We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Biden pushes forward on AI
Joe Biden is starting to walk the talk on artificial intelligence. Federal agencies have until December to get a handle on how to use — and minimize the risks from — AI, thanks to new instructions from the White House Office of Management and Budget. The policies mark the next step along the path laid out by Biden’s October AI executive order, adding specific goals after a period of evaluation.
What’s new
Federal agencies will need to “assess, test, and monitor” the impact of AI, “mitigate the risks of algorithmic discrimination,” and provide “transparency into how the government uses AI.”
It’s unclear to what extent AI currently factors into government work. The Defense Department already has key AI investments, while other agencies may only be toying with the new technology. Under Biden’s new rules, agencies seeking to use AI must create an “impact assessment” for the tools they use, conduct real-world testing before deployment, obtain independent evaluation from an oversight board or another body, do regular monitoring and risk-assessment, and work to mitigate any associated risks.
Adam Conner, vice president of technology policy at the Center for American Progress, says that the OMB guidance is “an important step in articulating that AI should be used by federal agencies in a responsible way.”
The OMB policy isn’t solely aimed at protecting against AI’s harms. It mandates that federal agencies name a Chief AI Officer charged with implementing the new standards. These new government AI czars are meant to work across agencies, coordinate the administration’s AI goals, and remove barriers to innovation within government.
What it means
Dev Saxena, director of Eurasia Group's geo-technology practice, said the policies are “precedent-setting,” especially in the absence of comprehensive artificial intelligence legislation like the one the European Union recently passed.
Saxena noted that the policies will move the government further along than industry in terms of safety and transparency standards for AI since there’s no federal law governing this technology specifically. While many industry leaders have cooperated with the Biden administration and signed a voluntary pledge to manage the risks of AI, the new OMB policies could also serve as a form of “soft law” to force higher standards of testing, risk-assessment, and transparency for the private sector if they want to sell their technology and services to the federal government.
However, there’s a notable carveout for the national security and defense agencies, which could be targets for the most dangerous and insidious uses of AI. We’ve previously written about America’s AI militarization and goal of maintaining a strategic advantage over rivals such as China. While they’re exempted from these new rules, a separate track of defense and national-security guidelines are expected to come later this year.
Fears and concerns
Still, public interest groups are concerned about the ways in which the citizens’ liberties could be curtailed when the government uses AI. The American Civil Liberties Union called on governments to do more to protect citizens from AI. “OMB has taken an important step, but only a step, in protecting us from abuses by AI. Federal uses of AI should not be permitted to undermine rights and safety, but harmful and discriminatory uses of AI by national security agencies, state governments, and more remain largely unchecked,” wrote Cody Venzke, ACLU senior policy counsel, in a statement.
Of course, the biggest risk to the implementation of these policies is the upcoming presidential election. Former President Donald Trump, if reelected, might keep some of the policies aimed at China and other political adversaries, Saxena says, but could significantly pull back from the rights- and safety-focused protections.
Beyond the uncertainty of election season, the Biden administration has a real challenge going from zero to full speed. “The administration should be commended on its work so far,” Conner says, “but now comes the hard part: implementation.”
Bloodbaths vs. Patriots
In the traffic jam of elections that is 2024 – there are over 50 this year worldwide – the US is still the BelAZ 75710 mega hauler of elections, the biggest rig that carries more payload than any other on the political road. So when it tips over, it’s impossible to ignore. Everything matters about the US 2024 election, and we have to stay within the nonpartisan lines to avoid veering off-road.
So after Donald Trump gave a fiery speech in Ohio last weekend about an impending “bloodbath” if he’s not elected, it’s worth sorting through the carnage of coverage to see what he meant. “Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole…” he said. “That’s going to be the least of it, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That’ll be the least of it.”
Did he mean another civil war, as some thought? Or, more plausibly and as his campaign has claimed, did he say it in the context of the auto industry and his concerns about high tariffs from China and Mexico?
That matters. Still, even the most charitable interpretation of Trump’s remarks – and I do think he was referring to the auto industry – doesn’t mean he wasn’t also playing footsie with apocalyptic, blood-soaked rhetoric, as he has long done. Warning people about illegal immigrants “poisoning the bloodstream" of the nation and openly talking about being a “dictator” are now standard parts of his campaign playbook.
The bigger problem is that the fallout obscured a much less difficult-to-interpret and more important moment in Trump's speech in which he openly rebranded the insurrectionists of Jan. 6, 2021, as “patriots” and those who went to prison after fair trials as “hostages.” It’s as if Jan. 6 is some 1979 redux of the Iranian hostage crisis and not a deadly attempt to overturn a free and fair US election. “You see the spirit from the hostages, and that's what they are, is hostages,” he said, adding: “And we’re going to be working on that as soon as the first day we get into office. We’re going to save our country, and we’re going to work with the people to treat those unbelievable patriots.”
The point is that this election is already overturning political norms in ways we have never seen in the US. There are other dynamics worth examining as well. Are Joe Biden and the Democrats radically shifting their support not only away from just the Netanyahu government’s wartime policy, but from Israel in general? What could that mean over the long term in the Middle East? What about getting more support for Ukraine? Or, as Ian Bremmer wrote for GZERO yesterday, how will America's new role as a fossil fuel superpower under a Democratic president play out politically and from a climate change perspective?
These are the core election questions this year. Is the US on the precipice of making fundamental changes to its role in the world and to its core democratic values? In her peerless book, “These Truths,” historian Jill Lepore surveys US history and asks whether the country has always lived up to its foundational values. It is the most important modern history book about the US, and its core thesis is playing out in real-time in the 2024 election.
This is a historic moment of testing that merits deeper coverage. That’s why we at GZERO are boosting our coverage of the US election and its impact on global politics.
First, check out our Election Watch section on the website, where we will aggregate our US and global elections coverage so you can get a clearer picture of what’s happening and what it means.
From April, we will also be changing our weekly video series with Eurasia Group’s Managing Director and lead Washington analyst Jon Lieber to “US Politics: Election 2024” and combining that with the weekly series “3 Big Things to Watch in the Election.”
We will also be continuing to track disinformation and the impact it has on the election as we did last month with the death of Alexei Navalny.
This weekend, on our weekly PBS TV program “GZERO World,” Ian Bremmer dives into the impact US foreign policy may have on the 2024 presidential election. The big question: Would a Trump second term bring considerable change to the way the US does business abroad? Ian’s guest this week, Harvard Kennedy School professor and acclaimed political scientist Stephen Walt, says it probably won’t. Ian disagrees. Tune in for a great debate.
It’s the first of several episodes Ian will devote to covering the US election and America’s impact on the world over the coming critical months.
So, get ready for more coverage and what we do best: more insight into what it means, why it matters, and where we are all headed. Let us know what else you want to see us cover.
President Joe Biden riding around in a Hummer EV during a tour of the General Motors 'Factory ZERO' electric vehicle assembly plant, in Detroit, Michigan, back in 2021.
Biden boosts EVs with new tailpipe emissions rules
As goes the American car market, so goes the world. Or at least large swathes of North America. With the Biden administration’s latest auto regulations, that may mean electric vehicles pull ahead as those with internal combustion engines.
On Wednesday, President Joe Biden introduced tailpipe pollution limits that require automakers to reduce carbon emissions from their vehicles by 56% by 2032 based on 2026 levels.
The new rules also require automakers to ramp up EV production. The administration is aiming for full EVs to account for roughly 35 to 56% of all vehicle sales and for plug-in hybrids to make up 13 to 36% within the next eight years. Full EVs currently account for 7.6% of sales.
Conscious of growing American protectionist impulses – and the coming presidential election – Biden hammed hard on protecting American auto jobs, promising the EVs would be made in the US-of-A. Democrats were concerned about alienating unions or automakers and their workers ahead of November.
In Canada, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government is planning for 20% of new light-duty vehicles sold to be zero-emissions by 2026, gradually rising to 100% by 2035. Biden’s move may help his cause as it pushes automakers to speed up production on more environmentally friendly vehicles.President Joe Biden during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss the war between Israel and Hamas, in Tel Aviv, Israel, Wednesday, Oct. 18, 2023.
Is the US-Israel relationship on the rocks?
The White House seems increasingly fed up with Israel’s approach to its war against Hamas. On Tuesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken – who’s set to visit the region again this week in ongoing efforts to secure another cease-fire – warned that all of Gaza faces “severe” food insecurity.
President Joe Bidenreiterated his opposition to a ground invasion in Rafah during a phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday, reportedly noting that Israel needs a “coherent and sustainable strategy” in Gaza. But on Tuesday, Netanyahu told Israeli lawmakers he would press on into Rafah despite Biden's pleas for restraint.
Will the US punish Israel? If Israel defies the US and invades Rafah, recent reporting suggests Biden could consider conditioning aid to the Jewish State — a step that prominent Democrats are advocating. In another sign of his escalating spat with Bibi, Biden last week applauded Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer after he called for new elections in Israel.
For now, the White House has summoned an Israeli delegation to gather in Washington by early next week for a discussion on an alternative to invading Rafah. But Netanyahu said Tuesday that Israel is “determined” to eliminate Hamas fighters in Rafah, adding, “There's no way to do that except by going in on the ground.”
Biden and Trudeau face headwinds … from Gaza
Last Thursday, after Joe Biden promised during his State of the Union to build a pier to deliver aid to Gaza, Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet shook the president’s hand, congratulated him on the speech, and urged him to push Israel to do more on “humanitarian stuff.”
Biden, caught on a hot mic, nodded in agreement and said he was pressing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “I told him, Bibi, don’t repeat this, but we are going to have a come-to-Jesus meeting.”
The next day, in the multicultural Toronto suburb of Mississauga, Justin Trudeau's International Development Minister Ahmed Hussenannounced that Canada would resume funding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. Israel has alleged that 12 employees were involved in the Oct. 7 attack on Israel, leading most Western countries to withdraw aid.
Unhappy progressives
Both Biden and Trudeau are responding to pressure to shift their positions on the war in Gaza, which has rattled their electoral coalitions, posing serious challenges for them as they head toward elections in November in the United States and 2025 in Canada.
The White House is aware of the problem. Biden’s aides have had to take steps to avoid pro-Palestinian protests, booking him into smaller venues and holding back event details until the last minute to keep protesters from being able to disrupt him. That is making it hard for him to get his message about student loan relief out on university campuses.
The horrible death toll in Gaza, where thousands of civilians have been killed since October, has led to despair and anger among progressives, not just among people with roots in the Middle East, but among young people and people of color.
There has been a significant generational shift in public opinion. A December New York Times poll found 46% of 18-to-19-year-olds are more sympathetic to Palestinians, compared to 27% who are sympathetic to Israel.
“I tell people all the time, 50 years ago when we had a demonstration from the White House it would be 50 people, all of whom had an Arabic accent, and today it’s tens of thousands of people, and it's a group as diverse as America that's showing up,” says James J. Zogby, founder of the Arab American Institute.
Michigan in the balance
In February’s Democratic presidential primary in Michigan, 13% of voters chose “uncommitted,” sparking similar protest movements in other states, a way for progressives to signal their unhappiness with Biden’s support for Israel in the Gaza war. But unlike the other states, Michigan, home to about 500,000 Arab Americans, is vital if Biden hopes to stay in the White House.
“Michigan had a huge impact because it is difficult to come up with a map where Democrats win the White House without Michigan in the mix, and the percentage of Arab voters in Michigan is high enough to make the difference,” says Zogby.
While the fear isn’t that these voters would flip sides for Donald Trump, the threat is real, says Clayton Allen, US director for the Eurasia Group. “Michigan is a great example where if you see the decline in Arab-American support hold through the election, that would be enough votes — if they would not show up to vote … — that would be enough to erase what had been his margin of victory in 2020.”
Nobody on Trudeau’s side
The situation in Canada is similar. Progressives are so frustrated with the Trudeau government’s position on the war that urban areas once considered safe for the Liberals may now be out of reach for the party.
Trudeau’s fence-sitting on the Gaza war has not endeared him to pro-Israel voters either.
“The Liberal Party has lost, largely, both communities, because they’ve tried to have it both ways,” says pollster Quito Maggi, of Mainstreet Research.
“For electoral purposes, it’s not really great to have nobody on your side,” says one Liberal organizer.
The Liberals have been behind in the polls for so long that some would like to replace Trudeau before the election, but a leadership race while the war continues could be dominated by arguments over Gaza, potentially damaging the party.
The war is not causing similar problems for conservatives in either country, because their coalitions don’t include progressives who are angered by the bombing. They can sit back and watch as their progressive opponents struggle to keep their coalitions together.
Both Biden and Trudeau appear to be in no-win positions. They are angering their progressive bases but would anger other constituencies if they move too far the other way.
“Outside of that young progressive block, most US voters, in total, support US military backing of Israel,” says Allen. “So Biden does bear a risk if he skews too hard to the left. Everyone else can attack him for abandoning Israel. I think that's been one of the limiting factors. It's why we see Biden try to walk this tightrope.”
Both leaders would benefit from bringing the temperature down, which will only happen after the bombs stop falling on Gaza. Few outside Canada have much reason to be greatly concerned about Trudeau’s position, but the United States provides $3.8 billion in military aid to Israel every year, which gives Biden leverage over Netanyahu.
He may need to use it soon to give himself time to win back the progressives whose votes he needs to keep Trump out of the White House.
US House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson holds a press conference at Capitol Hill in Washington, on Feb. 14, 2024.
House launches bipartisan AI task force
The task force will not write legislation, but it will produce a report outlining guiding principles and making broad policy recommendations. Two Californian representatives, Democrat Ted Lieu and Republican Jay Obernolte, will lead the committee. Both men are keenly interested in the subject: Obernolte holds a graduate degree in artificial intelligence, and Lieu spearheaded last year’s stalled efforts to regulate the industry.
The cross-party cooperation stands in notable contrast to the dysfunction the House of Representatives has faced in recent months, with top priorities like border security and aid to allies mired in partisan rancor. It also comes just months after Biden’s executive order, which focused on reducing AI-related risks.
We’re watching for whether the findings produce a more viable legislative path, given the apparent enthusiasm from both parties to end Congressional inaction on artificial intelligence.
President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky walk to the Oval Office of the White House, Thursday, September 21, 2023, in Washington, DC, USA.
White House: Money for Ukraine is running low
The Biden administration on Monday warned Congress that it’s on the verge of running out of money to support Ukraine in its fight against Russia, imploring lawmakers to act before the end of the year. In a letter to congressional leaders, Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young emphasized that if US aid stopped flowing it would “kneecap Ukraine on the battlefield” and increase the “likelihood of Russian military victories.”
So far, Congress has allocated $111 billion to assist Ukraine. But Young said that by mid-November the Defense Department had used up 97% of the $62.3 billion it had received, while the State Department had already utilized 100% of the $4.7 billion in military assistance it received.
Republican opposition: President Joe Biden has pushed for Congress to pass a $106 billion aid package that includes $61 billion for Ukraine, but he’s faced stiff opposition from Republicans. With the 2024 election on the horizon and polling showing voters growing wary of continued US aid to Ukraine, many GOP lawmakers have taken a strong stance against signing off on more funding for Kyiv.
House Speaker Mike Johnson has tied the issue to immigration, signaling that the GOP won’t green-light additional aid to Ukraine unless Biden agrees to changes in border security policy.
The bottom line: The war in Ukraine is largely deadlocked, but if US support dries up it could spell serious trouble for Kyiv in the days ahead.
Enter the chip wars
The Biden administration is desperately trying to halt the outflow of US-made semiconductors, aka chips, to China.
Chips have always been key to each country’s economy — a still-nagging chip shortage has led to manufacturing holdups for new cars, video game consoles, and home appliances since early 2020. But higher-powered chips are also necessary in the race toward superior artificial intelligence capability. It’s a situation that could lead to major ramifications for both consumer tools and military technology. The United States still maintains an edge over China, but the stakes feel higher than ever.
Last year, the US Commerce Department under President Joe Biden issued new rules restricting exports of certain “advanced computing chips” and manufacturing equipment to China. Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Administration Thea D. Rozman Kendler warned that China’s investment in powerful chips was proof that it aims to become a “world leader in artificial intelligence by 2030,” thereby boosting its surveillance and military capabilities. “Our actions will protect US national security and foreign policy interests while also sending a clear message that US technological leadership is about values as well as innovation,” she said.
A clear imperative: Restrict China’s access to good quality chips and contain their military capabilities.
US chipmakers continued, however, to find ways to get their products into China. NVIDIA, the de facto leader in US chipmaking known for its powerful graphics processors, became a trillion-dollar company in May. Chinese firms had placed $5 billion worth of orders for lower-powered NVIDIA chips still allowable under the old rules, but it appears many of those orders were canceled after the US issued an update to plug this loophole.
Last month, the US Commerce Department expanded its list of banned chips and manufacturing equipment to thwart these US-to-China sales. Under the new rules, only lower-capacity chips can be sold to Chinese firms. It also prohibited sales of chips to a new roster of countries it claims serve as pass-throughs for Chinese companies. Given 30 days to halt its shipments, NVIDIA reportedly stopped before the deadline.
But according to new reporting by the Financial Times, NVIDIA is developing three new chips with moderated performance levels specifically to comply with the new regulations and sell to China. It’s the clearest sign yet that Biden is engaged in a cat-and-mouse game with US semiconductor companies, comfortable with razor-thin compliance standards in a lucrative industry.
China’s market will always attract US chipmakers, says Jim Lewis, senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a foreign policy think tank. “The only way to stop the sales is to embargo any chip export to China instead of fussing around with export thresholds,” he says. “NVIDIA is playing hardball, and the administration is stuck. If they play hardball back, it could harm the US chip lead, but if they don't, NVIDIA and others will keep looking for loopholes.”
Xiaomeng Lu, a director in Eurasia Group’s geo-technology practice, is eager to see how the US government’s relationship with NVIDIA progresses. “The company’s behavior has become very annoying to US government officials who are trying to revise their rules once and twice, but it feels like the company is still interested in sneaking around the rules,” she says. “There will be a tussle between the two, and it’ll be interesting to see the regulatory power versus the commercial champion. Who will win this game?”
Lu is also watching to see if the US bans cloud-based access to graphics processors, which would close another loophole for chipmakers seeking access to restricted foreign markets. While NVIDIA is the largest US chipmaker, and the most eager to adapt to changing regulations, other manufacturers are surely watching and could follow suit.
Meanwhile, China is playing nice on the world stage, signing onto an agreement to avert the catastrophic risks of AI brokered by British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak earlier this month. While Sunak earned points for getting China to commit to anything, Beijing merely signed onto “loosely organized slogans” and a nonbinding agreement, Lu says. “Both sides got what they wanted.”
The export restrictions will also push China to look elsewhere. Lewis says that while Biden’s export controls have been successful so far, it’s also inspired the Chinese to “supercharge their chip investments” and shrug off their dependence on the US. Baidu, for example, ordered chips from Huawei this year, a sign that the Chinese tech sector may be becoming less reliant on NVIDIA and US-made chips.
The US should be careful, says Lewis, not to slow its chipmakers’ progress while curbing China’s capabilities. “It’s more important that the US accelerate its own AI development, since China will be hard to stop,” he adds. “The US leads in AI so the main issue is not doing something to mess that up, like creating regulatory hurdles for imaginary risks.”