IASEAI’25 vs. The AI Action Summit: Will AI Be Driven by Cooperation or Competition?

Last week in Paris, two back-to-back AI conferences painted starkly different visions of the future. The inaugural International Association for Safe and Ethical Artificial Intelligence (IASEAI’25) focused on AI safety, ethics, and global regulatory frameworks, bringing together a coalition of thinkers, policymakers, and Nobel Laureates. It was a call for restraint, cooperation, and the responsible stewardship of artificial intelligence.

The Paris AI Action Summit, however, struck a very different tone. If the IASEAI’25 was a discussion on mitigating risks, the Action Summit was a rallying cry for acceleration, national competitiveness, and economic dominance. And no speaker embodied that contrast more than J.D. Vance, the newly minted Vice President of the United States, who proclaimed:

We’re not here to talk about AI safety but opportunity.

This divergence in approaches raises critical questions: Will technology drive humanity, or will humanity drive technology? And more pressingly, will AI be shaped by global consensus, or will it be a battleground for geopolitical dominance?

IASEAI’25: A Call for Ethical AI and Global Cooperation

At the IASEAI’25 conference, safety, regulation, and cooperation were the dominant themes. Speakers such as Joseph Stiglitz, Maria Ressa, Max Tegmark, and Stuart Russell underscored the need for strong AI governance, arguing that without it, AI could exacerbate inequality, threaten democracy, and become an existential risk to humanity.

Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz emphasized that AI’s economic benefits would be meaningless without just distribution mechanisms, warning that unchecked AI development risks deepening inequality and undermining social stability.

Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa echoed this sentiment, highlighting how AI-driven disinformation and algorithmic manipulation threaten democracy and free speech.

Physicist Max Tegmark and computer scientist Stuart Russell reinforced the long-term existential risks, with Russell warning that “Unaligned AI is a threat greater than nuclear weapons” if left unregulated.

Key Takeaways from IASEAI’25:

• Global cooperation is necessary to set ethical AI guidelines.
• AI safety research and regulation must be prioritized over profit and competition.
• Unchecked AI development risks amplifying disinformation, inequality, and social instability.
• Regulation should not stifle innovation but create safeguards to prevent catastrophic risks.

Paris AI Action Summit: A Clash of Philosophies

The Paris AI Action Summit was, in many ways, the opposite of IASEAI’25. Hosted by France’s President Emmanuel Macron and India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the summit positioned AI as a tool for global progress, with a strong emphasis on economic growth, innovation, and national AI strategies.

Macron attempted to strike a balance, stating,

Paradise cannot mean the Wild West.

Modi, on the other hand, offered a vision where

AI is writing the code for humanity.

Yet it was J.D. Vance’s keynote speech that truly crystallized the American stance—a rejection of global AI regulation in favor of national supremacy and deregulation. Vance made four key points:

1. AI will remain an American-dominated industry, with US companies setting the global gold standard.
2. Excessive regulation would kill the industry just as it is taking off.
3. AI must remain free from “ideological bias,” a thinly veiled critique of regulations that ensure fairness and diversity.
4. The Trump Administration believes that AI will follow a “pro-worker growth path,” arguing that
   “Humans will never be replaced” by AI.

He further warned:

America cannot and will not tolerate tightening the screws on American AI companies.

The message was clear: The Trump administration views AI as an economic and military race, not an ethical dilemma.

Europe vs. America: A Fundamental Divide

The differences between the two conferences mirror the growing AI divide between Europe and the United States.

• IASEAI’25 was about cooperation, global ethics, and regulatory frameworks.
• The Paris AI Action Summit—particularly the US stance—was about competition, national advantage, and a laissez-faire approach.

While Europe champions AI regulation, safety, and transparency, the US, under Trump and Vance, is pushing for dominance, deregulation, and economic acceleration.

Yet, the divide is not absolute. Modi’s remarks, for example, aligned more with the European vision of collective AI governance, while Macron balanced the need for innovation with ethical considerations.

The question of AI’s future is, therefore, not simply a matter of regulation vs. acceleration but rather a philosophical and strategic choice:

• Will AI be a force for cooperation or a tool of geopolitical competition?
• Will we build global governance mechanisms, or will national interests take precedence?
• Will AI be guided by wisdom, or will it be another example of genius without restraint?

Because while Modi says, “AI is writing the code for humanity,” I might say:

AI may be writing the code for humanity, but humanity is writing its story with the help of AI.

The challenge is ensuring that we are the authors of our own future rather than mere passengers in an AI-driven world.

The Future Remains Unwritten

As the conferences ended and the world’s policymakers, scientists, and business leaders dispersed, the contrast between the two gatherings could not be clearer.

The IASEAI’25 spoke of cooperation and restraint. The Paris AI Action Summit spoke of acceleration and opportunity.

Neither side is entirely right—or entirely wrong. The future is not predetermined, which is precisely why we call it the future.

The critical question remains:

Will technology drive humanity, or will humanity drive technology?

The answer will define our era—and determine whether AI becomes a tool for liberation or an instrument of unchecked power and, possibly, self-destruction.

The clock is ticking. The choice is ours.