World February 5, 2026

U.S. and China Decline to Back Military AI Declaration as Only a Third of Summit Attendees Sign

Non-binding commitment adopted by 35 of 85 nations highlights friction over rules for AI deployment in warfare amid strategic competition

By Caleb Monroe
U.S. and China Decline to Back Military AI Declaration as Only a Third of Summit Attendees Sign

At the Responsible AI in the Military Domain summit in A Coruna, Spain, just 35 of 85 participating countries approved a non-binding set of 20 principles for using artificial intelligence in military settings. Both the United States and China declined to join the declaration. Delegates cited strained transatlantic ties and strategic concerns that limit willingness to commit to shared policies, even as officials warn rapid AI advances risk accidents or unintended escalation.

Key Points

  • Only 35 of 85 countries at the REAIM summit in A Coruna, Spain, signed a non-binding pledge of 20 principles on military AI governance - indicating limited consensus among attendees.
  • Both the United States and China chose not to endorse the declaration, illustrating the reluctance of two major military powers to commit to the joint text.
  • Sectors affected include defense and technology - the declaration addresses oversight, testing, and training for military AI systems, which are relevant to defense procurement and AI development efforts in the tech sector.

Delegations meeting in A Coruna, Spain, produced a modest, non-binding declaration on the military use of artificial intelligence on Thursday, but only around a third of attendees signed on and two major military powers - the United States and China - opted not to endorse the pledge.

The Responsible AI in the Military Domain, or REAIM, summit was attended by 85 countries. By the end of the day, 35 had put their names to a document outlining 20 principles intended to guide how states govern AI in warfare. The text reiterates that humans must retain responsibility for AI-enabled weapons, calls for clear chains of command and control, and urges the sharing of information about national oversight systems when consistent with national security.

The declaration also stresses the role of risk assessments, robust testing regimes, and training and education for personnel entrusted with operating military AI capabilities. While the document does not create legal obligations, delegates said some governments were reluctant to endorse more specific policies given strategic uncertainties.

Delegates and officials at the conference pointed to tensions between the United States and some European allies, and to broader uncertainty about the future shape of transatlantic relations, as factors that made countries cautious about committing to a joint text. That reluctance was reflected in the comparatively low number of signatories.

"Russia and China are moving very fast. That creates urgency to make progress in developing AI. But seeing it going fast also increases the urgency to keep working on its responsible use. The two go hand-in-hand," Dutch Defence Minister Ruben Brekelmans told reporters.

Brekelmans framed the situation as a balance between moving quickly to keep pace with rivals and the need to pursue responsible controls. Several attendees described the position facing governments as a kind of "prisoner’s dilemma" - where putting restrictions in place could be viewed as a handicap if adversaries do not follow suit.

Major signatories to Thursday's text included Canada, Germany, France, Britain, the Netherlands, South Korea and Ukraine. Observers noted that the picture contrasts with two earlier military AI gatherings: meetings in The Hague and in Seoul in 2023 and 2024, when roughly 60 nations - excluding China but including the United States - backed a modest, non-binding "blueprint for action." The current document likewise stopped short of legal commitments.

Yasmin Afina, a researcher at the U.N. Institute for Disarmament Research who advised on the process, said some participants remained uneasy about endorsing more concrete measures despite the non-binding nature of the text. That hesitancy, she said, contributed to the lower turnout of signatories.

Supporters of the declaration emphasized that the pledge was an attempt to respond to fast-moving advances in AI technology and to reduce the risk that deployment in military contexts could lead to accidents, miscalculation or unintended escalation. At the same time, the summit highlighted the political and strategic frictions that complicate multilateral attempts to set common standards.

The resulting division at the REAIM summit underlines ongoing challenges for governments seeking to reconcile national security priorities with efforts to promote responsible practices for military AI.

Risks

  • Rapid advances in AI could outpace rules for its military use, increasing the risk of accidents, miscalculation or unintended escalation - a concern explicitly cited in the summit discussions.
  • A strategic 'prisoner’s dilemma' may discourage governments from imposing restrictions if rivals do not reciprocate, complicating coordinated governance and affecting defense and security planning.
  • Uncertainty in transatlantic relations and hesitancy by some nations to commit to shared policies may weaken collective frameworks for oversight, with implications for defense procurement strategies and international cooperation on AI governance.

More from World

Trump Reaffirms Support for Viktor Orbán Ahead of Hungary’s April Vote Feb 5, 2026 Venezuelan Draft Amnesty Seeks Immediate Releases, Asset Returns and Lifts on International Warrants Feb 5, 2026 Trump Signals Readiness to Reinforce Diego Garcia if Lease Deal Falters Feb 5, 2026 Bailey Says March Rate Cut Is a 50-50 Prospect After Split BoE Vote Feb 5, 2026 Czech National Bank Keeps Policy Rate at 3.5% as Inflation Signals Diverge Feb 5, 2026