Rising Tensions in AI: Model Theft, Cross-Border Misuse, and the Broader Geopolitical Battle

The global race for artificial intelligence dominance has taken a darker turn, with mounting concerns over intellectual property theft, illicit model distillation, and the weaponization of AI systems. Recent developments reveal a complex landscape where nation-states and private firms grapple with safeguarding innovation amid allegations of cross-border exploitation and military ambitions.

Allegations of Model Distillation and Intellectual Property Theft

At the forefront of these concerns, Anthropic, the AI safety organization behind the acclaimed Claude language model, has publicly accused several Chinese firms—DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax—of illicitly extracting functionalities from Claude. According to reports from Reuters (February 23, 2026), these companies set up over 24,000 fake accounts to illicitly access and copy capabilities of the model. Such actions undermine intellectual property rights, pose security risks, and threaten the integrity of the global AI ecosystem.

Dario Amodei, Anthropic’s founder, condemned these practices sharply, warning that unauthorized model copying could threaten innovation and national security. By leveraging Claude's capabilities, Chinese firms can accelerate their own AI model development, effectively bypassing costly research and development phases. This practice not only undermines Western AI companies’ competitive edge but also raises espionage concerns, especially when sensitive capabilities are transferred across borders without oversight.

Industry and Expert Reactions

The incident has sparked widespread condemnation from industry leaders and experts alike:

• Elon Musk publicly labeled these activities "guilty", warning of significant risks to global security and technological trust.
• Many analysts emphasize that such cross-border exploitation could enable malicious actors to access advanced AI capabilities without proper safeguards, increasing the threat of AI-enabled espionage, misinformation, and military misuse.

The call for multilateral regulation has gained momentum, with policymakers urging the development of international frameworks to protect intellectual property, prevent cross-border misuse, and ensure responsible AI development. These efforts aim to balance innovation with security and mitigate the risks posed by illicit model distillation.

US Security and Defense Response

The United States has heightened its vigilance in response to these developments:

• Pentagon officials have queried defense contractors about their reliance on Anthropic’s AI systems, reflecting concerns over dependency vulnerabilities.
• Internal memos reveal efforts to assess reliance levels in order to strengthen strategic resilience.
• The US government has issued directives to counter data sovereignty initiatives that could expose sensitive information to foreign entities.
• Threats to terminate contracts with AI firms like Anthropic if they fail to meet security standards underscore the escalating tension between AI innovation and national security imperatives.

A Breakthrough: OpenAI’s Engagement with the Pentagon

Adding a new dimension to the geopolitical AI landscape, OpenAI has reportedly reached an agreement with the Pentagon to deploy their AI models for military and defense applications. According to Bloomberg, this move signals a closer collaboration between American AI firms and the US government, highlighting the strategic importance of AI in modern warfare.

This development underscores the broader trend of government engagement with commercial AI providers as nations seek to leverage advanced AI capabilities for military advantage. However, it also intensifies tensions around controlling sensitive technological assets and preventing misuse or theft.

Implications and the Path Forward

The convergence of these events underscores the escalating geopolitical friction over AI:

• The allegations of model theft and cross-border misuse are emblematic of broader concerns about technological espionage and military vulnerabilities.
• The US government’s increased engagement with domestic AI firms like OpenAI and Anthropic reflects a strategic effort to maintain technological sovereignty.
• The international community faces mounting pressure to establish robust regulatory frameworks that protect intellectual property, prevent illicit model transfer, and set norms for responsible AI deployment.

In conclusion, the current landscape reveals a battle for control over AI capabilities, with security risks and geopolitical tensions at the forefront. The urgency of establishing effective safeguards—both technical and policy-driven—is clear. As nations and corporations navigate this complex terrain, regional and international cooperation will be essential to mitigate risks, protect innovation, and ensure that AI serves the collective good rather than becoming a tool of conflict and espionage.