The UK and US: AI Outlaws, Out of Touch or Just Plain Out of Ideas?

The UK and US love to position themselves as global leaders in AI. But when it comes to actual global cooperation? They’d rather sit on the side-lines.

While 60 other nations signed a declaration for ethical, sustainable, and inclusive AI, the UK and US refused—because apparently, keeping AI unchecked and profit-driven is the real priority.

Welcome to another edition of the best damn newsletter in human-centric innovation.

Here’s what we’re covering today:

→ Why the US sees AI regulation as a threat, not a necessity

→ How the UK’s refusal to sign exposes its lack of independent strategy

→ What this means for global AI governance (and why the UK & US might regret it)

Let’s get to it! 👇

Leading From the Back of The Pack

Well, well, well. The UK and the US have once again graced the world stage—this time, by spectacularly refusing to sign a Paris summit declaration on inclusive and sustainable AI. It’s almost impressive, really. Sixty other nations, including France, China, India, Japan, Australia, and Canada, managed to get on board with the idea of AI that is ethical, transparent, and sustainable. But the Anglo-American duo? Nah. Too busy keeping their “strategic room” firmly downstream of Silicon Valley’s whims.

This is not just a diplomatic cold shoulder; it’s a calculated shrug. A UK government spokesperson mumbled something about the declaration lacking practical clarity on global governance—which is a bit rich, coming from the country whose AI policy changes direction more often than a self-driving car with a dodgy GPS. Meanwhile, the US, led by Vice-President JD Vance, went full cowboy, declaring that Europe’s excessive regulation was strangling the industry. Because heaven forbid AI be safe, ethical, or—God help us—held accountable.

What’s the Real Issue?

Let’s not pretend this is about governance complexity. This is about power and profit. The UK and the US are reluctant to embrace global AI regulation because it might mean they have to play by someone else’s rules for once. And let’s be honest—when the AI gold rush is in full swing, the last thing Silicon Valley and Westminster want is oversight that might make exploitation just a little bit harder.

Here’s what’s really going on:

1. The US Wants AI to Stay Its Wild West Playground

Vance’s speech made it abundantly clear—America has no interest in global AI regulation unless it’s the one writing the rules. Anything that even remotely hints at cooperation with China is a no-go, and any effort to rein in AI’s worst excesses is “overregulation.” Never mind that unchecked AI development has already fuelled misinformation, job displacement, and bias at an industrial scale.

2. The UK Has No Independent Strategy (As Usual)

Labour MPs have already admitted it: Britain is simply following America’s lead. Because that’s what a “Global AI Superpower” does, right? When asked why the UK refused to sign, Keir Starmer’s spokesperson gave a non-answer so vague it might as well have been AI-generated. Meanwhile, experts warn that this move could undermine the UK’s so-called world-leading AI Safety Institute. But hey, who needs credibility when you can just hitch a ride on the coattails of American tech giants?

3. Reputation, Reputation, Reputation

Campaigners are calling out the UK’s decision as a self-inflicted wound to its AI credibility. Andrew Dudfield of Full Fact warns that by refusing to commit to global governance, the UK risks “undercutting its hard-won credibility” as a leader in ethical AI. But let’s be real—was there ever any credibility to undercut? When Britain’s approach to AI ethics is essentially “trust us, we’ve got this”, the rest of the world has every right to roll its eyes.

The Bigger Picture

The UK and the US have long been happy to play global moral arbiters—lecturing other nations on human rights, democracy, and good governance. But when it comes to setting up AI rules that might actually hold their tech industries accountable? Suddenly, it’s all too complicated.

The irony? As America and Britain reject international AI oversight, they’re paving the way for other nations—yes, even China—to take the lead in shaping the future of AI governance. While they stall, the rest of the world moves on.

So, What’s Next?

• Will the UK and US eventually come crawling back to the table when it’s too late to shape the rules? Probably.

• Will this embolden Europe, China, and others to push ahead with their own AI standards? Almost certainly.

• Will AI ethics ever be taken seriously by the Anglo-American tech world? Not if there’s a profit margin at stake.

But hey, at least they’re staying consistent. When faced with the choice between global cooperation and corporate convenience, they’ll pick Big Tech every time.

AI Governance Isn’t a Sideshow—It’s the Main Event

The UK and US may think they can dodge global AI oversight, but the rest of the world isn’t waiting. From ethical risks to geopolitical power plays, AI is shaping the future faster than policymakers can keep up.

If you want to understand what’s really at stake—and why AI governance isn’t just red tape—now’s the time to dig deeper.

That’s exactly why I’ve launched a new course at the Netropolitan Academy: AI Uncovered. It cuts through the jargon, breaking down the real impact of AI on policy, ethics, and industry—so you can stay ahead without needing a tech background.

Ready to see what’s next? Let’s go.