unexpected pathways within the objectives and systems designed by humans.
This raises a fundamental question: if developers themselves are concerned about the consequences of increasingly powerful AI, can the technology realistically be slowed?
Rifai suggested that any attempt to restrict AI could create a difficult dilemma over who would actually be restricted. Advanced AI systems may remain available to governments, corporations and institutions with substantial resources, while access for ordinary users or smaller organizations could be limited.
China and the AI race
A major theme of the discussion was China’s rapidly expanding AI capabilities.
Rifai pointed to China’s development of large language models, including DeepSeek, as evidence of the country’s ability to compete technologically while potentially offering AI services at substantially lower costs. He also highlighted China’s efforts to develop its own advanced semiconductor and AI-processing capabilities.
The discussion raised the possibility that restrictions on the export of advanced chips to China may reflect concerns in Washington about China’s technological progress.
Unlike the highly public debate taking place in the United States, Rifai argued that China tends to present its technological development in a more strategic and long-term manner. Rather than generating constant public discussion about future breakthroughs, Chinese institutions can focus on research, investment and implementation as part of longer-term national planning.
According to Rifai, this difference may explain why there appears to be less public debate in China about whether AI development should be slowed.
AI, markets and the US economy
The conversation also connected the AI boom to broader questions surrounding the US economy and financial markets.
Rifai argued that the technology sector has become an important driver of US market growth. If investment and expectations surrounding AI were to collapse suddenly, he suggested, the consequences could extend beyond technology companies and affect the wider economy.
This led to a discussion about whether the extraordinary enthusiasm surrounding AI could eventually resemble previous investment bubbles, including the US housing boom that preceded the 2008 financial crisis.
Ayaz Khan Lohani questioned whether AI could experience a similar correction if investors continue treating the technology as the defining economic opportunity of the future.
Rifai responded that the AI race is unlikely to stop simply because concerns are being raised publicly. Even if some companies or governments call for caution, economic, military and strategic incentives could continue pushing development forward.
The Oppenheimer comparison
Another major theme was the comparison between today’s AI debate and the development of nuclear weapons.
The discussion referred to the dilemma faced by scientists involved in the creation of atomic weapons: technological breakthroughs can produce enormous benefits, but they can also create capabilities that governments may eventually use for destructive purposes.
The same question now surrounds artificial intelligence.
If AI systems become increasingly capable of designing technologies, analyzing information, operating autonomous systems or contributing to military applications, controlling their development could become significantly more difficult.
Amodei’s call for governments to become more involved therefore raises a broader political and economic question: how can governments regulate a technology largely developed by private companies without simultaneously restricting innovation?
Should the US and China slow down together?
The discussion also considered whether Washington could ask Beijing to slow its AI development.
Rifai questioned why China would voluntarily reduce its technological progress while the United States remains a strategic competitor. He argued that Beijing has strong incentives to continue investing in AI, semiconductors, automation, robotics and other advanced technologies.
The possibility of creating separate technological spheres of influence was also discussed, with the United States and China potentially seeking greater control over AI ecosystems in their respective spheres.
That scenario could transform AI from simply an economic technology into a central element of geopolitical competition.
Russia and the Gulf states could also become important players. Rifai suggested that Russia’s demographic and economic challenges could complicate its position in a technology race dominated by larger economic powers, while countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have been investing heavily in data centres and AI infrastructure.
AI is unlikely to disappear
The discussion ultimately returned to the central question: can the AI race actually be stopped?
Both Ayaz Khan Lohani and Kareem Shehadeh-Rifaiquestioned whether calls for restraint would be enough to reverse the direction of technological development.
Even if governments introduce restrictions and technology leaders publicly warn about the dangers, the incentives remain powerful. Companies want technological leadership, governments want strategic advantages, investors want economic returns and militaries increasingly see AI as an important component of future capabilities.
The result could be a paradox: while leading technology figures warn that AI development is moving too quickly, the same economic and geopolitical forces may make slowing it extremely difficult.
The discussion concluded that the AI race is therefore not simply a technological story. It is increasingly connected to economics, national security, geopolitics, markets and the future balance of power between the United States, China and other major players.
As Ayaz Khan Lohani concluded, AI is not going anywhere. The question is whether governments, technology companies and societies can establish meaningful safeguards before the technology advances beyond their ability to control it.
