Countries Balance US-China AI Blocs, 1News Reports
As the United States and China form their own AI blocs, countries like Kazakhstan are maneuvering to harness the strengths of both groupings, 1News reported.
The Diplomatic Balancing Act in Central Asia
The window for nations to choose freely between the two AI superpowers is narrowing, according to analysts who point to the emerging division between the US-led Pax Silica and the China-inspired World AI Cooperation Organisation. Kazakhstan, a Central Asian nation of approximately 21 million residents, has actively engaged with both coalitions to avoid a binary choice. In June, AI Minister Zhaslan Madiyev visited Washington to join a US initiative strengthening AI supply chains, before traveling to Shanghai three weeks later to sign on as a founding member of China’s global AI agenda.
“Everyone is hedging,” said Dana Masalimova, a former Kazakhstan diplomat and independent scholar and centre associate at Harvard University’s Kathryn W. and Shelby Cullom Davis Centre for Russian and Eurasian Studies. “We don’t want this binary choice.”
This diplomatic maneuverability stems from the country’s rich deposits of critical mineral resources essential to artificial intelligence development, alongside cheap electricity capable of powering heavy data centers. Earlier this year, the Kazakh government finalized an investment agreement valued at up to US$10 billion involving Nvidia to construct a dedicated data center valley. Concurrently, Chinese foreign direct investment in the country reached a record US$2.8 billion in 2025, supported by bilateral infrastructure agreements under the Belt and Road initiative following a meeting between Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.
Washington Pressure and Beijing Courtship
Both superpowers are using access to advanced technologies to expand global influence, though their diplomatic strategies diverge significantly. US officials have emphasized that participation in Pax Silica is restricted to trusted partners, stating that countries cannot engage in competing initiatives for superintelligence without forfeiting their status. Beijing, by contrast, promotes the openness of its World AI Cooperation Organisation, which counts 28 other initial founding nations—including Pakistan and Russia—among its ranks.
The differing approaches reflect underlying strategic realities. Kyle Chan, a fellow at The Brookings Institution’s John L. Thornton China Centre, noted that Beijing requires an alternative coalition to court third countries, whereas Washington relies on an established network of allies. This dynamic increases the bargaining power of swing countries.
Indonesia, possessing vital nickel and copper resources, has similarly joined China’s AI organization while maintaining openness to US firms. Mari Pangestu, vice chair of the Indonesian National Economic Council, affirmed that the nation intends to benefit from both technological ecosystems. In Singapore, Anthropic established a new Asia office while local officials consider joining Chinese AI initiatives. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia partnered with a Chinese AI firm to build a platform on an open model while simultaneously securing advanced chips through an agreement with Nvidia.
Strategic Alignment for Middle Powers
Middle powers lacking domestic frontier AI development capabilities face distinct structural limitations.
Pew Research Center data indicates that public trust in China regarding AI regulation has risen across several middle-income markets.
Despite the tightening technological bifurcation, most governments resist complete alignment. Aalok Mehta, director of the Wadhwani AI Centre at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, noted that nations are primarily focused on national AI sovereignty because distinct advantages and disadvantages exist across competing technology stacks.