After advocating for minimal AI regulation, the administration's abrupt action against Anthropic's Fable model signals a chaotic policy reversal. This unpredictable shift from "let it rip" to ad-hoc intervention threatens investment and the future of American AI development by creating an unstable regulatory environment.
The government used a private "is informed" letter to apply deemed export controls, which regulate a foreign national's access to technology *within* the US. This powerful tool effectively halted the Fable model's use, even by Anthropic's own foreign national employees, without public rule-making or debate.
The recent restrictions on allies signal a shift toward a tiered system for frontier AI models, similar to how advanced weaponry is shared. Top US government entities and companies will get first access, followed by a lower tier of close allies, who should not expect unfettered access to the latest American AI capabilities.
The current US strategy is contradictory. While taking extreme measures to block allies like Canada from accessing advanced US AI models, the administration's inaction has left open loopholes that allow Chinese firms to freely acquire the very chips needed to build competing models. This highlights a critical disconnect.
Maintaining a significant technological lead over China is not just about competition. It allows US policymakers the time and space to develop a thoughtful, robust, and predictable domestic AI regulatory framework without the pressure of a neck-and-neck race, which forces chaotic, reactive measures that harm innovation.
The Trump administration's failure to replace the Biden-era "AI diffusion rule" for over a year after declaring it non-enforced is the direct cause of a loophole allowing Chinese subsidiaries to buy advanced chips. This was not a policy choice but a significant bureaucratic failure that undermined the entire export control regime.
The growing consensus in Congress for AI regulation is driven less by national security or abstract safety concerns and more by the pragmatic fear of massive job displacement in their home districts. This political reality is creating unlikely bipartisan alliances focused on mitigating the economic disruption of AI.
The massive capital expenditures by hyperscalers are predicated on the assumption that AI models will continue to improve and generate economic utility. Sudden, unpredictable regulatory actions that halt model progress, like the Fable takedown, create significant uncertainty that could undermine the business case for this enormous build-out.
While the US government is reacting chaotically to domestic AI models, it has no corresponding strategy for ensuring global AI infrastructure is safe. This policy vacuum is critical as other countries will soon develop frontier capabilities without US-style safeguards, creating a global proliferation risk that isn't being addressed.