In the article “The AI Sovereignty Paradox at Home and Abroad,” published by the Council on Foreign Relations, Michael Froman examines the growing tension between governments and private technology firms over artificial intelligence. The analysis explores how disputes between companies such as Anthropic and the U.S. government reveal a broader dilemma about AI sovereignty.
At the same time, the article highlights how countries outside the United States and China face a different challenge: securing access to advanced AI systems while avoiding technological dependency.
The AI Sovereignty Paradox in the United States
Froman begins by examining a dispute between the Pentagon and Anthropic, the company behind the AI assistant Claude. The U.S. government demanded unrestricted access to the company’s AI models for military use. According to the Pentagon, national security requires the state to retain ultimate authority over emerging technologies.
Anthropic refused the request. CEO Dario Amodei argued that the company could not allow certain uses of its AI systems, especially mass domestic surveillance or fully autonomous weapons. In particular, he noted that existing laws have not kept pace with the rapid evolution of artificial intelligence.
This disagreement raises a broader question. Ultimately, who should decide how powerful AI systems are used, the government or the private firms that build them?
AI Sovereignty Beyond the United States
While the United States debates the balance of authority between governments and private firms, many other countries face a different challenge. Instead of regulating domestic AI champions, they are struggling to secure access to advanced AI systems.
This issue became evident at the India AI Impact Summit 2026, hosted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi. Rather than focusing on frontier AI models, the summit emphasized equitable access, climate resilience, and inclusive economic growth.
For many developing countries, the primary concern is not that artificial intelligence will become too powerful. Rather, the concern is that its benefits will remain concentrated in a small group of wealthy nations.
Governance Challenges in a Fragmented AI Landscape
A final issue involves the governance of artificial intelligence. The United States currently favors a light regulatory approach that prioritizes innovation and speed. However, many countries are uncomfortable with this strategy.
As a result, several governments are creating their own frameworks for responsible AI use. Consequently, a fragmented regulatory landscape is emerging across regions such as the European Union, ASEAN, Brazil, India, and Japan.
This fragmentation could complicate the global expansion of AI technologies. If regulations diverge significantly, companies may need to comply with dozens of different national standards.
Reference
Froman, M. (2026, February 27). The AI sovereignty paradox at home and abroad. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/articles/