Brave new world: How countries are regulating AI

Figurines with computers and smartphones are seen in front of the words "Artificial Intelligence AI" in this illustration created on February 19, 2024. (REUTERS)
Short Url
Updated 02 March 2026
Follow

Brave new world: How countries are regulating AI

  • These landmark rules have faced pushback from Washington under President Donald Trump, but also from businesses and governments at home that complain they could hamper growth

TOKYO: Since ChatGPT stunned the world three years ago with the powers of generative AI, countries have grappled with how to govern the rapidly developing technology.
As Vietnam’s artificial intelligence law goes into effect on Sunday, let’s take a look at regulation efforts around the globe:
The EU is considered a trailblazer, having adopted in 2024 what it calls “the world’s first comprehensive AI law” penalized with heavy fines.
The law takes a risk-based approach; if a system is high-risk, a company will have a stricter set of obligations to fulfill before being authorized in the EU.
These landmark rules have faced pushback from Washington under President Donald Trump, but also from businesses and governments at home that complain they could hamper growth.
The EU bowed to pressure last year and proposed changes including partially delaying the law’s application in a move it says will help European companies compete globally.
The law will now be fully applicable in 2027, but the EU already allows regulators to ban systems deemed to pose unacceptable risks.
That could include “social scoring” systems that lead to discrimination by classifying individuals or groups based on social behavior or personal traits.
The US, home to ChatGPT maker OpenAI, chip titan Nvidia and tech giants like Google, is not keen on enacting new rules.
Vice President JD Vance has warned against “excessive regulation” that “could kill a transformative sector.”

 


Trump insists he struck Iran on his own terms

Updated 04 March 2026
Follow

Trump insists he struck Iran on his own terms

  • “We are now a nation divided between those who want to fight wars for Israel and those who just want peace and to be able to afford their bills and health insurance,” Marjorie Taylor Greene posted on X.
  • Rubio himself doubled down on Tuesday after meeting with US House and Senate members, while insisting that “No, I told you this had to happen anyway”

WASHINGTON, United States: President Donald Trump and his team scrambled Tuesday to reclaim the narrative on why he decided to attack Iran, after his top diplomat suggested the US struck only after learning of an imminent Israeli strike.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio alarmed Democrats — who say only Congress can declare war — as well as many of Trump’s MAGA supporters on Monday when he said: “We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action.”
“We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn’t pre-emptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties,” Rubio told reporters.
Administration officials quickly backpedalled, insisting Trump authorized the strikes because Tehran was not seriously negotiating an accord on limiting its nuclear ambitions, and the United States needed to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities.
“No, Marco Rubio Didn’t Claim That Israel Dragged Trump into War with Iran,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted Tuesday on X.
At an Oval Office meeting later with Germany’s chancellor, Trump went further, saying that “Based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they (Iran) were going to attack first. And I didn’t want that to happen.”
“So, if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand.”

- Had to happen? -

Rubio himself doubled down on Tuesday after meeting with US House and Senate members, while insisting that “No, I told you this had to happen anyway.”
“The president made a decision. The decision he made was that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide... behind this ability to conduct an attack.”
Critics seized on the muddied messaging to accuse Trump of precipitating the country into a war without a clear rationale, without informing Congress — and without a clear idea of how it might end.
They noted that just two weeks ago, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pressed Trump again in Washington to take a hard line, in their seventh meeting since Trump’s return to power last year.
Some Republican allies rallied behind the president, with Senator Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, insisting that “No one pushes or drags Donald Trump anywhere.”
“He acts in the vital national security interest of the United States,” Cotton told the “Fox & Friends” morning show.
But as crucial US midterm elections approach that could see Republicans lose their congressional majority, Trump risks shedding supporters who had welcomed his pledge to end foreign military interventions.
“We are now a nation divided between those who want to fight wars for Israel and those who just want peace and to be able to afford their bills and health insurance,” Marjorie Taylor Greene, a top former Trump ally and a major figure in the populist and isolationist hard right, posted on X.