Ulrike Franke, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said that while “it's not at all surprising that the United States had a military AI strategy before it had a national AI strategy,” Europeans were “quite the opposite. I did that,” he said. ,He said:
This reflects familiar transatlantic differences over defense spending and former President Donald Trump's frustrations, but it also highlights different approaches to regulating AI more broadly.
The EU's AI strategy is cautious, touting itself as “human-centric” and focused on curbing corporate overreach and keeping citizens' data safe. The United States, which tends to be loose on regulations and keen on defense, sees things differently.
There is also disagreement over what technology the alliance should develop, including autonomous lethal weapons systems (often referred to as “killer robots”) that are programmed to identify and destroy targets without human control. .
Powerful NATO members such as France, the United Kingdom, and the United States have developed these technologies and oppose treaties on these weapons, while countries such as Belgium and Germany have also expressed serious concerns about this technology. ing.
These weapons systems also face fierce public opposition from civil society and human rights groups, including UN Secretary-General António Guterres, who called for their ban in 2018.
