| Treaty Clause | US Net Stance | China Net Stance | Verification Friction | Consensus Verdict |
|---|
Why AI Consensus Narrowed
As highlighted in recent bilateral diplomatic reporting, dialogue between the United States and China on artificial intelligence is caught between existential containment and technological sovereignty. Finger-pointing over advanced compute export curbs and cyber operations reduces diplomatic space.
This explorer adapts classic Rubinstein-Nash non-zero-sum bargaining models to frontier AI dilemmas: evaluating when shared aversion to accidental catastrophe outweighs the fear of giving up military asymmetry.
Model Levers & Verification Dynamics
Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA)
ZOPA emerges only when the cumulative utility of an accord exceeds both nations' best alternatives to a negotiated agreement (BATNA / reservation thresholds). Verification distrust shrinks this overlap dramatically.
Asymmetric Compute & Sovereignty Concerns
Frontier cluster on-site inspections trigger deep espionage concerns for Beijing, while unverified self-reporting triggers defection fears for Washington. Accords focused on redlines (CBRN and lethal autonomy) preserve higher feasibility than cluster quotas.
Crisis Communication Hotlines as Anchor Agreements
When high distrust scuppers intrusive technical audits, mutual hotlines and unclassified incident reporting mechanisms remain resilient pareto-optimal starting points.