Editor’s Note: This article is part of our series, “Governing the Quantum Revolution.”
For decades, critics have argued that intellectual property rules–particularly in patent law–have entrenched global inequality by ensuring the fruits of technological development remain concentrated in wealthy countries. This has slowed, and in some cases stalled, growth in the Global South. Similar concerns are now emerging with the rise of the AI economy, where first movers are setting governance standards to suit their own interests, often at the expense of poorer nations.
As countries in the Global North race toward quantum supremacy, this familiar pattern of technological gatekeeping is poised to repeat itself. Disparities in both access to and control over transformative technologies are likely to widen, driven by the national security implications of quantum advancements. Already, we are seeing restrictive export controls and competitive research initiatives designed to hoard these technologies among the countries developing them. The Global South risks exclusion—not only from the technological and economic benefits of quantum innovation, but also from the enhanced security protections it promises. These emerging silos of privileged access to quantum technology echo problematic trends from previous technological regimes but also introduce new challenges, particularly given quantum’s potential to undermine existing digital infrastructure.
Entrenching Global Divisions
While the practical applications of quantum technologies are mostly still on the horizon, the growing global quantum divide is already becoming apparent. Export controls for quantum-relevant technologies have expanded significantly over the last five years. The United States has taken an increasingly aggressive approach to protecting its quantum research, beginning with targeted bans on eight Chinese companies in 2021, then issuing comprehensive export license requirements for quantum hardware, software, and complete systems in late 2024. In 2021, the European Union (EU) established a unified framework limiting exports on dual-use technologies, with France, Spain, and the Netherlands implementing specific controls on functional qubits (basic units of quantum computing that can maintain quantum properties long enough to perform reliable calculations) and banning exports of systems exceeding 34 qubits. China has implemented its own protective measures, adding quantum encryption technology and ultra-low temperature technology (essential for superconducting computers) to its restricted exports list in 2020.
These technology controls create concentric circles of access; allies enjoy privileged exchange while competitors face increasing challenges in establishing domestic quantum research programs. Though these controls are often justified as a means to constrain rivals—particularly China—they also have the unintended effect of locking out researchers and institutions from the Global South.
Siloes of Innovation
While technology transfer restrictions have hardened, approaches to research collaboration have grown more nuanced. Strategic knowledge-sharing frameworks now allow individual researchers greater freedom to collaborate internationally. This shift reflects practical considerations: the global quantum workforce is small, and many of its top minds are internationally mobile. Nearly half of quantum professionals in the United States are foreign nationals. The United States continues to allow information sharing with these individuals, though it mandates strict recordkeeping. It also depends heavily on European and Japanese partners for key components and materials, and around half of American-authored quantum research papers include foreign co-authors.
The European Union has followed suit, walking back earlier efforts to confine quantum research initiatives to Member States and finalizing cooperation agreements with the United Kingdom while exploring similar arrangements with Switzerland. China, by contrast, has doubled down on self-reliance, prioritizing domestic talent development and limiting international collaborations. All three approaches to quantum technology control and development raise critical questions about equitable technological access and the implications for countries left outside these privileged silos of innovation.
Restrictions on quantum-relevant technology transfers could also serve to maintain the military and intelligence dominance of advanced economies, while crippling economic development in the Global South. For example, deploying a large-scale quantum communications network — which the European Union and Canada have both expressed interest in — could prove essential to the next generation of secure infrastructure, leaving countries without access to this, or similarly effective quantum security, at risk of attack by their geopolitical rivals, or even mercenary hackers. Likewise, quantum sensing could herald a new generation of precision design and offer a range of civil applications, from disaster monitoring to medical imaging. However, this cutting-edge innovation will inevitably produce tension between pressure to allow poor countries to access the economic and development benefits associated with quantum technologies and the desire to maintain strategic dominance, particularly over advances with civil and military applications. The clustering of quantum supply chains in the Global North compounds this problem, reinforcing the gatekeeping role of first movers.
A New Nonproliferation Framework?
This dilemma is not without historical precedent. At the dawn of the nuclear age, U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower proposed the “Atoms for Peace” initiative in 1953—offering support for peaceful nuclear development in exchange for commitments to forgo military applications. This led to the evolution of the nuclear nonproliferation regime, complete with safeguards on transferred materials and technologies.
Could a similar “Qubits for Peace” framework be devised for quantum technologies? Perhaps—but the geopolitical context is far less favorable. Today’s multipolar world makes it unlikely that a single power—or even a coalition—could dictate terms. Moreover, Global South countries may be unwilling to accept limits on their own pursuit of strategic technologies.
Even if advanced countries were willing to transfer quantum technology through such a framework, the difficulty of distinguishing civilian from military quantum applications presents a major obstacle. Cryptography and communication are particularly thorny areas: states have a collective interest in secure systems but also seek to penetrate their rivals’ networks. This mirrors longstanding debates around strong encryption, now updated for a quantum era.
In the current fractured geopolitical environment—marked by nationalism and deteriorating alliances—it is hard to imagine a broad-based commitment to equitable quantum development. The risk is that a handful of governments will monopolize secure communications, prioritizing espionage advantages over global security. If so, the Global South could be left even more vulnerable.
Missing the Quantum Revolution
Without meaningful access to quantum resources, the Global South may face a triple disadvantage. First, their security infrastructure might become increasingly vulnerable as quantum computing threatens to break existing encryption protocols. Second, their economic competitiveness might diminish as they miss opportunities to develop quantum-enhanced technologies. Lastly, their technological sovereignty might erode as dependence on external providers for quantum-resistant security becomes unavoidable. This could deeply exacerbate the existing digital divide, and finally lay to rest any hope that the Global South may someday catch up to the technological standard of living the Global North enjoys.
Quantum advancements present significant challenges for those left behind. Unlike digital technologies that benefitted from a gradual diffusion, quantum technologies threaten to create immediate security risks and expose the global digital infrastructure to unprecedented vulnerabilities while simultaneously denying Global South countries access to quantum resources. The changed approach towards research collaboration by major quantum powers could signal a potential pathway forward, with strategic knowledge-sharing frameworks broadened to include Global South interests and bridge the quantum divide. As governments pour resources into advancing these technologies, they need to consider strategies for ensuring that their benefits do not remain siloed across a handful of wealthy countries, and are accessible to all.
FEATURED IMAGE: Visualization of a digital world (via Getty Images)
