The ultimate goal for US-China relations should not be to "win" a zero-sum AI race, but to achieve a "Pax Robotica"—a future of shared peace and abundance. This reframes the relationship from competition to collaboration, avoiding the creation of new AI-powered existential risks.

Robert Wright argues the most immediate existential danger isn't a superintelligent AI takeover, but the geopolitical competition. A breakneck race for AI supremacy could provoke one nation to launch a preemptive war to prevent the other from achieving a perceived decisive advantage.

The US and USSR, despite being adversaries, collaborated to prevent nuclear proliferation to rogue actors. A similar model can be applied to AI. The US and China share an interest in preventing powerful open-weight models from being used for cyber-attacks or bio-terrorism by third parties, creating a foundation for a safety dialogue.

The same governments pushing AI competition for a strategic edge may be forced into cooperation. As AI democratizes access to catastrophic weapons (CBRN), the national security risk will become so great that even rival superpowers will have a mutual incentive to create verifiable safety treaties.

The greatest risk in US-China tech competition is not one side getting ahead, but their technology stacks becoming mutually unintelligible. This lack of legibility creates a volatile environment ripe for catastrophic miscalculation and conflict, making a shared AI paradigm a strategic necessity for peace.

Despite intense technological competition, both the U.S. and China face a common threat from non-state actors like terrorist or criminal groups acquiring powerful AI models. This shared vulnerability presents a potential opportunity for cooperation on AI regulation and safeguards, even amid broader strategic rivalry.

The AI competition is not a race to develop the most powerful technology, but a race to see which nation is better at steering and governing that power. Developing an uncontrollable 'AI bazooka' first is not a win; true advantage comes from creating systems that strengthen, rather than weaken, one's own society.

Global consensus on AI safety is unlikely soon. The most practical approach is a bilateral agreement between the US and China, the two dominant players. This can begin with informal 'track two' conversations between their respective AI labs before escalating to a formal government pact.

The intense U.S.-China rivalry prevents cooperation on AI safety, creating a dangerous vacuum. Without guardrails or arms control agreements, the risk of rogue AI agents or AI-powered weapons in nuclear or biological domains threatens to 'set back civilization.'