Reuters reported that the U.S. State Department is drafting a letter to inform the signatories to Joint Statement on AI Opportunity Partnership that they would be excluded from a U.S.-led AI coalition if they join a "competing framework" opposed to Washington.

The joint statement was released at the second Pax Silica Summit in the U.S. in June. The 35 signatories include more than 20 members of the Pax Silica initiative launched by the U.S. in December 2025, and other countries that have expressed interest in cooperating with the U.S. on AI.

Reuters quoted a U.S. official as saying, "It's difficult to see how a country can credibly position themselves as trusted partners in one technology ecosystem while simultaneously signing up for an initiative designed by China to advance a competing vision for AI."

The so-called Pax Silica initiative is ostensibly to secure supply chains for frontier AI models, semiconductor chips, and critical minerals. The U.S. has pledged to provide Pax Silica member countries with relevant technologies for shaping their AI economy.

It is clear that security is merely a pretext for the U.S. to launch the initiative, whose real objective is to contain China. As Trisha Ray, a researcher at the U.S. think tank Atlantic Council, wrote, Pax Silica aims at establishing an economic bloc to compete with China across the full technology stack.

The subtext of the U.S. letter is obvious: If you pursue in-depth AI cooperation with China, you must decouple from the U.S.-dominated supply chain. Access to U.S. advanced chips, closed-source large language models, and other AI technologies may be cut off.

Ironically, the U.S. frequently claims that its AI supply chain is threatened by other countries and has rallied alliances under the banner of "supply chain security." And now it is using the "supply chain" itself as a tool to threaten and bind its own partner nations.

The attempt to force countries to "pick sides" runs counter to the national interests of many within the so-called Pax Silica economies, particularly developing countries. While advanced U.S. AI technologies are certainly attractive, China's open-source ecosystem also offers a more cost-effective path to intelligent transformation. Engaging in in-depth AI cooperation with both China and the U.S. simultaneously, and integrating different supply chains and technological pathways based on their own conditions is often more aligned with the development needs of developing countries.

For example, Kazakhstan has joined the Pax Silica initiative and is also one of the founding members of the World AI Cooperation Organization initiated by China. In July, the Chilean think tank AthenaLab noted in a report that although Chile has joined the Pax Silica Declaration and has access to U.S. frontier AI models, it doesn't make it immune to dependence on other countries' AI technologies. "What real alternatives exist outside that bloc" should be one of Chile's core considerations. The alternatives include increasingly accessible Chinese models.

Demanding that countries make an "either-or" choice between different technological systems is, in essence, interference in their sovereignty and right to development, and a typical manifestation of "technological hegemony." The U.S. attempt to turn Pax Silica into an exclusive bloc is distorting technological cooperation into a bargaining chip for geopolitical games, running counter to the spirit of openness and sharing in technological development.

Pressuring Pax Silica economies to pick sides is nothing short of a reversal of previous commitments. Jacob Helberg, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs, said in an interview with The Straits Times in May that Pax Silica is not an exclusive organization and the signatories are not being forced to choose between the U.S. and China. Helberg was hoping the assurance would allay the concerns of ASEAN countries and persuade them to join the initiative. But the leaked letter makes it clear that the assurance was a hollow one.

The world today has no place for bloc confrontation or zero-sum games. As the world's leading AI developers, China and the U.S. should strengthen cooperation in areas such as technology accessibility and security governance, and jointly lead the global transition to an intelligent era. All countries should have full freedom to choose solutions suited to their own development paths. Forcing countries to "pick sides" will win the U.S. no support and ultimately, leave it isolated.