US AI lab Anthropic reported a run-rate revenue crossing $47 billion in May 2026, even as the Trump Administration’s ban on global access to its advanced AI models, Mythos and Fable 5, remained in force. This state-imposed restriction has reshaped the global market for frontier AI, creating new avenues for capital accumulation for firms outside the US.
State-Sanctioned Capital Reorientation
The Trump Administration’s ban, which took effect two weeks ago, has directly impacted the flow of advanced AI technology, forcing a reorientation of capital and development. In the weeks since the export order, at least two companies, one in Tokyo and one in Beijing, have stepped into the space it left behind. This demonstrates how state policy, under the guise of national security, actively reconfigures global markets and opportunities for profit.
Tokyo-based AI startup Sakana AI launched Fugu, a model it claims “stands shoulder-to-shoulder with leading models like Anthropic’s Fable 5 and Mythos Preview.” Sakana, co-founded in 2023 by former Google researchers Ren Ito, Llion Jones, and David Ha, advertises “delivering frontier capability without the risk of export controls.” The company aims Fugu at Japanese businesses and government agencies seeking to reduce their exposure to tightening export controls, directly capitalizing on the vacuum created by the US ban.
Simultaneously, Chinese cybersecurity firm 360 reportedly unveiled Tulongfeng, an AI tool it says can go head-to-head with Anthropic’s Mythos. 360 also launched Yitianzhen, built to automate cyber defense and incident response. According to Reuters, 360’s founder Zhou Hongyi described vulnerability-finding AI as a national strategic asset, flagging the risk of “one-way transparency” where some actors could access advanced capabilities while others could not. This highlights the intense inter-state competition for technological dominance, driven by the perceived strategic value of AI.
New Frontiers for Capital Accumulation
Sakana AI’s spokesperson stated the release of Fugu was “entirely coincidental,” but acknowledged the timing brought it “more attention than we expected.” The company’s focus on affordable generative AI models optimized for the Japanese language and culture positions it to capture a significant market share, particularly among those seeking alternatives to US models. While Sakana positioned Fugu as a hedge strategy to preserve access rather than replace US AI, the Chinese firm 360 was not hedging, directly developing competitive security tools.
How much of Anthropic’s $47 billion run-rate revenue depends on Asian enterprise customers is not publicly known. However, the rapid emergence of local alternatives, trained to better understand local language and nuance, indicates that even if US companies could win back trust should the ban ever end, the market landscape for AI capital has already shifted.
Managing Imperial Contradictions
Ren Ito, a co-founder of Sakana, made remarks at the G7 summit in Evian last week, where AI access and export controls were a central topic. Ito urged the US federal government in an op-ed to consider that its “first priority should be to preserve access” for America’s closest allies, arguing that “AI should not become a technology that is hoarded; it should be one that is developed together.” This liberal framing seeks to manage the contradictions of imperial control by advocating for a more inclusive, yet still capitalist, distribution of technology among allied nations, rather than challenging the fundamental concentration of power.
David Ha, co-founder and CEO of Sakana, echoed this sentiment, stating that relying on a single provider for national infrastructure is a risk the recent export controls made impossible to ignore. He wrote on X that “access to top models can disappear overnight” and that “collective intelligence is the practical hedge against this concentration of power.” These statements, while acknowledging the risks of concentrated power, propose solutions that remain firmly within the competitive market framework, seeking diversification of providers rather than a fundamental shift in the ownership or control of AI as a collective resource.