Most people are keenly aware that geopolitics have played havoc with global trade over the past few years. As trade barriers rise and capricious decisions made, leaders in many countries are reconsidering national strategies for dealing with artificial intelligence (AI). One of the most significant trends is the rise of “sovereign AI.” Journalist Salvatore Salamone explains, “In the rapidly shifting landscape of digital geopolitics, the concept of sovereign AI has emerged as a key strategic imperative for nations. Simply put, sovereign AI refers to a country’s ability to develop, host, deploy, and govern artificial intelligence systems using domestic data, infrastructure, workforce, and business ecosystems. That’s in contrast to being wholly dependent on foreign technology providers or cloud jurisdictions. Nations consider this route not as isolationism necessarily, but as a means to ensure they retain autonomy, control, and resilience in a world where AI underpins economic competitiveness, national security, and social governance.”[1]

Why Sovereign AI and Why Now?

Salamone offers four reasons for the rise of the sovereign AI movement. First, AI now plays a central role in everyday life. He notes, “AI is increasingly foundational to everything.” Second, countries and organizations want to control and regulate how AI develops. Salamone observes, “Data sovereignty, security, and regulatory compliance are rising concerns.” One of the big concerns is that “countries can become vulnerable to supply-chain disruption, foreign legal or regulatory overhang, and geopolitical leverage.” This is true even among allies. Journalists Sam Schechner, Berber Jin, and Kim Mackrael, report, “Rising tensions with the U.S. are spurring new plans in Europe to do something that has long seemed impossible: break with American technology in favor of homegrown alternatives.”[2] Tech writer John Leonard adds, “Coercive and aggressive actions by our supposed ally have led more and more people to question — somewhat belatedly — whether being so tightly bound to the interests of one country, however ‘special’ the relationship, is actually wise.”[3]

According to Salamone, a third reason the sovereign AI movement has gained momentum is national pride. He notes, “Cultural, linguistic, and value-system alignment matters: generic global AI models may not reflect local languages, ethics, norms, or regulatory expectations, so building domestic models helps alignment with national priorities.” Last, but certainly not least, are national security concerns. Salamone explains, “The race for strategic advantage, both economic and military, is motivating states to build domestic capabilities rather than ceding ground to geopolitical rivals.”

Strategic Pillars of Sovereign AI

Muath Alduhishy, Chief Strategy Officer at MOYASAR, observes that sovereign AI requires a technically-skilled workforce. He writes, “Building a workforce that has the knowledge and skills to take advantage of [AI] will lead to a fertile national innovation ecosystem that begets future technological advancements and create a national competitive advantage. Sovereign AI thus not only promises to propel economies forward but also positions countries as leaders in the global digital economy.”[4] He believes there are six strategic pillars that should guide nations when pursuing sovereign AI. They are:

• Digital infrastructure. Alduhishy insists, “The backbone of Sovereign AI lies in robust digital infrastructure. ... This infrastructure serves as the foundation upon which AI technologies can be developed and deployed effectively.”

• Workforce development. According to Alduhishy, “A skilled workforce is critical for the advancement of AI technologies. Initiatives must focus on STEM education, encouraging students and professionals to pursue careers in AI.”

• Research, development and innovation. If governments desire sovereign AI, they must be prepared to invest and not rely solely on the private sector. Alduhishy explains, “Investing in RDI is essential for pushing the boundaries of what AI can achieve. Governments should provide incentives and allocate funds for AI research, supporting both foundational and applied research as well as commercialization of innovation.”

• Regulatory and ethical framework. Some governments are urging a full-speed effort to develop AI systems. Alduhishy advises caution. He explains, “Balancing innovation with ethical considerations and regulatory compliance is paramount, especially when it comes to AI.”

• Stimulating the AI industry. In the end, sovereign AI relies on an active and reliable AI industry. According to Alduhishy, “This involves creating a conducive environment for the growth of AI-driven businesses and applications, especially across vital sectors such as energy, healthcare, finance, transportation and manufacturing.”

• International Cooperation. This pillar may sound a bit counterintuitive; however, Alduhishy explains, “While developing Sovereign AI is about harnessing capabilities within national borders, international cooperation remains crucial. Engaging in dialogues and partnerships with other nations can help set global standards for AI, facilitate cross-border data flows under agreed-upon norms and address shared challenges such as privacy and cybersecurity threats.” As Salamone noted above, the sovereign AI movement isn’t about isolationism.

One thing should be clear from Alduhishy’s six pillars: pursuing sovereign AI is a journey that takes perseverance and patience. He concludes, “The journey towards Sovereign AI is complex and requires thoughtful and long-term strategic planning and implementation on the national level. As nations embark on this path, the goal is not to self-isolate but to ensure that they are not left behind in the rapidly advancing global digital race, all while safeguarding their interests and securing a competitive edge on the international stage.”

AI Decolonization versus Sovereign AI

Not every country has the wealth, talent, or technology base that permits it to pursue sovereign AI. In such cases, another movement is afoot — AI decolonization. Journalist Stu Woo reports, “The multitrillion-dollar spending spree on AI has spread to the developing world. It is driven in part by a philosophy known in some academic circles as AI decolonization. The idea is simple. Foreign powers once extracted resources such as oil from colonies, offering minimal benefits to the locals. Today, developing nations aim to ensure that the AI boom enriches more than just Silicon Valley. Regulations effectively require tech companies such as Google and Meta to process local data domestically. That pushes companies to build or rent data facilities onshore instead of relying on global infrastructure. These investments add up to billions of dollars and create jobs that foster national talent, or so developing nations hope.”[5]

Woo calls AI decolonization “a twist on data sovereignty.” Nvidia’s Chief Executive Jensen Huang supports the idea. At a 2024 event in Jakarta, he stated, “No country can afford to have its natural resource — the data of its people — be extracted, transformed into intelligence and then imported back into the country.”[6] Futurist Mark van Rijmenam, however, believes everyone would be better off if data was made open source. He insists, “Treating data like private hoards is how countries lose the AI race.”[7] On the other, he cautions, “‘Open’ without guardrails becomes backlash: privacy, copyright, provenance, and access controls decide whether this becomes public value or a trust crisis.”

Concluding Thoughts

Since sovereign AI is not an isolationist movement, knowing when and where to collaborate and cooperate is essential. Leonard observes, “There’s the question of how far digital sovereignty can realistically go. After all, cloud services, even local ones — run on servers — and servers are almost all made in the US or China. Moreover, we must not throw the baby out with the bathwater. The problem is concentration of power, not the quality of the technology. … The hyperscalers offer global reach, cutting-edge functionality, resilience, consistent operating models, familiarity and — to a degree — standardization which may be difficult to replicate with local alternatives.” The biggest concern rising from the sovereign AI movement is fragmentation which slows innovation, increases costs, reduces efficiencies, and opens new security risks. One way to help reconcile these dilemmas, according to Leonard, is to “focus on open standards and open source.” But as van Rijmenam noted, guardrails need to be in place. Another consideration is to simply spread the risk. Leonard explains, “Removing eggs from a single basket and distributing them more widely needn’t be part of some grand patriotic gesture. In almost every part of life, distributing risk is common sense. Why should tech be different?”

I suspect the sovereign AI movement will gain strength as geopolitical tensions increase and reliance on artificial intelligence systems becomes the norm. The danger is that this movement can go too far and end up shackling the international economy.

Footnotes

[1] Salvatore Salamone, “What Is Sovereign AI? Why Nations Are Racing to Build Domestic AI Capabilities,” RT Insights, 20 November 2025.

[2] Sam Schechner, Berber Jin, and Kim Mackrael, “Europe Prepares for a Nightmare Scenario: The U.S. Blocking Access to Tech,” The Wall Street Journal, 23 January 2026.

[3] John Leonard, “Why cloud-first has meant sovereignty last – and how to fix it,” Computing, 26 January 2026.

[4] Muath Alduhishy, “Sovereign AI: What it is, and 6 strategic pillars for achieving it,” World Economic Forum, 25 April 2024.

[5] Stu Woo, “It’s Not Just Rich Countries. Tech’s Trillion-Dollar Bet on AI Is Everywhere.” The Wall Street Journal, 26 October 2025.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Mark van Rijmenam, “Data Is the New Highway System for National AI,” The Digital Speaker, 27 January 2026.