Multilateralism has fallen on hard times lately, especially at the UN. The UN Security Council could not stop Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, ceasefires in Gaza and Lebanon remain elusive, and subsequent COP summits have failed to spur enough concrete action to meet global climate targets. Not only are the UN’s own Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) off-track; in many cases, progress toward meeting them has reversed. The UN’s foundational commitments to peace, security, and cooperation feel very foreign at a time when multiple wars are raging, protectionism is on the rise, and the world is splitting into rival blocs.
However, despite this geopolitical recession, global cooperation is still possible. The UN General Assembly’s first Summit of the Future on Sept. 22 and 23 tested the organization’s ability to tackle one of the world’s biggest transnational challenges: artificial intelligence (AI). Surprising as it might be, the UN passed.
It is no exaggeration to say that AI has spurred one of the fastest and most robust policy responses in living memory. Barely a year ago, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres invited representatives from government, the private sector and civil society to recommend how the world might govern AI in the service of humanity. He knew that the world’s ambition to govern AI could fall flat, much like the initial response to climate change. The existing approaches were already too fragmented, and most left out the Global South, with 118 countries party to no AI governance framework at all.
Illustration: Mountain People
Together, we served as rapporteurs for the secretary-general’s High-Level Advisory Body on AI, which was established to meet this worthy challenge. Reflecting the world’s diversity, its 39 members came from every continent, and included representatives from government, academia, civil society and the technology industry.
This was the first genuinely global effort to govern AI, and we are pleased that several of our recommendations were taken up in the Global Digital Compact, a comprehensive governance framework that UN member states adopted last month. Reaching this new agreement required overcoming all the very real differences that separate the US, China, Europe and the Global South, as well as governments and the private sector (especially technology companies).
For example, one of our recommendations — which has been approved in principle for implementation — is to establish an international scientific panel on AI. People started from the premise that to govern an issue as complex as AI, they should have a common understanding of the technology and its potential risks and effects across countries and cultures.
Humanity learned this lesson the hard way from climate change. While many now debate how to address the climate crisis, there is no serious debate over whether we should address it; the evidence provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is overwhelming. A similar intergovernmental panel on AI would undertake the difficult but fundamental work of analyzing the ongoing developments in AI technology, thereby giving policymakers a factual, independent foundation to inform debates, goals and policy decisions.
However, what we are most enthusiastic about is the prospect of ensuring that AI benefits everyone. Unlike climate change — where there are zero-sum politics and serious short-term trade-offs between lowering emissions, fostering economic growth and achieving equity (with powerful vested interests that oppose a post-carbon transition) — AI is the rare transnational issue with positive-sum solutions. If shared safely and made to respect international law and fundamental freedoms, AI should not pose an existential threat to incumbent governments and companies. Instead, it should catalyze win-win opportunities.
There is tremendous demand for technologies like AI, as well as excitement over its potential to help us meet all sorts of objectives, including those enshrined in the SDGs. From public health and education to economic growth and climate mitigation, AI can be a game-changing technology.
However, without the infrastructure and mechanisms to oversee its transformative growth, it could drive further global divergence, with the poorest and most vulnerable populations once again being left behind. We are determined to prevent that.
That is why, in addition to forming a common knowledge base, we have recommended initiatives that enhance all countries’ and communities’ access to AI. From talent and standards to data and funding, the UN and its partners can help address gaps in resources and infrastructure to ensure that no one is left behind from the AI revolution.
Of course, there are some who question the UN’s role in governing AI, and governance must take place at the nation-state level as well. The companies developing AI models also are creating standards. However, like the Internet before it, AI’s potential makes it a global public good, as is AI safety. The UN is the only truly global body with the legitimacy to convene the world’s governments and AI stakeholders, and the ability to guarantee any resulting agreements. That starts with getting the world on the same page — not to compel governance, but to align around the nature and scale of the opportunity and challenges. With the right vision, tools and political leadership, humanity can deploy the resources to ensure that AI lives up to its promise.
From climate change and public health to nuclear proliferation, the world has turned to the UN to solve its most complex problems. Armed conflict, humanitarian disasters, environmental crises and economic woes highlight the international community’s frequent failure to rise to the challenges the world faces. However, as humanity grapples with its most revolutionary and potentially disruptive technology yet, the Global Digital Compact proves that there is still hope for multilateralism in a geopolitically fragmented world.
Ian Bremmer, founder and president of Eurasia Group and GZERO Media, is a member of the executive committee of the UN High-level Advisory Body on Artificial Intelligence. Marietje Schaake, a former member of the European Parliament, is international policy director of the Cyber Policy Center at Stanford University, international policy fellow at Stanford’s Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence and a member of the executive committee of the UN High-level Advisory Body on Artificial Intelligence.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS