China this week chose not to sign onto an international "blueprint" agreed to by some 60 nations, including the U.S., that looked to establish guardrails when employing artificial intelligence (AI) for military use. 

More than 90 nations attended the Responsible Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain (REAIM) summit hosted in South Korea on Monday and Tuesday, though roughly a third of the attendees did not support the nonbinding proposal.

AI expert Arthur Herman, senior fellow and director of the Quantum Alliance Initiative with the Hudson Institute, told Fox News Digital that the fact some 30 nations opted out of this important development in the race to develop AI is not necessarily cause for concern, though in Beijing’s case it is likely because of its general opposition to signing multilateral agreements.

MASTERING 'THE ART OF BRAINWASHING,' CHINA INTENSIFIES AI CENSORSHIP

"What it boils down to … is China is always wary of any kind of international agreement in which it has not been the architect or involved in creating and organizing how that agreement is going to be shaped and implemented," he said. "I think the Chinese see all of these efforts, all of these multilateral endeavors, as ways in which to try and constrain and limit China's ability to use AI to enhance its military edge."

Herman explained that the summit, and the blueprint agreed to by some five dozen nations, is an attempt to safeguard the expanding technology surrounding AI by ensuring there is always "human control" over the systems in place, particularly as it relates to military and defense matters.

"The algorithms that drive defense systems and weapons systems depend a lot on how fast they can go," he said. "[They] move quickly to gather information and data that you then can speed back to command and control so they can then make the decision.

"The speed with which AI moves … that's hugely important on the battlefield," he added. "If the decision that the AI-driven system is making involves taking a human life, then you want it to be one in which it's a human being that makes the final call about a decision of that sort."

Nations leading in AI development, like the U.S., have said maintaining a human element in serious battlefield decisions is hugely important to avoid mistaken casualties and prevent a machine-driven conflict.

ARMY PUSHES 2 NEW STRATEGIES TO SAFEGUARD TROOPS UNDER 500-DAY AI IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

The summit, which was co-hosted by the Netherlands, Singapore, Kenya and the United Kingdom, was the second of its kind after more than 60 nations attended the first meeting last year held in the Dutch capital.

It remains unclear why China, along with some 30 other countries, opted not to agree to the building blocks that look to set up AI safeguards, particularly after Beijing backed a similar "call to action" during the summit last year. 

When pressed for details of the summit during a Wednesday press conference, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said that upon invitation, China sent a delegation to the summit where it "elaborated on China’s principles of AI governance."

Mao pointed to the "Global Initiative for AI Governance" put forward by Chinese President Xi Jinping in October that she said "gives a systemic view on China’s governance propositions."

The spokesperson did not say why China did not back the nonbinding blueprint introduced during the REAIM summit this week but added that "China will remain open and constructive in working with other parties and deliver more tangibly for humanity through AI development."

Herman warned that while nations like the U.S. and its allies will look to establish multilateral agreements for safeguarding AI practices in military use, they are unlikely to do much in the way of deterring adversarial nations like China, Russia and Iran from developing malign technologies.

"When you're talking about nuclear proliferation or missile technology, the best restraint is deterrence," the AI expert explained. "You force those who are determined to push ahead with the use of AI – even to the point of basically using AI as kind of [a] automatic kill mechanism, because they see it in their interest to do so – the way in which you constrain them is by making it clear, if you develop weapons like that, we can use them against you in the same way.

"You don't count on their sense of altruism or high ethical standards to restrain them, that’s not how that works," Herman added.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Vice President Kamala Harris has gone 54 days as the presumptive, and now, official Democratic nominee for president without holding an official press conference. 

She and former President Trump met on Tuesday at the ABC News Presidential Debate.

Under pressure to sit down for a substantive interview after weeks of stonewalling, Harris finally ended her interview drought last month when she was joined by running mate Tim Walz for a pre-taped piece with CNN's Dana Bash last Thursday in Georgia that was a far cry from a traditional press conference.

"Anyone who wants to lead the free world should be able to handle questions from the press," conservative influencer Tim Young told Fox News Digital. "If Kamala can't handle real questions from the press, she absolutely can't handle negotiations with foreign leaders."

BERNIE SANDERS SAYS HARRIS DROPPING FAR-LEFT POLICIES ‘IN ORDER TO WIN THE ELECTION’

Harris also sat for two taped radio interviews last week, which aired Friday and Monday.

As to when she'll actually do a formal press conference, that day may never come, at least while she's still a candidate.

Conservative Radio Libre host Jorge Bonilla feels Harris should do a press conference but said it’s almost "irrelevant" because she continues to get a pass. 

VOTERS REPORT KAMALA HARRIS IS MORE RADICAL THAN TRUMP: ‘TOO LIBERAL OR PROGRESSIVE’

"She is highly unlikely to do a press conference because the media have enabled and encouraged her ‘plexiglass basement’ strategy, wherein she preserves the illusion of being out there while remaining wholly inaccessible to the press and therefore unaccountable," Bonilla told Fox News Digital.

Meaike believes the approach is "disrespectful" to Americans. 

"As a businessman, I couldn't imagine if the company was just tumbling in the wrong direction. And I said, or any leader said, ‘Hey, guess what? I'm just not going to talk to anyone. I'm not going to take any questions,’" Meaike told said. 

"I don’t think we see Harris in a press conference where there is anyone that’s going to ask her a question that isn’t a softball," he added. "I think Harris will continue to avoid anything remotely confrontational."

Trump has sought to highlight the contrast in media availability between the two, sitting for several lengthy interviews in recent weeks and also holding a pair of press conferences last month.

Harris received mixed reviews for her showing with Bash, where she took the majority of the questions but nevertheless had Walz there for support.

TOM COTTON TURNS TABLES ON CNN'S DANA BASH ON GUNS, BRINGS UP HARRIS' PAST REMARKS ON SCHOOL SHOOTINGS

"My fear is, because Bash wasn't like, say, CBS's Steve Kroft or NPR's Steve Inskeep salivating at the sight of Barack Obama, the liberal media will claim this and the upcoming ABC debate are sufficient interview time for the campaign," Houck said.

Fox News Digital’s Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.