The US is drafting a letter telling partner countries to pick a side in the AI standoff between Washington and Beijing. According to Reuters, a State Department draft the agency reviewed carries this warning: "To be part of everything is to be part of nothing."

What the draft says is plain: countries that join China's AI initiative would be shut out of the US-led Pax Silica coalition.

Two rival frameworks

Washington launched the initiative to secure supply chains for AI models, semiconductors and critical minerals. About two dozen countries have signed on so far, plus the European Union.

On the other side stands the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization, launched in July by Chinese President Xi Jinping. It promotes China's open-weight AI models as an alternative to US systems from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic.

The two frameworks rest on different logics:

  • Pax Silica — built on supply chain security, tying together access to chips, minerals and models.
  • China's organization — built on distributing open-weight models, promising to spread access rather than restrict it.

That difference turns a country's choice from a technical question into a political one. On one side is secure but conditional supply; on the other, unconditional access that creates dependency.

Why Kazakhstan is the pivotal case

Kazakhstan is so far the only country known to belong to both frameworks, and that has everything to do with what it holds: large reserves of critical minerals that matter for high-tech and AI supply chains.

The Kazakh case also explains the timing of the pressure. A mineral-rich country working with both sides undercuts the founding assumption of a coalition built on supply chain security. If the point of the coalition is to guarantee members shared access to resources they cannot source elsewhere, then the same resource being open to the rival bloc weakens that guarantee.

Beijing's response

China's embassy in Washington pushed back on the US plans, saying moves of this kind would slow global AI progress and serve no one's interests.

Why it matters

This development marks the AI debate moving out of technology policy and into foreign policy. Chip export controls, until now, targeted specific companies and products. A demand to pick a side targets countries, and turns access to technology into a test of alliance.

For small and mid-sized economies it means the room for balancing narrows. Many countries have until now worked with both blocs to extract better prices and terms. If the letter goes out, that strategy effectively ends. Countries with technology and supply relationships on both sides — Turkey among them — could face concrete pressure to choose.

It is worth noting the letter remains a draft. Whether it will be sent, and in what language if it is, remains unknown.