Brazil is among the 29 nations that signed the founding document of the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization (Waico), announced in July of this year, with its headquarters in Shanghai, China. The initiative aims to develop global AI governance through open-source models, which allow any company or organization to adapt the technology.

The China-led initiative contrasts with the United States’ plan for the future of AI, known as Pax Silica, which brings together “trusted allies” of the White House to control supply chains for semiconductors, critical minerals, and energy.

Notícias relacionadas:

• Justice says Brazil’s sovereignty must prevail over US threats.
• Brazil Sovereign Plan expands access to credit for exporters.

Artificial intelligence experts consulted by Agência Brasil point out that Waico represents an opportunity for Brazil to develop its own digital sovereignty. However, to achieve this, Brazil should “do its homework,” as explained by sociologist Sérgio Amadeu da Silveira, a professor at the Federal University of ABC (UFABC), in São Paulo.

The sociologist maintains that Brazil is a sufficiently large country, with university research centers unlike those found in most other nations – which places the country in a privileged position for AI development.

“Brazil can find a path to development that is more autonomous and more independent. Without a doubt, Brazil should strengthen its alliance with China, but we have to develop our own strategy,” he said.

Professor Amadeu added that, if Brazil does not develop its critical AI infrastructure – while also maintaining sovereignty over the data produced in the country – it will not be possible to benefit from cooperation with China to absorb that knowledge.

As an example, the professor said that if he were to receive BRL 10 million to develop AI projects at the university, he would have to spend BRL 5 million just on cloud storage contracts provided by big tech companies like Amazon, or even by the Chinese company Huawei.

“I don’t have the infrastructure available here that would allow researchers, universities, and the government itself to spend resources building expertise and infrastructure in our country for data processing and storage, which would give us significant computing power – instead of propping up foreign big tech companies,” he pointed out.

Ettore Arpini, an expert in AI governance and founder of Plures – an organization that supports the training of professionals in AI – emphasized that Brazil is well-positioned to be a key player in the geopolitics of AI because of its ability to navigate between Chinese and Western initiatives.

“The most important thing is for Brazil not to view AI as a sector-specific issue. An AI policy alone is not enough, just as simply regulating this market is not enough. We must understand it as a geopolitical and economic advantage, and also as a potential driver of prosperity for our people – an opportunity that rarely arises in a country’s history,” he concluded saying.

Brazil in the geopolitics of AI

The Brazilian government has maintained that the country cannot become dependent on any single model – whether Chinese or Western – arguing that it has engaged in dialogue with all initiatives that could help Brazil achieve digital sovereignty.

In multilateral forums, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has argued that AI cannot “become the privilege of a few countries or a tool for manipulation in the hands of billionaires.” According to the president, “we need intergovernmental governance of AI, in which all governments have a seat at the table.”

Experts have emphasized that AI is a technology that will permeate all sectors of economic life, just as electricity and the internet did.

Present at the launch of Waico in Shanghai, United Nations (UN) Secretary-General António Guterres stated that AI could be “humanity’s greatest opportunity in the 21st century,” but it “could also become one of its greatest risks.”

“The technology that will shape humanity’s future must be shaped by all of humanity. It cannot be governed by a handful of countries or a handful of companies. All nations need a seat at the table,” said the UN chief.

Pax Silica

The vision of an AI governed by all countries runs counter to the US vision for the future of technology, which Washington views as one of the pillars of the global power structure. For this reason, the White House is attempting, through Pax Silica, to control the supply chains for critical minerals, data, and energy that enable AI to function.

The Trump administration’s view on the matter was outlined in an article published by US Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs Jacob Helberg.

He criticized the concept of “digital sovereignty” advocated by the UN and several countries, including Brazil.

“[The UN] presses toward a world in which every country commands what the Secretary-General’s own reports call an ‘irreducible minimum’ of artificial intelligence—its own computers, its own data, its own models, raised at home and owned at home,” he wrote.

Helberg adds that the idea is appealing but counterproductive. In his view, other countries and governments will reap greater benefits if they take advantage of the infrastructure already built by tech giants.

“[If they follow the path laid out by the UN, countries]  will have achieved not so-called “digital sovereignty” but a kind of synchronized mediocrity—a planet of subscale clones, each heroically reconstructing last year’s breakthrough while the breakthrough itself moves on without them. While others rebuild the present, American firms will be inventing the future,” the US under secretary of state argued.

The expansion of data centers in Brazil requires planning, transparency, and regulations that ensure benefits for the country and reduce socio-environmental impacts. The conclusion was drawn by researchers during a debate held in Niterói, in Rio’s metropolitan region, on Monday (Jul. 27) as part of the 78th Annual Meeting of the Brazilian Society for the Advancement of Science.

Professors Mauro Oliveira, from the Federal Institute of Ceará, and Dan Levy, from the Federal University of São Paulo, argued that the installation of large data processing centers must be accompanied by public policies and greater involvement from the scientific community.

Notícias relacionadas:

• Justice says Brazil’s sovereignty must prevail over US threats.
• AI used in 6 out of 10 federal and state government agencies.

In Professor Oliveira’s view, Brazil runs the risk of repeating a historical pattern of exploiting natural resources without securing benefits for national development.

“The problem isn’t hosting data centers. The problem is accepting these investments without negotiation. Brazil needs to define what it wants to demand in return,” he said.

The discussion about data centers, he argues, is still limited to a few sectors and should involve universities, the government, and society. Professor Oliveira believes these projects pose challenges related to energy consumption, digital sovereignty, and control over technological infrastructure.

He cited the project to build a large AI data center in Ceará state. The facility, he noted, is expected to consume about 300 megawatts of power – a demand equivalent to the electricity supply capacity for millions of people.

“The world today cannot produce enough energy to meet the projected demand from AI data centers,” he stated.

In addition to energy, Professor Oliveira argued that Brazil should establish permanent mechanisms for monitoring, auditing, and ensuring transparency regarding these projects.

“The role of universities is to participate in this debate. We are not against data centers. We are against the absence of universities in the discussion about the conditions under which they are being implemented,” he said.

Impact

From an environmental law perspective, Professor Dan Levy argued that the impacts caused by data centers go beyond water and energy consumption. To his judgment, effects such as noise pollution, pressure on natural resources, territorial conflicts, social inequalities, and risks to vulnerable communities must also be considered.

“The digital transition and the ecological transition cannot be treated as separate processes. We must incorporate criteria of sustainability, transparency, and social participation,” he stated.

The communities directly affected need to participate in decisions related to the implementation of these projects and not just bear the brunt of their impacts, he went on to say.

He also linked the expansion of data centers to the concept of digital colonialism, whereby countries in the Global South provide natural resources – such as energy, water, and land – to sustain the technological infrastructure of large corporations in the Global North.

“We’re not against development. The issue is how this development is carried out and who bears its costs,” he concluded saying.