Introduction
In recent decades, the world has witnessed a fundamental transformation in the structure of power. Suppose in the twentieth century, oil and energy were the central axes of competition among powers, in the twenty-first century. In that case, this position has been taken over by data and artificial intelligence. In other words, what determines the superiority of nations in global politics today is not merely military weapons or natural resources, but rather the ability to dominate algorithms, data, and advanced technologies. This reality has paved the way for the emergence of a new concept in international relations known as the Geopolitics of Artificial Intelligence.
In short, the geopolitics of artificial intelligence studies the connection between intelligent technologies and political power on a global scale. This concept seeks to show how countries use artificial intelligence as a tool for influence, control, and competition. On one hand, AI can contribute to economic development, improve public services, and enhance national security; on the other hand, the very same technology can become an instrument for mass surveillance, cyber warfare, and even the shaping of global public opinion. Therefore, understanding the geopolitics of artificial intelligence is essential for analyzing the future of the international order.
In this regard, many analysts believe that the primary competition of the twenty-first century is not between ideological blocs, but between algorithms and data. The United States and China are at the forefront of this race, each striving to dominate the technology production chain and shape global standards to its own advantage. Meanwhile, the European Union, emphasizing “digital sovereignty,” seeks to preserve its technological independence. Thus, in a world where data has become the main source of power, the geopolitics of artificial intelligence is not only determining the future of the economy but also redefining politics, ethics, and even the very concept of humanity within the global order.
Artificial Intelligence as a Tool of Global Power
Understanding the concept of the geopolitics of artificial intelligence is impossible without considering the role this technology plays in the structure of global power. From past to present, each historical era has been defined by a specific material source of power: land in the agricultural age, industry in the modern era, and information in the digital age. Now, with the emergence of artificial intelligence, we have entered a stage in which data and algorithms have become the most important instruments of domination and political competition. States and corporations capable of collecting, processing, and analyzing massive amounts of data are effectively in a position to determine the economic, military, and even cultural directions of the world.
Among these actors, the United States and China stand at the forefront of the global race for artificial intelligence. The U.S., relying on advanced technology companies such as Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI, leads in developing sophisticated algorithms and intelligent language models. In contrast, China, through centralized government policies and strong support for companies like Alibaba and Baidu, seeks to expand a digital order based on surveillance and social control. Thus, the competition between these two great powers is emerging not only in the economic sphere but also at the civilizational and value-based levels. One of the main characteristics of the geopolitics of AI is precisely this confrontation between “data freedom” in the West and “data control” in the East.
At the same time, artificial intelligence has a dual nature: it is a tool for progress and control simultaneously. Technologies such as facial recognition, behavioral analytics, and neural networks can, on one hand, enhance public security, yet on the other hand, they grant governments unprecedented power to monitor their citizens. In fact, the boundary between security and authoritarianism in the age of AI has become exceedingly thin. This has led many international relations theorists to speak of the emergence of a new form of “technological power,” one no longer based on territorial dominance but on mastery over data and computation.
Nevertheless, it must be remembered that technological power alone does not guarantee geopolitical superiority. Just as industrial superiority in the twentieth-century wars was ineffective without political cohesion, in the new era, technological supremacy without effective governance frameworks may lead to a crisis of legitimacy or moral collapse. From this perspective, the geopolitics of artificial intelligence is not merely a competition among states—it represents a deeper issue: how the relationship between technology, humanity, and power is defined in the contemporary world.
The Political Economy of Artificial Intelligence: Data, Capital, and Digital Sovereignty
To gain a deeper understanding of the geopolitics of artificial intelligence, one must recognize that AI is not merely a technological tool—it is the beating heart of the political economy of the new world. Just as oil formed the foundation of economic and political power in the twentieth century, data has become the vital source of power in the twenty-first. The greater a country’s access to Big Data, the higher its capacity to develop advanced algorithms, strengthen security, and dominate the global technology market. From this perspective, data can be regarded as a form of geopolitical capital, the control of which has the potential to transform global power dynamics.
In the past decade, the accumulation of personal, economic, and social data in the hands of major technology corporations has created a new structure of power—what can be described as data capitalism. In this structure, companies such as Amazon, Google, Baidu, and Meta are not merely economic players but geopolitical actors with influence that often surpasses that of nation-states. On the other hand, this massive concentration of data within the private sector has blurred the boundaries between national and corporate interests. For example, American companies, while cooperating with the Washington government to maintain technological superiority over China, are also active in Asian markets—a duality that partly explains the complexity of the geopolitics of artificial intelligence.
In this context, the concept of Digital Sovereignty has become one of the key terms in global politics. Countries are seeking to establish a degree of digital independence by enacting national laws governing data storage, privacy protection, and the regulation of technology companies. The European Union, through regulations such as the GDPR and the AI Act, aims to reduce technological dependence on the United States and to offer a model of ethical governance over artificial intelligence. Conversely, China, by restricting the free flow of data and relying on its domestic networks, promotes a model of cyber sovereignty based on state control.
However, on a global scale, these efforts have deepened the digital divide between the Global North and South. Developing countries, lacking the technological infrastructure and human capital required for producing data and algorithms, have become passive consumers of Western or Eastern AI products. Some scholars refer to this phenomenon as data colonialism—a process through which the data of societies in the Global South are extracted and analyzed by corporations and governments of the North, without the benefits ever returning to the originating countries. This technological inequality has added a new dimension to the geopolitics of AI, as digital power now plays the same role that financial capital did in the twentieth century.
Consequently, it can be said that today’s geopolitics is more tightly bound to the political economy of technology than ever before. Power now lies not only in the ownership of territory but also in the ownership of data and algorithmic capability. In other words, any country capable of controlling the flow of data effectively occupies a decisive position in shaping the future global order.
Ethics, Control, and Technological Authoritarianism
One of the central questions in the discussion of AI geopolitics is whether technological advancement necessarily leads to greater freedom and democracy, or conversely, whether it can serve as a tool for authoritarianism and deeper human control. The answer is far from simple, but evidence suggests that in many societies—especially in East Asia—AI technologies have become the backbone of surveillance systems. For example, the Chinese government, through facial recognition, behavioral analysis, and the digital social credit system, has created a model of technological governance founded on continuous monitoring and intelligent punishment. This model represents a new face of authoritarianism in which technology has replaced traditional repression.
In contrast, although technological surveillance in Western countries is less overt, similar dangers exist. American and European tech companies collect and analyze enormous volumes of user data to predict consumption patterns, political behavior, and even emotional tendencies. In this context, the line between privacy and commercial or security interests gradually dissolves. Thus, even in societies that appear free, a kind of soft authoritarianism is emerging—an authoritarianism exercised not through police or armies, but through algorithms and digital platforms.
In response to this trend, the European Union has attempted to establish an ethical framework for the development and use of AI through restrictive laws such as the AI Act. The goal of these laws is to preserve human dignity and prevent algorithmic discrimination. However, critics argue that such policies may, in practice, slow down technological innovation and leave Europe lagging behind in the global competition. This tension between ethics and power is one of the defining features of AI geopolitics: nations that are most ethically sensitive may fall behind technologically, whereas those that set aside moral constraints may advance more rapidly.
Nevertheless, it must be recognized that the issue of ethics in AI is not merely a technical or legal matter—it is fundamentally philosophical. The essential question is whether human decision-making can be delegated to algorithms that lack moral understanding. Is the human being, in the age of artificial intelligence, still a moral agent, or has he been reduced to a predictable and controllable subject? These questions are especially critical in international politics, for nations that control algorithms also possess the capacity to engineer global narratives. For this reason, some thinkers speak of the emergence of an Algorithmic State—a state in which major political decisions are made not through human dialogue and popular legitimacy, but based on data analysis, machine predictions, and mathematical logic.
In conclusion, it can be said that ethics in the geopolitics of artificial intelligence has become a new battlefield of power—a struggle between transparency and control, freedom and security, humanity and the algorithm. A world in which technology ceases to serve humanity and instead begins to shape it is not merely facing a political challenge but a profound crisis of meaning and identity.
Technological Alliances and Blocs in the Geopolitics of Artificial Intelligence
In today’s world, technological power is no longer defined purely on a national basis; rather, it is deeply dependent on international alliances and networks of technology. Every country, in order to maintain its position within the digital order, is compelled to actively participate in one of the global technology blocs. This phenomenon—known as Digital Bloc Formation—has become one of the fundamental components of the geopolitics of artificial intelligence. In simple terms, just as political blocs of East and West emerged during the Cold War, technological blocs are now forming in the present era. The key difference, however, is that the dividing lines are no longer drawn by ideology, but by data, infrastructure, and AI standards.
At the heart of this new division, three primary axes can be identified: the American bloc, the Chinese bloc, and the European bloc. The American bloc, led by the United States, relies on private-sector innovation and a network of technology-oriented allies such as Japan, South Korea, and Australia. This bloc pursues a strategy known as Technological Democracy, seeking to restrict the transfer of technology to geopolitical rivals through control over the export of advanced chips. In line with this strategy, the United States, by imposing technological sanctions on China and Russia, effectively employs the “technology economy” as a tool of hard power.
In contrast, China, through its Digital Silk Road Initiative, seeks to draw a network of developing countries into its technological orbit. By exporting surveillance technologies, investing in internet infrastructure, and promoting domestic digital platforms, China aims to build an Asian digital order. In this bloc, the state plays a central role, and technology is defined not merely as an economic instrument but as a tool of governance and political influence. As a result, many Asian and African nations, which urgently require rapid technological development, have gradually gravitated toward this Chinese model.
Meanwhile, the European Union is striving to maintain a balance between the two major poles of power and to move toward Digital Strategic Autonomy. European policies in the field of artificial intelligence primarily focus on transparency, data security, and ethics. Europe aims to establish itself as a regulatory power in the global digital order by developing international standards for the safe and responsible use of AI. This approach represents a new form of technological soft power, which exerts influence not through military or informational competition but through legislation and norm-setting.
However, it should not be overlooked that many medium and small powers are also seeking to free themselves from dependence on these major blocs. Countries such as India, Brazil, and the United Arab Emirates are pursuing indigenous models of AI development to secure a share in the global competition while maintaining technological independence. The rise of these independent actors could gradually lead to the emergence of Digital Multipolarity—an order in which no single country possesses absolute dominance in the realm of technology.
Ultimately, technological alliances today play the same role that military alliances did in the past century. The geopolitics of artificial intelligence has become an arena where cooperation and competition, partnership and rivalry, coexist simultaneously. Any nation capable of attracting a larger network of allies in research, data sharing, and standardization will, in the near future, be the one to determine the overall direction of digital civilization.
The Future of the Global Order in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Technological transformations have always reshaped the course of international relations. Just as the Industrial Revolution led to the rise of modern empires and the Atomic Age redefined the balance of power, the Artificial Intelligence Revolution is now rewriting the global map of power. In this context, the concept of the geopolitics of artificial intelligence is the key to understanding this profound transformation—one that affects not only economic structures but also the political and ethical foundations of the international system.
In the traditional international order, power was primarily based on physical resources and military capabilities. In the emerging order, however, power increasingly depends on the control of data, algorithmic processing capacity, and ownership of intelligent technologies. Within this framework, data superpowers play the same role that industrial powers did in the nineteenth century. This new form of power is both soft and hard: soft because it relies on cultural and cognitive influence, and hard because it can reshape the actual structures of the global economy and security. For this reason, some researchers speak of the rise of Algorithmic Hegemony—a condition in which the country or bloc that controls digital infrastructure effectively directs the world’s political and cultural future.
Moreover, it must not be forgotten that artificial intelligence has blurred the line between war and peace. Today, competition among states does not necessarily unfold on physical battlefields but rather through cyber wars, information operations, and the manipulation of public opinion via data. In such circumstances, the notion of national security has expanded in an unprecedented way—to include digital security, cognitive security, and algorithmic security. Therefore, countries lacking the necessary infrastructure in these areas face a silent yet fundamental threat: the loss of informational sovereignty.
Nonetheless, alongside these threats lie new opportunities. The development of artificial intelligence can provide innovative tools to address global challenges such as climate change, poverty, and disease. If international cooperation in technology replaces pure competition, the global order could be redefined in a more equitable way. Unfortunately, the current reality tends more toward the weaponization of technology rather than its sharing. This trend deepens the gap between major powers and peripheral countries, turning technological injustice into one of the defining crises of the twenty-first century.
As a result, the future of the global order in the age of artificial intelligence depends on two possible paths. The first is a world in which AI becomes a tool of domination, surveillance, and endless power rivalry—a world marked by mistrust, digital inequality, and the continual threat to human freedom. The second is a world in which intelligent technology serves human progress, transparency, and global cooperation. The choice between these two paths depends above all on the political will of governments, the ethical awareness of elites, and the cultural maturity of societies.
In summary, the geopolitics of artificial intelligence is not merely a technological issue but a civilizational one. What lies before us is not simply a competition between the United States and China, or between East and West, but a contest between two distinct understandings of humanity and the future: the human being as a tool of the algorithm, or the algorithm as a tool of humanity. The future of the global order depends on our answer to this very question.
Final Summary: From Traditional Geopolitics to the Geopolitics of Artificial Intelligence
An analysis of recent global developments shows that the concept of power is undergoing a fundamental transformation. In the twentieth century, power was tied to natural resources, military strength, and industrial supremacy. In the twenty-first century, however, power has taken on a new and invisible form: the power of data and algorithms. Within this context, the geopolitics of artificial intelligence has emerged as a new paradigm in international relations, replacing many classical models of power.
Today, competition among states is no longer fought over territory but over data and the control of digital infrastructure. The United States, relying on leading companies such as Google, Microsoft, and Amazon, seeks to preserve its technological dominance, while China, by combining technology with authoritarian governance, offers its own model of digital sovereignty. Europe, in turn, is attempting to find a middle path between market freedom and state control through strict regulatory frameworks. Meanwhile, developing countries risk digital marginalization, as their access to advanced technologies and data resources remains limited.
However, the geopolitics of artificial intelligence is not only about competition among powers—it is also about redefining the relationship between humanity and technology. Whether AI becomes a tool for expanding freedom, transparency, and global cooperation, or a mechanism of control, surveillance, and domination, depends on the political and ethical decisions we make today. In reality, the future global order will not be shaped on battlefields but within digital codes and algorithmic decisions.
Therefore, understanding the geopolitics of artificial intelligence is essential for every researcher, policymaker, and citizen. This phenomenon is not merely a part of the future—it is the reality of our present, a reality that is redefining the boundaries between economy, security, and politics. In a world where data has become the primary source of power, ignoring this transformation is tantamount to losing one’s place in the global order of the future.
