Government AI commitments, claims, and international agreements

AI Policy and National Claims

From Rhetoric to Reality: The Evolving Landscape of Global AI Governance in 2024–2025

As artificial intelligence (AI) rapidly embeds itself into the fabric of global society—from military defense systems to consumer devices—the international community faces a pivotal challenge: translating lofty promises and high-level commitments into concrete, measurable actions. While 2024 and early 2025 have seen impressive milestones, sectoral innovations, and new international treaties, a persistent gap remains between rhetoric and implementation. The stakes are high, as effective AI governance will determine societal trust, security, and the equitable distribution of technological benefits.

Bridging the Implementation Gap: Moving Beyond Promises

Despite widespread declarations emphasizing responsible AI development, tangible progress often lags behind words. Many governments and organizations continue to struggle with standardized metrics to objectively measure advancements or verify compliance. Enforcement mechanisms tend to be weak or underdeveloped, risking erosion of public trust when stakeholders perceive commitments as superficial.

To address this, there is increasing advocacy for establishing robust oversight bodies—modernized equivalents of the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA)—focused not on advocacy but on independent, unbiased evaluation of AI systems, policies, and implementation progress. These entities could serve as critical arbiters, providing transparent assessments, identifying gaps, and fostering accountability. Such measures are vital for moving from aspirational rhetoric to tangible results.

International and Legal Milestones: Armenia’s Signatory Step and Its Challenges

A noteworthy development in 2024 is Armenia’s accession to the Council of Europe's AI Convention, signaling a willingness to align domestic policies with European standards emphasizing transparency, accountability, and cross-border cooperation. This move enhances Armenia’s reputation as a responsible AI participant and opens regional avenues for collaboration and foreign investment.

However, signing the treaty is merely the initial step. The real challenge lies in effective implementation:

Developing comprehensive domestic policies aligned with treaty obligations
Building regulatory capacity to enforce standards
Establishing enforceable compliance mechanisms

Without these, superficial adoption risks failure to achieve the Convention’s objectives, potentially damaging Armenia’s international credibility. Many countries face similar hurdles—signing treaties without the necessary domestic reforms to uphold their commitments.

Geopolitical Narratives vs. Verifiable Capabilities

Despite nations crafting ambitious narratives about their AI prowess, independent analysis often reveals discrepancies:

South Korea claims to be the third-largest AI nation, seeking to bolster soft power and influence global standards. Yet, verifiable data supporting such rankings remains scarce, raising concerns that overpromising could lead to disillusionment if capabilities lag behind rhetoric.
Russia’s AI influence appears diminished due to policy missteps and talent drain, illustrating that credibility depends on demonstrable achievements rather than words.

Adding a strategic layer, the global chip manufacturing supply chain faces critical vulnerabilities. Analysts like Chris Miller highlight that the U.S. has lost control over critical chip fabrication, essential for AI hardware infrastructure. This fragility exposes national security vulnerabilities and underscores the need for industrial and technological sovereignty—a significant aspect of AI governance and geopolitical competition.

Operationalizing AI Safety: From Principles to Practical Standards

Transforming high-level safety commitments into operational standards remains a priority. For example:

The U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has introduced the ‘algorithmic hygiene’ framework, aimed at managing AI risks in workplaces through:
- Developing standard operating procedures for hazard identification
- Promoting training and awareness among industry professionals
- Embedding transparency and accountability into routine workflows

These initiatives demonstrate how policy principles can be translated into sector-specific standards. Similarly, the UK has appointed Sally Davies as AI Champion for Creative Industries, emphasizing responsible innovation balanced with ethical and legal considerations.

In industry, companies like Siemens and Instron Technologies exemplify responsible deployment:

Siemens focuses on climate and sustainability goals
Instron advances automation solutions that prioritize safety and scalability

Sectoral Leadership and Innovation: U.S. and Industry Efforts

The United States continues to position itself as a leader in responsible AI development through initiatives such as the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Genesis Missions, launched in 2024. These encompass 26 science and technology challenges leveraging AI to:

Improve energy efficiency
Enhance climate resilience
Strengthen national security

These programs exemplify a shift beyond rhetoric, emphasizing tangible societal benefits. Additionally, upcoming reports like the "2025-2026 AI Technology Stack Panorama" will shed light on emerging technological ecosystems, informing strategies for infrastructure resilience and technological sovereignty.

Industry leaders are also active:

Siemens’ reports highlight AI’s role in industrial sustainability
Instron’s automation innovations showcase scalable, safe, and efficient solutions

Recent developments include:

The UK x Microsoft partnership in CATS AI, aiming to demonstrate government-industry collaboration in deploying responsible AI solutions.
Public concerns about big tech’s impact on democracy, exemplified by critiques like Alexis Crews’ "Big tech is stifling democracy" video, which underscores the need for robust governance and oversight.

Regional Dynamics: Latin America’s Unique Challenges and Opportunities

Beyond traditional AI hubs, Latin America faces distinctive hurdles:

AI-driven disinformation campaigns threaten political stability and democratic processes
Platform effects, such as the amplification of conservative narratives on social media like X (formerly Twitter), complicate electoral integrity
Data sovereignty issues hinder regional cooperation and technological advancement

Recent research indicates that certain platforms tend to favor particular political narratives, creating an uneven, sometimes manipulative digital ecosystem. To foster sustainable AI growth, regional strategies must prioritize intergovernmental cooperation, tailored policy frameworks, and technological independence—aiming to prevent exploitation and bolster societal resilience.

Societal Attitudes, Infrastructure, and Workforce Adaptation

Public sentiment around AI remains mixed:

Many support AI in workplaces for productivity gains and innovation
Opposition persists regarding local infrastructure projects—such as data centers—due to privacy concerns and safety issues

This trust gap underscores the importance of transparent, community-engaged governance. Building societal trust involves public participation, clear communication, and robust safeguards as AI becomes more embedded in daily life.

Workforce impacts are also profound:

Automation displaces certain jobs, necessitating training programs, upskilling initiatives, and social safety nets to ensure equitable benefits.
Policymakers must evolve regulatory frameworks swiftly to protect workers and support economic resilience.

The Defense and Tech Interface: New Frontiers

A growing area of focus is the intersection of AI, defense, and geopolitics. Recent insights highlight:

The existence of "Unit X", a secretive U.S. Defense Department unit, exemplifies how military–industry collaborations shape AI strategies.
These efforts involve dual-use technologies that serve both civilian and military purposes, raising ethical questions and international stability concerns.

The book "Unit X: How the Pentagon and Silicon Valley Are Transforming the Future of War" explores how AI innovations are transforming warfare, often blurring the lines between peace and conflict and emphasizing the importance of ethical boundaries in AI deployment.

Recent Developments and Future Directions

Recent initiatives demonstrate a growing integration of government and industry:

The UK’s collaboration with Microsoft in deploying CATS AI exemplifies efforts to embed responsible AI standards across sectors.
Concerns about big tech’s influence on democracy, as discussed in Alexis Crews’ video, reinforce the urgent need for regulatory oversight and public accountability.

The path forward involves:

Defining clear, measurable benchmarks for societal and technological progress
Strengthening independent, transparent assessment bodies to evaluate implementation
Promoting international harmonization of standards to prevent regulatory fragmentation
Investing in workforce development and resilient supply chains to uphold sovereignty and security

Current Status and Broader Implications

While many nations and organizations continue to sign treaties, launch initiatives, and articulate visions, the implementation gap persists, driven by fast-paced AI advancements. Addressing this requires adaptive, scalable governance frameworks capable of responding in real time to emerging risks and opportunities.

Key challenges include:

Ensuring measurable accountability
Bridging the rhetoric versus reality divide
Balancing domestic priorities with international cooperation

The decisions made today will shape societal trust, geopolitical stability, and the future trajectory of AI. As AI becomes increasingly integrated into daily life, responsible governance must be recognized as essential—failure to do so could undermine societal cohesion and global stability.

Conclusion: From Commitment to Action

Achieving meaningful progress demands systematic, actionable strategies:

Establishing quantitative benchmarks for societal and technological impact
Enhancing regulatory and independent assessment capacities
Addressing organizational bottlenecks and systemic risks
Fostering genuine international collaboration rooted in shared values and standards

A collective commitment to transparency, accountability, and ethical principles will be critical to navigate AI’s complex landscape and realize its societal benefits responsibly. Moving from rhetoric to reality hinges on steadfast resolve, systemic reform, and international solidarity—only then can AI’s transformative potential be harnessed for the common good.

In summary, despite numerous pledges and initiatives, the global AI governance landscape remains a work in progress. The rapid pace of technological innovation necessitates agile, scalable frameworks capable of addressing new risks and opportunities. Success will depend on measurable progress, independent oversight, and international cooperation, ensuring AI’s benefits are ethical, secure, and equitable for all.

Sources (14)