AI Governance Discussions in the UNGA
By Ipek Kara | 20 October 2025
Bernd Dittrich/Unsplash
Summary
AI governance was one of the most debated topics in the 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), Following that, the informal meeting of Global Dialogue on AI Governance established the Independent International Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence (IISP-AI) under the UNGA Resolution A/RES/79/325.
While the resolution and the discussion are not binding, it shows the demand for structural cooperation and worries of states.
The tensions between the sceptics of centralised governance and supporters was clearly observed and may increase as the new bodies will start to get funded in the following months.
Context
At the 80th UNGA, the world leaders addressed AI as both an economic driver and a global security challenge. On 26 August, they adopted a new resolution on global AI governance, A/29/325. In 25 September, during the High-Level Multi-stakeholder Informal Meeting, the Global Dialogue on AI Governance was presented as a stage to promote responsible innovation, discuss regulations, and close the AI capacity gap between developed and developing states, providing a common place for governments, the private sector, academia, and society to deliberate on the standards of the industry. One of the other important announcements was the IISPI-AI. It was formally announced as a body of 40 experts with the goal of delivering periodic assessments to the UN Secretary General and the member states. The panel will aim to have experts from diverse fields, especially including cybersecurity and safety experts. Their reports will be guides for the Global Dialogue and inform the UN policy on AI’s impacts on societies and global security.
The UN Security Council held an open debate on AI and international peace and security. Dual use risks of AI in warfare, disinformation, and surveillance systems were the most emphasised issues. Secretary-General António Guterres urged collective measures and stated that “The window is closing to shape AI – for peace, for justice, for humanity. We must act without delay” and warned that leaving the "humanity's fate to algorithms” would be untenable.
In parallel to these discussions, several delegates brought up the idea of establishing a Global Fund for AI, with the aim of financing inclusive access, research safety, and helping with the technical capacity of developing countries. While existing in concept for now, it reflects the pressure from developing countries to ensure AI does not deepen their structural inequality.
Implications
The US is sceptical of the idea of a strong centralised regulation of AI at the moment as it would likely constrain its national autonomy and market share to some extent. During the debates in the UN, the US representatives highlighted the risks of misuse and stressed the importance of transparency, but resisted binding constraints with the potential to undermine their current flexibility.
China has a positive view towards the UN’s initiatives and called the “important platforms for enhanced communication, consensus building, and expanded cooperation” in governance of AI. Through their current framing, China positioned itself as a leading voice of the Global South, arguing that AI governance should be an international cooperative model rather than being in the hands of the tech giants and wealthy states.
As AI systems become widely embedded in decision-making processes in defence and warfare, the balance between innovation, ethics, and accountability will determine whether AI serves collective progress or deepens inequality and mistrust. The UN’s acts signal AI is now in a definitive process in terms of international cooperation, technological autonomy and global security risks. While the UN actions are non-binding, initiatives such as the IISP-AI, the upcoming Global Dialogue in Geneva, and the efforts of international organisations such as NATO and the EU will be shaping the future of cybersecurity, ethical innovation, and our societies along the way through supporting long-term stability and balancing technological power between developed and developing countries.
Forecast
Short-term (Now - 3 months)
The IISP-AI is highly likely to begin forming its working groups and defining a clear strategy, likely to be focused on transparency, safety, and cyber-resilience
The Global Dialogue on AI Governance is likely to finalise its structure and agenda for the Geneva meeting in July 2026.
The UN member states are likely to begin drafting statements or national plans on their stance towards global AI coordination, developing general plans for country-specific agendas before the Global Dialogue in Geneva.
Medium-term (3-12 months)
Divergence between the Western and Chinese approaches on AI governance is likely to deepen. While China and several developing countries are likely to support a UN-led central control mechanism, The US is likely to promote non-binding voluntary norms and regional cooperation systems mainly due to distrust in China.
Regional organisations such as the EU and the African Union are likely to align their AI governance with the upcoming Global Dialogue and seek a balance of regional and global cooperation.
Long-term (>1 year)
The IISP-AI’s reports are highly likely to become major reference points for future decision-making processes of AI governance and shaping global standards for possible future treaties.
Divergent ideas of the US, China, and the EU are likely to create separate blocks on AI standards as experienced with digital privacy policies in the past.
