National Leap Strategy for South Korea in the AGI Era

A Concrete Roadmap for South Korea’s Survival and Prosperity in the Age of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)

• In-depth comparative analysis of AGI governance models in the OECD, EU, US, and China
• A candid assessment of South Korea’s AI strategy strengths and weaknesses
• Four core execution strategies for South Korea to become a global AI hub

The dawn of the AGI era presents South Korea with both a significant opportunity and a challenge. As global competition fragments into a ‘block competition’ with differing rules, establishing an independent AGI strategy has become more critical than ever. This article analyzes trends in the global regulatory chessboard, diagnoses South Korea’s current status, and offers a concrete blueprint for the future.

Part 1: Current Global AGI Governance – Comparing the Four Major Players’ Strategies

With the opening of the AGI era, the world has entered an invisible regulatory war. Understanding the trends of the major players—the OECD, EU, US, and China—within this ‘block competition’ where each creates its own rules based on ideology and goals is the first step in devising our survival strategy.

OECD Standards – The Cornerstone of Global Trust

The OECD’s AI principles, while not legally binding, serve as the ‘common language’ and ‘basic textbook’ for global AI discussions. Established in 2019 and revised in 2024, these principles convey the message: “Innovate with AI technology while protecting human rights and democratic values.”

Their true value lies in providing a minimum common denominator agreed upon even by the US and EU, which have different regulatory models, thus acting as a ‘buffer’ to prevent complete regulatory fragmentation. Like a ‘Geneva Convention’ for the AI era, it functions as a diplomatic safeguard for the global order.

European Union (EU) ‘Brussels Effect’ – A Fortress Centered on Rights

The EU AI Act, the world’s first comprehensive AI legislation, is founded on the philosophy that “citizens’ rights and safety come first.” It classifies AI into four risk categories (unacceptable, high-risk, limited risk, minimal risk) and imposes strict obligations on high-risk AI even before market release.

Its most powerful weapon is the ’extraterritorial application’ principle. Even Korean companies must comply if they release AI products in the EU market. The EU legalizes ’trust’ to create a premium brand of ‘AI that meets EU standards’ and pursues a ‘weaponization of regulation’ strategy to seize global standards.

United States ‘Innovation First’ – Competition for Hegemony

The US adopts an ‘innovation-first’ approach: “Regulate later, run first!” Especially under the Trump administration’s ‘AI Action Plan,’ AI is defined as a strategic asset for global hegemony, emphasizing speed, deregulation, and ideological control.

The core strategy uses government procurement as leverage through a ’no biased (Woke) AI’ clause to set US-centered value standards for AI models and export them as a ‘full-stack AI package’ to allies. This is a powerful soft power strategy aiming to implant US political agendas abroad beyond technology exports.

China’s ‘Sovereign AI’ – State Control Model

China follows a ‘sovereign AI’ path prioritizing national security and social stability. All AI must adhere to the principle of “upholding socialist core values” under strong government control.

However, this regulation has a subtle dual structure that exempts R&D and internal corporate AI not disclosed to the public. Outwardly, it functions as a ‘Great Wall’ strongly controlling and blocking foreign companies, while internally building a ‘walled garden’ to accelerate domestic innovation.

Part 2: South Korea’s Current AGI Strategy – Strengths and Weaknesses Analysis

Having understood the global competitive landscape, it is time to objectively assess ourselves. We analyze South Korea’s national strategy, legislation, and industrial capabilities to clearly diagnose our current position.

‘AI G3’ Vision – South Korea’s National Strategy

The government is making massive investments in national computing resources and domestic AI semiconductors under the vision of becoming one of the ‘Top 3 AI Powers (AI G3)’ worldwide. This expresses a strong will to secure ‘AI sovereignty’ by domesticating AI’s brain (computing power) and skeleton (semiconductors).

However, there is a risk of a ‘hollow core.’ Even with world-class hardware, lacking top-tier AI experts to utilize it could render efforts futile. The severe shortage of AI talent is a critical issue to resolve.

AI Framework Act – A Practical Balancing Act

South Korea’s ‘AI Framework Act’ chooses a ’third way’ balancing between the EU’s strictness and the US’s freedom. It adopts a risk-based approach without banning specific technologies and focuses on industry promotion by keeping fines low.

This is a ‘regulatory arbitrage’ strategy aiming to ease domestic burdens while considering EU market access, representing a clever compromise for both international society and domestic industry.

Technology and Industrial Capabilities – Opportunity in On-Device AI

South Korea’s strongest asset is its semiconductor-centered hardware technology. The emerging trend of ‘On-device AI’ is a perfect opportunity to maximize this strength. On-device AI refers to AI operating on devices themselves—smartphones, cars—rather than the cloud.

As AI shifts from cloud to device, Korea’s vertically integrated manufacturing capabilities from semiconductors to finished products can shine. This is the surest path to leap from a ‘fast follower’ to a ‘market leader.’

Human Capital – Failures and Lessons in AI Education

Despite excellent technology, the ‘people’ issue remains our decisive limitation. The government’s ambitious ‘AI digital textbook’ policy failed due to lack of communication with the field. Policies pushed without consensus from teachers, parents, and students cannot succeed.

I personally recognize the importance of AI education but am reminded how hollow policies ignoring field voices can be. National AI strategy must be a social and cultural project that wins people’s hearts beyond technology dissemination.

Comprehensive Comparison of Global AI Governance Models

Each block’s AI governance philosophy and approach show clear differences. The complex situation is summarized in the table below for easy understanding.

Table 1: Global AI Governance Comparison Framework

Four Core Strategies for South Korea to Lead the AGI Era

Beyond analysis, here is a concrete AGI strategy blueprint for South Korea to rise as a global AI hub.

1. Navigating Geopolitical Headwinds: ‘Two-Track’ Diplomacy

Unable to choose between the US and EU/China, South Korea needs smart relations with both through ’two-track’ diplomacy.

• Track 1 (Pragmatic acceleration with the US): Actively utilize US-led open-source AI models to close the technology gap, adapting them to Korean values (‘Koreanization’).
• Track 2 (Regulatory diplomacy with the EU): Strive for interoperability between Korean AI law and EU law, making ‘Made in Korea AI’ a symbol of ‘EU regulatory compliance.’

2. Securing True ‘AI Sovereignty’: Leading the On-Device AI Market

A ’leapfrog’ strategy creating gaps in our strongest areas is needed, focusing on dominating the on-device AI and AI semiconductor markets.

• AI Semiconductor Roadmap: Mobilize national capabilities to develop next-generation AI semiconductors (NPU, PIM) and establish a ‘Korean AI chip’ standard.
• On-Device Ecosystem Building: Launch the ‘K-On-Device AI’ flagship project spanning chips, OS, AI models, and final apps.
• Startup-Corporate Synergy: Create a ‘synergy fund’ combining large corporations’ capital with startups’ innovative technologies.

3. Building a ‘Trusted AI’ Brand

In the deepfake era, ’trust’ is the strongest competitive advantage. South Korea must establish itself as a global leader in ’trustworthy AI.’

• National XAI Initiative: Designate explainable AI (XAI) technology as a national research project and mandate its application in public sectors like healthcare and finance.
• Modernizing Product Liability Law: Amend laws to include AI systems as ‘products’ to clarify liability for AI-caused accidents.

4. Cultivating an AI-Native Nation: Investing in Human Capital

The success of all strategies ultimately depends on ‘people.’ The education system must be overhauled to create an ‘AI-native’ nation.

• Reforming K-12 Curriculum: Make AI a mandatory independent subject like English and math, teaching AI ethics and data literacy.
• Teacher Training ‘Manhattan Project’: Launch a large-scale national AI training program for all teachers.
• University and Lifelong Learning: Expand AI contract departments linked with industry and establish an ‘AI retraining fund’ to support workforce transitions.

Conclusion

The path for South Korea to become a global pivotal nation in the AGI era is clear. The four core AGI strategies summarized here are:

1. Manage geopolitical risks and turn them into opportunities through ’two-track diplomacy.’
2. Maximize our greatest strength in hardware manufacturing with an ‘on-device industry strategy.’
3. Build a ’trusted AI brand’ that leverages ethical values as new commercial competitiveness.
4. Create an AI-native nation by investing in human capital so all citizens understand and utilize AI.

If this blueprint is implemented, South Korea can stand tall as a key ’lever’ in the AGI era, harmonizing technological innovation with democratic values and becoming the fulcrum of future society.

What are your thoughts on this AGI strategy? Please feel free to share your opinions in the comments.