The EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act: An Ethical And Human-Centric 3rd Way Approach

Introduction

Today, artificial intelligence (AI) has become one of the most strategic technologies, positioned at the center of global politics, economics, and military tactics. With a wide range of impacts from the economy to security, democracy to the protection of individual rights, this technology has the potential to transform international balances of power. Some analysts even compare the AI ​​race to the nuclear race of the Cold War, arguing that the winner of the AI ​​development race could have the potential to dominate global politics, economics, and security. In the AI ​​development race, the US is advancing with a market-based model driven by large technology companies, while China prefers a statist, surveillance-focused, and authoritarian approach. These two different models, in addition to technological competition, are also bringing about a global competition shaped by values.

The European Union (EU) aims to build its own unique “third way,” different from the approaches of the US and China. While the EU is behind of these two actors in terms of innovation power, it aims to present a distinct vision on a global scale with its capacity to develop normative regulations and ethical standards. Its “human-centric AI” approach is based on transparency, accountability, and human rights, and this vision has been embodied in the risk-based AI Act.

This article examines the security and strategic importance of artificial intelligence, the EU’s regulatory framework, and the “third way” argument. It aims to discuss the EU’s position in the global balance of power and draw lessons for Türkiye.

I.The Strategic Importance of AI: Security and the Ukrainian Experience

Artificial intelligence increases efficiency in today’s economy, supports innovation, and even finds its way into corporate decision-making mechanisms, becoming an integral part of a productive and strong economy. As such, the knowledge and innovative methods generated by AI are becoming a fundamental determinant of military capacity and national security. In modern warfare, in addition to the number of tanks and missiles, the rapid processing and efficient use of data has become crucial. Military algorithms developed with AI can process information from sensors, providing states with significant advantages in target acquisition, command and control processes, and logistics planning. Therefore, as a strategic technology today, AI is gaining importance comparable to the role of nuclear deterrence during the Cold War.

The Ukraine war is the most striking example of this transformation. Autonomous and semi-autonomous drones used on the front lines play a critical role in both reconnaissance and attack missions thanks to their AI-supported image recognition and targeting systems. Processing open-source data through algorithms produces rapid and reliable information about activity on the ground, providing an advantage in decision-making processes. In addition to its use on the battlefield, developed AI models are also being used for purposes such as gathering evidence of war crimes, clearing landmines, resettling displaced refugees, and combating corruption. AI-based analysis solutions provided by US-based companies such as Palantir allow Ukraine to monitor the front lines in real time and adapt its operations accordingly. This also demonstrates that not only states but also private sector companies are becoming increasingly central actors in modern warfare.

Considering the Ukraine War, where AI is actively used and, in fact, a beta version of it is being tested, developed military algorithms can identify the locations of mines, enemy troops, and weapons, enabling operational plans. Furthermore, through larger data analysis, the locations of countries’ nuclear weapons can be detected. In such a scenario, a nuclear power that wins the AI ​​race and destroys the nuclear capabilities of other countries could end the balance built on the mutually assured destruction and become a sole dominant force in global politics, economics, and security.

Meanwhile, holding the prospect of shaping the fate of global politics with its role on the battlefield and its high potential, artificial intelligence carries weight of ongoing ethical debates. The fact that autonomous systems have the final say in distinguishing civilian targets raises concerns regarding international humanitarian law. Furthermore, the increasing prevalence of war decisions given without human oversight raises issues of accountability and responsibility.

These developments hold three lessons for states. First, AI is no longer just about economic competition; it is a direct matter of security and defense. Second, the extensive use of AI in warfare demonstrates the necessity of regulations based on ethical principles. Finally, other actors seeking to play a role in military AI, where the US and China are rapidly advancing, must establish regulations and invest in AI technologies to ensure they do not fall behind.

II.The EU’s Third Way, Based on Values

The European Union is striving to position itself as a “third way” by presenting a distinct global vision in the field of artificial intelligence. Between the US’s market- and innovation-focused model and China’s state-led and surveillance-centric approach, the EU’s preference is to develop a regulatory framework based on human rights, ethical values, and transparency. Within this vision, the European Commission published the “Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI” documents in 2019 and the “White Paper on Artificial Intelligence” in 2020. With these documents, the EU has made the concept of “human-centric AI” the backbone of its policies.

The principle of “human-centric AI” stipulates that artificial intelligence systems should ultimately remain under human supervision, be non-discriminatory, accountable, and designed transparently. In this respect, the EU’s approach differs from the Chinese model, which legitimizes authoritarian surveillance systems, and the US model, which prioritizes innovation while relegating ethical risks to the background.

Taking these ethical concerns into account, the EU published the Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) in February 2025. Rather than outright banning technology, this law introduces a risk-based classification model. Accordingly, applications in the “unacceptable risk” category, such as social scoring systems, are banned, while strict oversight, transparency, and certification requirements are stipulated for “high-risk” applications, such as biometric recognition, critical infrastructure management, or algorithms used in recruitment processes. Flexible and innovation friendly regulations are being adopted for systems with lower risk levels. Thus, the EU aims to protect human rights and security while simultaneously guiding innovation without completely stifling it.

On the other hand, the US, which adopts a market-based approach to AI, published its plans in July 2025 with the ambitious title “Winning the Race: America’s AI Action Plan,” aiming for global dominance. China, advancing with a statist AI model, published its plans with the more cohesive title “Global AI Governance Plan,” calling for international cooperation. While it’s not uncommon for these countries’ carefully chosen policy paper titles to contradict their implementation, it’s undeniable that these titles send a message to the international community and other actors.

Within this framework, the EU aims to create a unique position within the international system with the AI ​​Act. This law not only regulates the European internal market but also, like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), intends to influence the way global companies do business through the “Brussels effect.” The EU aims to build a rules-based order founded on ethical values, human rights and transparency, as opposed to an approach that surrenders to unrestricted market dynamics or a model that prioritizes social control over state surveillance.

III. The EU’s Claim for Global Leadership in Artificial Intelligence

The European Union’s vision for artificial intelligence aims to establish digital sovereignty alongside economic competitiveness. Data has become as strategic a factor as energy resources. Artificial intelligence processes require large and reliable data, but much of this data is still held by US-based companies or China’s state-controlled ecosystems. To change this, the EU has focused on establishing secure, European-centric infrastructures through projects like GAIA-X, launched under the leadership of Germany and France. From a security perspective, AI-supported decision-making, cyber defense, and intelligence analysis are directly linked to data security. Having data in the hands of external actors creates not only economic dependency but also strategic vulnerability. The Ukraine war demonstrated that even open-source data played a decisive role in operations on the ground. Therefore, as part of its independence in the defense field, Europe aims to establish digital sovereignty in the field of AI.

As a global norm-setting power, following the global standardization of data protection regulations (GDPR), the EU aims to be a decisive factor not only within the continent but also in the compliance processes of global companies with its risk-based approach in the field of artificial intelligence. While these regulations do not directly target military technologies, they are anticipated to have second-order consequences. For example, image recognition or natural language processing systems can be used in both commercial and military sectors. The standards introduced on the civilian side also raise the need for military systems to comply with ethical and technical criteria.

ıv. Opportunities and Limitations for the EU

The European Union’s Third-Way vision holds significant opportunities. Firstly, an approach based on ethical standards provides global credibility. Regulatory capacity compels international companies to comply with EU standards, increasing the Union’s global influence. Furthermore, the globalization of technical standards provides the EU with both economic and diplomatic leverage.

Conversely, Europe lags significantly behind the US and China in AI innovation. The absence of large technological companies weakens the EU’s claim to be a global regulator. Furthermore, it is argued that strict regulations could slow the pace of innovation among European startups and leave the continent at a further disadvantage vis-à-vis the US and China. Moreover, the EU remains dependent on the US for security and defense. The fact that critical military and intelligence support during the Ukraine war came largely from the US further demonstrates this reality. If the European Union truly wants to realize its Third Way ambition, it must not be content with a merely normative vision but must support this vision with strong technology investments and security capacity building.

v. Türkiye’s Position

Türkiye outlined its roadmap for the period 2021-2025 with the “National Artificial Intelligence Strategy,” published in 2021. The strategy aims to cultivate qualified human resources, increase R&D investments, and expand the use of artificial intelligence in public services and industry.

On the other hand, the European Union’s artificial intelligence policies serve as an important example for Türkiye. First and foremost, the EU’s “human-centric” approach and risk-based regulations provide a normative framework that Türkiye can consider when shaping its own AI strategy.

Compliance with the AI ​​Act and similar regulations may be critical for competitiveness in the coming period, since a large portion of its export markets are destined for the EU. Furthermore, based on the EU’s goals of digital sovereignty and strategic autonomy, it is crucial for Türkiye to take steps to improve data security and reduce technology dependency. Finally, the military dimension of AI should not be neglected, and priority should be given to capacity building in this area.

Conclusion

Artificial intelligence is becoming not only an economic and technological element but also a strategic force shaping the future of international relations and security policies. Moreover, the Ukraine war has concretely demonstrated the role of artificial intelligence in the field. With its human-centered and risk-based approach, facing the differing models of the US and China, the EU aims to become a global normative power in AI development while also ensuring its own dominance in the digital sphere.

The EU has the opportunity to emerge as a reliable actor in global governance with its regulations based on ethical standards. However, Europe faces challenges to overcome. Deficiencies in innovation capacity, the absence of technology companies, and dependence on the US for defense make the Third Way claim fragile.

In this sense, increasing Türkiye’s investments in data security and artificial intelligence is crucial for strengthening both its economic competitiveness and strategic capacity. Creating an AI vision supported by a strong innovation infrastructure is critical for Türkiye’s future economic and military position.

Zafer Aydın, graduated from the Department of International Relations at Istanbul University’s Faculty of Political Sciences. He is pursuing a master’s degree in the same field at Akdeniz University. An expert in international trade, Aydın works in the management of projects and international event organizations targeting various sectors. His academic interests include foreign policy, international security, and the global economy.

Sources:

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/artificial-intelligence-end-mutual-assured-destruction#

https://time.com/6691662/ai-ukraine-war-palantir/

https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/07/governing-military-ai-amid-a-geopolitical-minefield?lang=en&utm

https://www.cnas.org/publications/reports/u-s-china-competition-and-military-ai?utm

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Second-order-impacts-of-civil-artificial-intelligence-regulation-on-defense-Why-the-national-security-community-must-engage.pdf

https://www.reconnect-china.ugent.be/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Reconnect-China-Policy-Brief-16_AI-and-Technical-Standardization.pdf

https://eh4s.eu/publication/comparative-analysis-of-ai-development-strategies-a-study-of-chinas-ambitions-and-the-e-us-regulatory-framework?utm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Intelligence_Act?utm

Towards Adaptive AI Governance: Comparative Insights from the U.S., EU, and Asiahttps://arxiv.org/pdf/2504.00652

Bridging the Artificial Intelligence Governance Gap: The United States’ and China’s Divergent Approaches to Governing General-Purpose Artificial Intelligence:https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.03497

https://www.ege.fr/infoguerre/ai-act-la-course-europeenne-par-la-norme-face-au-leadership-americain-en-matiere-dintelligence-artificielle?utm

https://www.ifri.org/sites/default/files/20251/ifri_deroucyrochegonde_gouvernance_mondiale_ia_2025.pdf?utm

https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/european-approach-artificial-intelligence

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/26/china-ai-action-plan.html

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Americas-AI-Action-Plan.pdf