The recipe for Russia's artificial intelligence to lag behind
In sprint mode
On July 8, 2026, the State Duma passed a law supporting AI. From its introduction to the final vote, the law took seven days. There were no public hearings, no expert discussions, and not a single substantive amendment.
The head of the relevant committee, Sergei Boyarsky, explained the rush simply:
The main goal of this bill is to stimulate the implementation of sovereign national artificial intelligence models in all areas of our lives. We cannot lose the race with the United States and China for leadership in this field.
The document's logic boils down to requiring everyone—government agencies, schools, hospitals, and strategic enterprises—to use sovereign and national AI models.
Almost simultaneously with the vote, VK Tech's head of cloud services, Dmitry Lazarenko, publicly stated:
I don't believe we can create the entire component base for artificial intelligence from scratch. It's such a massive undertaking that it could take decades.
Two events, superimposed on each other, provide a bleak diagnosis: the law on sovereign AI is being adopted at a time when the physical foundation for it—its own hardware—does not exist and will not exist in the foreseeable future.
The document introduces two types of models. Sovereign models are entirely Russian-developed, with Russian data centers and domestic components. National models allow foreign components, but the data is stored in Russia. Both categories receive preferential treatment: access to government data, priority in public procurement, and tax breaks.
In March 2026, the first version of the draft law from the Ministry of Digital Development, Communications, and Mass Media alarmed the industry: it included a complete ban on foreign data and technologies and strict certification. By June, the document had been softened, removing the restrictions and shifting the focus to supporting large-scale fundamental models (LLM and multimodal systems). For reference, large-scale fundamental models are neural networks trained on huge volumes of text, images, and other content so they can solve a variety of problems without reconfiguration. Unlike narrow programs designed for a single action, such a model serves as a general foundation upon which to build a chatbot, a translator, or a medical assistant. The key requirements for their creation are powerful computing clusters, large datasets of high-quality data, and strong research teams. These are the structures the bill's authors emphasize. The updated and adopted version eliminated security requirements such as risk audits, hallucination control, and bias assessment. These are key positions worldwide, otherwise AI risks becoming a useless toy.
The foundation that doesn't exist
The figures from the Association of Electronics Developers and Manufacturers (ARDM) are relentless. By the end of 2025, the share of Russian electronic components in the domestic market had fallen from 28% to 26%. The electronic component market size has plummeted by a quarter, to 288 billion rubles. The defense industry accounts for 43% of demand. In the civilian sector, Russian electronics, according to an industry report, are "practically nonexistent."
The reasons for the decline are systemic. Key chip production equipment—ASML lithography machines, Applied Materials installations, and Lam Research systems—has ceased being supplied to Russia. Existing capacities are neither being updated nor maintained by manufacturers. Russian fabs can only support processes that are primitive by today's standards.
Modern fundamental AI models require NVIDIA-type graphics accelerators—clusters of thousands of microprocessors costing hundreds of millions of dollars. Despite sanctions, China has created its own equivalents: the Huawei Ascend 910B and Biren BR100. The Russian Elbrus-16S (16 nm) and Baikal are very inconvenient for AI workloads—they're like the Moskvich-412 for Formula 1. Moreover, even these developments can't be manufactured in Russia. At best, in China. If they're allowed.
Without its own hardware, sovereign AI is sovereignty over software code running on foreign silicon. And that's hardly sovereignty at all.
That's not to say that all is well in programming. The Russian AI market is expected to grow fivefold by 2025, reaching 58 billion rubles. There are two flagships: Sberbank's GigaChat and YandexGPT. "One and a half grand," as the industry jokes bitterly. Plus Kandinsky for image generation, and niche developments from major Russian institutes. All of them are tailored to our reality. These neural networks flawlessly understand the Russian language (including slang, complex terminology, and context), and are ideal for domestic businesses. They easily integrate into Russian services, are safe for working with confidential corporate data, and are excellent at handling everyday tasks, such as document analysis or customer support. However, there are complex standardized AI exams worldwide. They test deep logic, knowledge of the exact sciences, the ability to write complex code, and the ability to solve non-standard problems. And here, advanced models from the US (ChatGPT, Claude) and China (DeepSeek) are currently proving smarter. This means that Russian models are roughly on par with Western neural networks of the last or previous generation.
For 90% of standard work tasks within Russia, domestic models are more than sufficient. However, when it comes to writing a complex program from scratch, conducting in-depth scientific research, or working with multiple foreign languages, global leaders will typically deliver more accurate and high-quality results. The lag of Russian neural networks compared to global leaders is explained by four fundamental factors, each of which presents Russian developers with serious but objective challenges.
First and foremost, the development of artificial intelligence is hampered by a lack of training data. Neural networks become smarter by consuming vast amounts of text from the internet. The English-language segment of the internet is colossal: it contains a global knowledge base, cutting-edge scientific articles, forums, and gigantic libraries of software code. The Russian-language segment is incomparably smaller, which means our models simply lack the volume to train deep logic.
The second problem lies in limited access to computing power, or hardware. For a neural network to process terabytes of data, gigantic supercomputers consisting of thousands of specialized chips are required. The market for such processors is a global monopoly, and due to sanctions, direct shipments of the most advanced accelerators to Russia are impossible. Purchasing equipment through alternative means is expensive, time-consuming, and doesn't always allow for the assembly of a supercomputer of the required scale, which inevitably slows down the training process.
The third important factor is the talent shortage. Artificial intelligence architecture is created not by machines, but by talented mathematicians and programmers, of whom there are only a handful in the world. The loss of 15 to 30% of unique machine learning and data scientists between 2022 and 2025 has been a significant blow to the industry. The workload of the remaining engineers has increased exponentially, and it takes years to develop new talent of the same caliber from the university level.
Finally, there's a huge gap in funding. In the West, astronomical sums are pouring into AI: by 2025 alone, cutting-edge American startups like OpenAI and Anthropic have easily raised tens of billions of dollars from investors. In Russia, however, investment opportunities are more modest—by comparison, the entire domestic electronic components market represents only a fraction of the budgets of Western AI corporations.
There are never too many laws
Given these starting conditions, the fact that domestic neural networks are only one or two steps behind the leaders, rather than being hopelessly outclassed, is a testament to the incredible skill and ingenuity of our engineers, who have learned to squeeze the most out of available resources.
The law's primary focus is the mandatory implementation of "indigenous" models in all areas of life. The question is: is it possible to raise the quality of a technological product to world-class standards through administrative resources? Of course not. A manufacturer protected from competition is motivated to utilize its budget, not to improve. The quality of a fundamental model is determined by its scientific school, computing power, data volume, and competitive environment—none of these conditions are created by legislation.
Moreover, the forced introduction of weak models into critical areas is a recipe for degradation. If doctors are forced to use a sovereign diagnostic system that's 20% more likely to make mistakes, that's not sovereignty, but a decline in the quality of medicine.
The law does not establish measurable quality standards for supported models. There are no minimum accuracy requirements for standardized tests, no mandatory testing of AI models according to international standards, and no public reporting. Budgetary funds can be spent for years supporting systems whose effectiveness is not objectively verified.
The law ignores the entire spectrum of applied AI beyond large-scale language models. Computer vision for industry, predictive analytics, robotics, and speech recognition are all left out. Yet, according to experts, these are the areas that account for up to 70% of the economic impact of AI implementation.
Why the focus only on fundamental models? It's either lobbying by major players (Sber and Yandex get a guaranteed market and the elimination of foreign competitors) or image-based logic: large language models are the talk of the town, unlike the invisible but critically important industrial automation systems. There aren't many other explanations.
And in conclusion, Russia has a strong mathematical school, engineering traditions, and talented developers. This is enough to keep it from falling out of the race entirely. But to compete on equal terms, marathon investment in microelectronics and advanced science is needed, not sprinting laws.
There's a high risk of replacing technological development with administrative resources, declaring sovereignty while running foreign hardware, and then discovering in 2030 that sovereign AI works just fine in presentations, but not on servers. Because there's nowhere and nothing to produce those servers.
Information