Which risks are sufficiently shared that rival states could cooperate despite broader geopolitical conflict?
The candidate zones: evaluation science, verification technology, and loss-of-control red lines — areas where rivals share downside the way they shared it on nuclear accidents. Bengio and others have mapped the technical overlap.
View on the map → · Open in Browse →
The two-year freeze ended: the US and China announced an intergovernmental dialogue on AI safety, and April's IDAIS-London statement shows where rival states' scientists still co-sign — near-term AI cyber capability handing non-state actors state-level attack capacity, with biological misuse close behind. The design question is now which cooperation format survives rivalry: standing information-sharing exchanges rather than arms-control bargaining, even as the one existing military commitment (human control of nuclear decisions) loses definition.
China and the US announced an intergovernmental AI dialogue, ending a two-year freeze in official bilateral engagement on AI safety.
The definitive annual mapping of China's AI safety ecosystem, documenting the resumed US-China intergovernmental dialogue and China's UN and WAICO moves — the evidence base for which risks Beijing treats as shared.
Societies remain unprepared for this imminent threat, and biological misuse risks are not far behind.
The April 2026 track-II dialogue where senior US, Chinese, and other scientists jointly warned that near-term AI cyber capabilities will hand non-state actors state-level attack capacity — the red-line zone where rivals' scientists still co-sign.
it should be a regular process of sharing information, ideas, plans, and research in the area of AI model risk assessment and mitigation.
Design proposal for the new bilateral channel: standing technical exchanges on model risk assessment modeled on information-sharing rather than arms-control bargaining — an argument about which cooperation format survives geopolitical rivalry.
the single military-AI commitment that the two powers already share – keeping humans in control of nuclear decisions – loses definition.
Sober assessment of the military side of the shared-risk zone: the one existing US-China commitment is eroding in meaning just as the broader dialogue opens.