Anthropic Export Controls Spark Global AI Sovereignty Scramble

Anthropic export controls turned an abstract policy fear into a live one last week: as of June 13, 2026, one US government directive took the company’s two most powerful AI models offline for users everywhere, including, briefly, Anthropic’s own foreign-born employees, and set off alarm bells across Europe and Canada about who really controls the AI the world runs on.

The mechanics were startling in their speed. The reaction abroad has been louder still.

Launch to lockdown in four days

On June 9, 2026, Anthropic made Claude Fable 5 and Claude Mythos 5 generally available, the public face of a model class the company had developed under controlled access since April through a programme called Project Glasswing. Fable 5 was described as a Mythos-class model made safe for general use, state-of-the-art on nearly all tested benchmarks, with strong performance in software engineering, scientific research, and autonomous work. 

Mythos 5, the more capable sibling, stayed restricted to Glasswing partners and selected biology researchers. Four days later, it was gone. Anthropic said it received an export control directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 at 5:21 pm ET on June 12, with the letter not explaining the specific security concern in detail. 

Unable to filter users by nationality in real time, the company said it had to “abruptly disable” access for all customers to comply. The order, issued by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in a letter to CEO Dario Amodei, called for suspending all access by any foreign national, whether inside or outside the United States. 

The jailbreak at the centre of it

Washington cited national security, specifically, a method for “jailbreaking” Fable 5, or getting around its safety guardrails. Anthropic disputed the severity, saying the technique amounted to a limited capability to review programme code and identify errors, something rival models, including OpenAI’s GPT-5.5, can also do. 

The government’s account is sharper. David Sacks, co-chair of the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology, said on X that the administration asked Amodei to either fix the vulnerability or pull the model from deployment, and that Amodei refused. Sacks pressed the contradiction directly: “In their blog post, Anthropic defended its decision by saying the jailbreak isn’t serious. That is not what the trusted partner and the US government believe; nor is that kind of minimising language consistent with Anthropic’s brand as the AI safety company.

The Wall Street Journal reported the move was also shaped by Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, who told Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and other officials that Amazon researchers had used Fable 5 prompts to obtain information that could aid cyberattacks. Amazon is one of Anthropic’s largest investors. A spokesperson said it is “not uncommon for governments to seek our counsel on potential security risks,” but declined to share details. 

A fight that started months before

None of this began last week. The dispute erupted earlier this year after Anthropic insisted its technology should not be used for mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons systems, infuriating Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth. President Trump ordered every federal agency to stop using Anthropic’s technology, and Hegseth designated the company a “Supply-Chain Risk to National Security“, a label, the company’s lawsuit notes, usually reserved for foreign adversary firms like Huawei. 

Anthropic sued to reverse the blacklisting, warning it could jeopardise “hundreds of millions of dollars” in revenue. The result is a company simultaneously deemed too dangerous for the US government’s own use and too dangerous for foreign use, a contradiction not lost on observers. Dean Ball, an AI policy expert who briefly served in the Trump administration, called the order “simply cartoonish,” noting that an administration willing to export advanced AI chips to China now wants to ban Britain and every other non-American from using Anthropic’s best models.

The export controls heard around the world

Outside the US, the response went straight past the jailbreak debate and landed on a single, uncomfortable realisation: a tool embedded in companies, research institutions, and public services worldwide had been switched off by a foreign government, with an email, in an afternoon.

The European Commission confirmed it is examining the fallout. Spokesperson Thomas Regnier said the new generation of highly capable AI models offers real benefits, including for cyber-defence, but raises serious cybersecurity concerns that need addressing, adding that “contingency measures taken in this light should not be discriminatory against partners.” 

European politicians were blunter. French commentary framed the decision as an accelerator of the geopolitical battle over AI, with the argument that “Europe cannot settle for being an open market dependent on technologies designed, funded, and controlled elsewhere.” Finnish MEP Aura Salla said Europe “cannot continue to increase its technical potential by relying on access that can be turned off by a foreign government overnight.” The timing sharpened the point: the Commission had published its Technological Sovereignty Package — including a Cloud and AI Development Act — on June 3, just nine days before the shutdown. euronews + 2

The unease crossed the Atlantic. Speaking in Ireland ahead of the G7 summit, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said the restrictions show the dangers of overreliance on a limited number of American providers, framing it as a lesson in diversification. “The situation we’re in collectively right now with Mythos and Fable is something that can happen with overreliance on certain models,” Carney said, flagging AI as a major topic for the summit. In Britain, AI and Online Safety Minister Kanishka Narayan said the episode should drive deeper investment in the country’s own AI industry. 

What happens next

Anthropic’s position has not moved. It maintains that applying this standard across the industry “would essentially halt all new model deployments for all frontier model providers.” The route back runs through the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, where a licence is now required for export, re-export or domestic transfer of the two models, with individually validated licences needed for reinstatement and civil penalties for non-compliance. 

Sacks framed the off-ramp plainly: fix the jailbreak, lift the control. “The ball is in Anthropic’s court,” he wrote. For the governments now watching from outside, the patch is almost beside the point. The lesson many of them have already drawn is that access to frontier AI is no longer purely a matter of price or product; it is a matter of whose jurisdiction holds the switch. Last week, the answer turned out to be Washington’s, and a lot of capitals didn’t like how that felt.

See also: Anthropic IPO filing marks AI maturing into enterprise utility

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and is co-located with other leading technology events including the Cyber Security & Cloud Expo. Click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.