The AI Cold War: Which Countries Are on Each Side?

The AI Cold War: Which Countries Are on Each Side?

Artificial intelligence is becoming a major arena for geopolitical competition between the U.S. and China, spanning advanced chips and data centers to technical standards and AI governance.

This visualization, created by Iswardi Ishak, maps two emerging camps: the U.S.-led Pax Silica initiative and China’s World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization (W.A.I.C.O.). The visualization is based on data from the U.S. Department of State and Xinhua Net.

Two Competing Visions for the AI Era

Pax Silica is a U.S.-led initiative focused on securing the physical foundations of AI, including semiconductors, computing infrastructure, advanced manufacturing, and critical minerals. Its membership brings together many economies that occupy important positions in the global chip supply chain.

By contrast, W.A.I.C.O. is an intergovernmental organization headquartered in Shanghai. In July 2026, 29 countries signed its founding agreement, with a stated goal of promoting international cooperation and global governance around safe and equitable AI.

The table below shows the countries participating in the two groups:

Country	Group
Kazakhstan	Both
Argentina	Pax Silica
Australia	Pax Silica
Chile	Pax Silica
Costa Rica	Pax Silica
El Salvador	Pax Silica
Finland	Pax Silica
Germany	Pax Silica
Greece	Pax Silica
India	Pax Silica
Israel	Pax Silica
Italy	Pax Silica
Japan	Pax Silica
Netherlands	Pax Silica
Norway	Pax Silica
Panama	Pax Silica
Philippines	Pax Silica
Qatar	Pax Silica
Singapore	Pax Silica
South Korea	Pax Silica
Sweden	Pax Silica
United Arab Emirates	Pax Silica
United Kingdom	Pax Silica
United States of America	Pax Silica
Austria	Pax Silica (via EU)
Belgium	Pax Silica (via EU)
Bulgaria	Pax Silica (via EU)
Croatia	Pax Silica (via EU)
Cyprus	Pax Silica (via EU)
Czech Republic	Pax Silica (via EU)
Denmark	Pax Silica (via EU)
Estonia	Pax Silica (observer status only)
France	Pax Silica (via EU)
Hungary	Pax Silica (via EU)
Ireland	Pax Silica (via EU)
Latvia	Pax Silica (via EU)
Lithuania	Pax Silica (via EU)
Netherlands	Pax Silica (via EU)
Poland	Pax Silica (via EU)
Portugal	Pax Silica (via EU)
Romania	Pax Silica (via EU)
Slovakia	Pax Silica (via EU)
Spain	Pax Silica (via EU)
Taiwan	Pax Silica (non-signatory participant)
Algeria	WAICO
Belarus	WAICO
Brazil	WAICO
Cambodia	WAICO
Cameroon	WAICO
China	WAICO
Congo	WAICO
Cuba	WAICO
Ethiopia	WAICO
Indonesia	WAICO
Iran	WAICO
Kenya	WAICO
Kyrgyzstan	WAICO
Laos	WAICO
Lesotho	WAICO
Malaysia	WAICO
Mozambique	WAICO
Myanmar	WAICO
Nicaragua	WAICO
Oman	WAICO
Pakistan	WAICO
Russia	WAICO
Senegal	WAICO
Serbia	WAICO
South Africa	WAICO
Tajikistan	WAICO
Uzbekistan	WAICO
Venezuela	WAICO
Zambia	WAICO

The memberships reveal two different geographic strengths. Pax Silica includes the U.S. and major European and Indo-Pacific technology economies, while W.A.I.C.O. extends more deeply into the Global South, including Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, Pakistan, and numerous African states.

Why Countries Are Choosing Different Sides

The two blocs are not exact equivalents. Pax Silica is principally a supply-chain partnership, while W.A.I.C.O. is a treaty-founded international organization centered on AI cooperation and governance. That difference also helps explain why membership can overlap.

For Washington, access to cutting-edge chips and trusted supply chains is a major source of leverage. The U.S. ecosystem includes semiconductor strengths across countries such as Japan, South Korea, and the Netherlands, while America’s broader economic relationship with Beijing remains deeply interconnected through U.S.-China trade.

China, meanwhile, can offer developing economies infrastructure, training, and access to increasingly competitive open-weight AI models. This may be particularly attractive to countries that feel underrepresented in Western-led technology institutions or want to avoid dependence on a single supplier.

The World’s AI Swing States

The map also highlights Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, and Vietnam among the major economies still in play. Their choices matter because AI infrastructure is becoming increasingly difficult to separate from foreign policy.

This does not necessarily mean every country must permanently choose Washington or Beijing. Singapore and other globally connected economies have incentives to preserve access to multiple technology ecosystems, particularly as AI adoption varies widely around the world.

The stakes are enormous. One analysis estimates roughly $800 billion in Asia-Pacific data center investment through 2030, meaning today’s decisions about chips, clouds, energy systems, and technical standards could lock in relationships for decades.

What the AI Cold War Could Mean for the Future

Rather than two isolated digital worlds emerging overnight, the bigger risk is gradual fragmentation. Countries could face different rules governing access to cloud infrastructure, technical standards, and AI models depending on their partnerships.

Yet the map also shows why the Cold War analogy has limits. These blocs are neither mutually exclusive nor military alliances, and many strategically important economies remain outside either camp.

The contest may ultimately be less about which country builds the best AI model and more about which ecosystem becomes indispensable. Washington is betting on control of crucial supply-chain chokepoints and trusted infrastructure, while Beijing is building a broader coalition around access, development, and a larger role for emerging economies in AI governance.

Learn More on the Voronoi App

To see how individual models compare within this rapidly evolving landscape, check out Ranked: The Smartest AI Models in 2026 on the Voronoi app.

• Source: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/the-ai-cold-war-which-countries-are-on-each-side/