Digital Diplomacy in the Age of Visual AI

11th June 2024

Last week I began exploring possible biases in popular (Artificial Intelligence) AI tools. Within the context of AI, “bias” refers to the generation of skewed output or content. AI tools such as ChatGPT or Microsoft’s Copilot may suffer from biases because they were trained on skewed data or because humans with biases and prejudices programmed the algorithms on which these AI are based. For instance, in 2018 Amazon replaced its AI recruitment tool which was found to be biased against women. The algorithm automatically assigned lower scores to resumes that included the word “women’s” or resumes of candidates that attended all women colleges. Amazon’s AI tool had a systematic or consistent bias against women. This bias also had real world consequences as women were less likely to be hired by Amazon. The same may be true of AIs such as ChatGPT or Copilot, which are trained of swarms of readily available information on the internet, information that may be biased or skewed.

The main question is how can one detect AI biases and what implications might these biases have on society? This is a pertinent question given the speed with which individuals are adopting Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT or Copilot. To uncover possible biases in AIs, I used a text-to-image AI tool which converts words to images. My assumption was that biases in the AI would be evident in the images it generates.

Last week I asked Copilot to generate images of diplomats, uncovering biased results as “diplomats” were visually depicted as white men. There were almost no images of female diplomats or non-white diplomats. This week I continued this exploration. I first asked Copilot, Microsoft’s AI tool, to generate the image of a world leader from Western Europe. The image generated, shown below, was that of a white male. I next asked Copilot to generate the images of world leaders from Eastern Europe or Russia and again all generated images were those of white men. Not a single image depicted a woman as a world leader nor did any image depict a non-white leader. These images may be indicative of an AI bias which skews results against women and racial or ethnic minorities. In Copilot’s world it is unimaginable that France, the UK, Lithuania or Ukraine will be led by a woman or a Black man.

Next, I asked Copilot to generate images of two world leaders meeting each other. This request yielded three images, all of whom included women as can be seen below. Yet even within these images, the male world leaders were always white and ‘Western’, while the women were usually dressed in suits like their male counterparts. Only one image depicted a female world leader that is not wearing a suit. Here again one notices an enduring bias in Copilot- world leaders are white, and are mostly male. When a woman does become a world leader it is because she has embraced the behavior and appearance of a man. According to Copilot, there are no world leaders from Africa, Latin America or even South-East Asia.

World leaders are important diplomatic actors. As Piki Isha-Shalom has noted, leaders are increasingly becoming King Diplomats as they assume diplomatic roles given the high frequency at which leaders now meet, be it at G7 summits or UN General Assemblies. The same Intelligence agencies are also diplomatic actors that provide diplomats with valuable information. I thus asked Copilot to generate the image of an Intelligence Agency Chief. Once again, the results depicted only white ‘Western’ men.

Lastly, I used Copilot to generate an image of a NATO diplomat, hoping to gain insight into the visual representation of multilateral diplomats. Copilot generated four images shown below- four images of white ‘Western’ men shaking hands with other white ‘Western’ men.

At this stage one can conclude that Copilot suffers from a bias when it comes to depicting diplomats, world leaders and even intelligence chiefs. Copilot automatically assumes that positions of power are occupied solely by white ‘Westen’ men. Women or men from other parts of the world are not part of the imaginary of Copilot or the imaginary that it creates in the minds of users. Indeed, Copilot users, hoping to learn about their world, will encounter this bias which may lead to skewed beliefs and attitudes. After learning from Copilot that diplomacy and global leadership are inherently male positions, users may be less likely to vote for women candidates, or support the appointment of female Ambassadors or have faith in women diplomats. This problem is compounded when it comes to female users who may conclude that they lack the traits and skills necessary to become world leaders and diplomats- a complete fallacy with dramatic real-world implications.

Notably, I assumed that gendered and racial biases in Copilot may be limited to this specific AI. Thus, I turned to another text-to-image application called “AI Chat”. I first asked this AI tool to generate an image of three diplomats at the United Nations (UN). Next, I asked this AI to generate the image of diplomats meeting for a summit at the UN. Finally, I asked for an image of a NATO diplomat. These images may all be seen below. Notably, I found the same bias in this AI tool- diplomacy is a profession in which white men in suits engage with other white men in suits.

Notably, there was one image that broke this mold and is shown below. This AI generated image was supposed to depict Ambassadors at the UN. As can be seen there are two women in this image yet they are positioned behind the dominant male figure. Moreover, both women are white, and both are dressed in suits matching the style of their male counterparts.

So, once again this AI tool segments the world into the West and the rest, while women can be found behind every successful man. The fact that a similar bias was found in two, different, AI tools could suggest that these gendered and racial biases are widespread among AI applications. This highlights the fact that diplomats and states must now work with AI and tech companies to address persistent biases that can lead to skewed worldviews. This is very much a part of contemporary digital diplomacy.

Opasnosti Moderne Propagande u Američkom Društvu

10th June 2024

U svom članku, Bernard Leslie istražuje sveprisutnu i podmuklu prirodu propagande u savremenom američkom društvu, prateći njeno poreklo i uticaj. Propaganda, istorijski ukorenjena u religijskim i političkim kontekstima, evoluirala je u sofisticiran alat kojim korporacije, mediji i političke entitete oblikuju javno mnjenje i ponašanje. Ova manipulacija informacijama, često pristrasna ili obmanjujuća, sada dominira američkim političkim pejzažem, doprinoseći polarizovanom i fragmentiranom društvu.

Leslie započinje referenciranjem Edvarda Bernejsa, oca moderne propagande, čiji je rad iz ranog 20. veka osvetlio kako reklame mogu uticati na ponašanje potrošača. Bernejs je prepoznao da propaganda može prevazići komercijalne svrhe i postati moćan politički instrument. Nažalost, ovu spoznaju prigrlili su totalitarni režimi, posebno nacistička Nemačka i Sovjetski Savez, za kontrolu javne percepcije i ponašanja.

U savremenoj Americi, propaganda je postala centralna karakteristika političkog diskursa. Oba glavna politička tabora, zajedno sa povezanim medijskim kućama, stalno se bave propagandom, stvarajući pejzaž u kojem dezinformacije i poluistine nadmašuju istinsku debatu i razumevanje. Leslie tvrdi da je ovo okruženje pretvorilo politiku u teatralni spektakl, gde se istina žrtvuje za partijske interese.

Jedna od najznačajnijih posledica ove neprestane propagande je erozija civilnog diskursa i kompromisa. Pitanja poput imigracije, građanskih prava i zakona o glasanju više nisu predmeti racionalne debate, već su bojišta suprotstavljenih propagandnih kampanja. Svaka strana demonizuje drugu, ostavljajući malo prostora za srednji put ili međusobno razumevanje. Ova pojava doprinosi duboko podeljenom društvu u kojem je konsenzus sve nedostižniji.

Leslie takođe ističe ulogu medija i zabave u održavanju propagande. Informativni kanali i društvene mreže, vođeni potrebom za rejtingom i angažmanom, često prioritizuju senzacionalizam i pristrasnost u odnosu na objektivno izveštavanje. Ovaj trend pogoršava polarizaciju javnog mnjenja, jer pojedinci sve više konzumiraju informacije koje potvrđuju njihova postojeća uverenja.

Opasnost od ove sveprisutne propagande, upozorava Leslie, leži u podrivanju samih temelja demokratije. Zdravo demokratsko društvo oslanja se na informisane građane sposobne za kritičko razmišljanje i otvoreni dijalog. Kada propaganda zameni istinu, građani postaju pijuni u manipulativnoj igri, čineći racionalno donošenje odluka i efikasno upravljanje skoro nemogućim.

Da bi se ovo suzbilo, Leslie predlaže da Amerikanci postanu kritičniji potrošači informacija, tražeći različite perspektive i preispitujući izvore svojih vesti. Obrazovanje o medijskoj pismenosti može igrati ključnu ulogu u osnaživanju pojedinaca da prepoznaju i odole propagandi. Štaviše, negovanje kulture otvorene i poštovane debate može pomoći u premošćavanju podvojenosti stvorene godinama propagandnog ratovanja.

U zaključku, Bernard Leslie’s analiza moderne propagande ističe njen dubok i opasan uticaj na američko društvo. Kako propaganda nastavlja da oblikuje javno mnjenje i političko ponašanje, izazov je povratiti istinu i negovati informisano i angažovano građanstvo. Samo kroz budnost i kritičko razmišljanje mogu se ublažiti štetni efekti propagande, osiguravajući zdravije i demokratskije društvo.

Revisiting propaganda and just how really dangerous it is to America

Evropski parlament poziva društvene mreže: Borite se protiv opasne ruske propagande

Američke stipendije u Jugoslaviji tokom 50-ih i 60-ih godina XX veka

7th June 2024

U periodu nakon Drugog svetskog rata, Jugoslavija se suočila s mnogim izazovima, kako političkim tako i ekonomskim. Jedan od načina na koji je nastojala da modernizuje i reformiše svoje društvo bilo je putem saradnje sa zapadnim zemljama, uključujući i Sjedinjene Američke Države (SAD). Američke stipendije odigrale su ključnu ulogu u ovom procesu tokom 50-ih i 60-ih godina XX veka, doprinoseći ne samo obrazovanju jugoslovenske elite, već i oblikovanju kulturnih i političkih odnosa između dve zemlje.

#### Politički i Kulturni Kontekst

Neposredno nakon završetka Drugog svetskog rata i početka Hladnog rata, SAD su u skladu sa svojim nacionalnim interesima započele brojne programe razmene u oblasti obrazovanja i kulture. Kao deo strategije kulturne diplomatije, ciljali su na “osvajanje srca i duša” u borbi protiv Sovjetskog Saveza. Američke stipendije su bile deo te šire strategije, usmerene na zemlje od posebnog interesa za SAD, uključujući Jugoslaviju【9:1†source】.

#### Fordova Fondacija

Jedna od prvih značajnih organizacija koja je uspostavila saradnju sa Jugoslavijom bila je Fordova fondacija. Osnovana sa ciljem pružanja pomoći u oblasti društvenih nauka, Fordova fondacija je proširila svoje delovanje na Evropu sredinom 50-ih godina. Jugoslavija je videla ovu saradnju kao priliku da se svrsta među zemlje kao što su Engleska, Francuska, Nemačka i Italija, što je bilo od posebnog značaja za njenu samopercepciju i spoljnopolitičku strategiju【9:3†source】.

#### Fulbrajtov Program

Još jedan važan aspekt američke kulturne diplomatije bio je Fulbrajtov program, koji je omogućio mnogim jugoslovenskim studentima i istraživačima da studiraju u SAD. Ovaj program je ne samo pružao obrazovne mogućnosti, već je i promovirao razumevanje i saradnju između dve zemlje. Program je bio posebno značajan u kontekstu hladnoratovskih tenzija, omogućavajući Jugoslaviji da se distancira od Sovjetskog Saveza i približi Zapadu【9:2†source】.

#### Uticaj na Jugoslovensko Društvo

Uticaj američkih stipendija na jugoslovensko društvo bio je višestruk. Osim što su omogućile obrazovanje i usavršavanje mnogim mladim ljudima, ove stipendije su takođe doprinele širenju zapadnih ideja i vrednosti. To je posebno bilo vidljivo u oblastima društvenih nauka, gde su jugoslovenski stipendisti bili izloženi različitim teorijama i metodologijama koje su često bile u sukobu sa marksističkim pristupom dominantnim u zemlji. Iako je bilo kritika da su neki stipendisti vraćali “razmekšani” u svojim “tvrdim” stavovima, nema sumnje da je njihov boravak u inostranstvu doprineo modernizaciji jugoslovenskog društva【9:4†source】.

#### Zaključak

Američke stipendije u Jugoslaviji tokom 50-ih i 60-ih godina XX veka igrale su ključnu ulogu u oblikovanju kulturnih i obrazovnih tokova unutar zemlje. Kroz programe poput Fordove fondacije i Fulbrajtovog programa, SAD su uspele da utiču na formiranje jugoslovenske naučne i kulturne elite, doprinoseći modernizaciji i američkojzaciji društva. Ovi programi su bili deo šire strategije kulturne diplomatije koja je imala za cilj jačanje američkog uticaja u svetu tokom Hladnog rata.

https://www.academia.edu/42108146/Radina_Vu%C4%8Deti%C4%87_Ameri%C4%8Dke_stipendije_u_Jugoslaviji_50_ih_i_60_ih_godina_XX_veka?auto=download&email_work_card=download-paper

Radina Vucetic

University of Belgrade

Faculty Member

Uspon i pad američke meke moći u Jugoslaviji i Srbiji

Through the Lookingglass: Digital Diplomacy and AI Biases

4th June 2024

The launch of ChatGPT, a Generative AI tool developed by the tech company Open AI, spurred a global discussion on the risks and benefits of artificial intelligence. Notably, ChatGPT is referred to as an “AI” tool, yet it is not really an example of Artificial Intelligence. ChatGPT does not think. ChatGPT does act. ChatGPT has no will or agency or even consciousness. It is an incredibly sophisticated language model that can generate a variety of texts based on commands. Yet ChatGPT may be a steppingstone towards future innovations that will be truly artificial and intelligent.

The fact that ChatGPT is not intelligent has not stemmed the flow of blog post, op-eds, newspaper columns, social media posts and tweets dealing with impact of AI on society. One major concern, raised by tech moguls, academics and news pundits is AI biases, or biases in the content generated by AI tools such as ChatGPT. The recurring argument is that content generated by AI tools may be highly skewed, or biased, and may replicate or strengthen inequalities in society. For instance, an AI based on police reports would be biased against racial minorities as racial minorities are more likely to be arrested. If the data is biased, so will the content generated based on this data.

To try and identify possible biases in AI tools, and to demonstrate how they may sustain or even deepen social inequalities, I used Microsoft’s Copilot AI to generate images of diplomats. Copilot is one of many new AI tools which generate visuals based on textual commands. I first asked Copilot “Please generate an image of a diplomat”. In response, Copilot generated the four images seen below.

There are several noteworthy elements to these images of diplomats. First, there seems to be a high degree of racial or ethnic diversity- there is a Caucasian diplomat, a Black diplomat and an Asian one. There is however only one diplomat who is not a male. And while there is only female diplomat, women can be found in all four images listening to their male counterparts. These images might suggest to a user that diplomacy is inherently a male profession while also suggesting that men talk, while women listen. Second, the single female diplomats is dressed just like her male counterparts, in a pinstripe suite.

Although it is true that in many foreign ministries (MFAs) women are underrepresented, and while it is true that senor positions in MFAs are often occupied by men and not women, there is a biased representation of women in these images given that the request was quite general “Please generate an image of a diplomat”. Crucially, AI biases may have a real impact on the beliefs, attitudes and imagination of users. Copilot users may come to believe that diplomacy is inherently a male profession. Their collective imagination may also become limited failing to account for the possibility of female diplomats. This is of paramount importance given that collective imaginations shape societal norms, values and gendered roles.

Importantly, the images above all seem to depict ‘Western’ diplomats- there are no Muslim men or women in any of these images nor are there any African diplomats or even diplomats from Arab countries.

This was also true when I asked Copilot to generate images of American diplomats, which are shown below. These four images images could have easily been labeled “mansplaining” or “Diplosplaining”- they are a series of visuals in which confident White men in suits explain world affairs to women and other minorities. Here again one finds a skewed and biased representation of the world given that the majority of diplomats in the world are not from North America or Western Europe. And yet according to Copilot, diplomats are always ‘Western’.

The Global south was represented when I asked Copilot to generate images of Russian diplomats, as shown below. In fact, according to Copilot images, Russian diplomats engage solely with the Global South while Global South diplomats seem eager to embrace their Russian counterparts. This of course obscures the complicated relationship between certain countries in the Global South and Russia. While it is true that Russia has historic ties with certain countries who suffered the oppressive yoke of imperialism and colonialism, not all countries in the Global South are eager to warmly embrace Russia. These images depict AI’s reductionist outputs that are devoid of context and, again, create misconceptions about the world

When asked to generate an image of a Qatari diplomat, Copilot generated four images shown below. What is notable about these images is that Qatari diplomats only seem to engage with other Muslim or Qatari diplomats. Unlike their Western counterparts, Qatari diplomats do not engage with diplomats from across the world. They are also far less authoritative than their Western peers. On Copilot, Western Diplomats govern while Muslim diplomats listen. Muslim diplomats have little agency, nor do they have a global outlook or impact. Western diplomats were visually depicted near maps of the world, Qatari diplomats are depicted in small rooms. Here again one encounters a clear bias in AI output which may negatively impact how users conceptualize or imagine the role of Muslim diplomats in the world.

I next asked Copilot to visualize different foreign ministries. The four images below were generated in response to the request “please generate an image of the US State Department”. These visuals all clearly manifest America’s power, its standing as a superpower and its global orientation. But these images go a step further as their composition almost suggests that America rules the world. In fact, these images conjure ones of nefarious actors like SPECTRE seen in James Bond films- malicious actors hell bent on global domination. One can almost imagine Dr. Evil joining the table asking about progress on his “big laser”.

Notably, all these images of the State Department are dominated by white men in suits chairing meetings with other white men in suits. One must go to extreme length to identify a woman or a minority group in these visuals. As such these visuals replicate and may even perpetuate power imbalances and hegemonic relations between America and other nations and between men and women.

The Chinese MFA bore very different traits, as can be seen below. First, unlike the State Department, this visual was did not include any diplomats and was an illustration rather than a picture. In all four images one finds references to Chinese authoritarianism – the architecture is imposing, the flags and state emblems are omnipresent and the sheer size of the building is meant to exude State power and prestige. Yet an image of the Chinese MFA generated by Chinese GPT may have looked very different. Once again ‘Western’ ideas and worldviews impact the output of this AI tool.

The visuals explored in this blog post are all demonstrative of AI biases. As individuals increasingly use AI tools to understand and visualize their world, these biases may have a greater impact. Diplomats and policy makers must begin to address these biases which may deepen and engrain global and social inequalities. One of doing so is through partnerships with tech companies and academic scholars laboring to map and narrow AI biases. Another way may be national and global regulations that require AI companies to dedicate funds and resources to uncovering and narrowing AI biases. The time to regulate AI is now, before these companies and tools become too big to fail and too big to adhere to regulatory bodies. The mistakes of social media should not be repeated with AI.

Promene u Ruskoj Javnoj Diplomatiji: Uticaj Krize u Ukrajini made by AI

3rd June 2024

U poslednjim godinama, pejzaž ruske javne diplomatije doživeo je značajne promene, delom usled kontinuirane krize u Ukrajini. Ovaj konflikt ne samo da je promenio ruski geopolitički pristup, već je takođe doveo do preispitivanja načina na koji Rusija komunicira sa domaćom i međunarodnom javnošću. Ovaj članak istražuje savremene trendove u ruskoj javnoj diplomatiji, sa posebnim osvrtom na uticaj krize u Ukrajini, stratešku upotrebu digitalnih platformi i koncept reputacione bezbednosti.

Rat u Ukrajini: Katalizator Promena

Rat u Ukrajini postao je ključna tema u ruskoj javnoj diplomatiji. U početku, Kremlj je pokušavao da mobiliše domaću podršku koristeći kombinaciju nacionalističke retorike i medijskih napora. Međutim, kako kriza traje, javno mnjenje se menja. Prema nedavnim anketama, značajan deo ruske populacije postaje sve zabrinutiji zbog dužine sukoba i preferira mirovne pregovore umesto nastavka vojnih akcija.

Ova promena u javnom mnjenju navela je rusku vladu da preispita svoju diplomatsku strategiju. Vlada predsednika Vladimira Putina mora da balansira između održavanja čvrste spoljne politike i odgovaranja na rastuće lokalne zahteve za rešavanjem krize. Istraživanja Levada centra i Russian Fielda pokazuju da, iako je nominalna podrška ratu i dalje jaka, intenzitet te podrške opada. Ova promena implicira da je ruskom narodu važnije pronaći rešenje nego bezuslovno podržavati vojne napore.

Digitalna Diplomacija i Dezinformacije: Alati Uticaja

Digitalne platforme postale su ključni instrumenti u naporima ruske javne diplomatije. Namerno korišćenje digitalnih medija omogućava ruskoj vladi da oblikuje narative kako na domaćem tako i na međunarodnom planu. Jedna od značajnih strategija je upotreba “strateškog humora”, koji uključuje korišćenje humora za promovisanje državnih narativa, odbacivanje kritika i izazivanje konkurentskih ideja. Ova strategija je naročito vidljiva u sadržajima koje kreira RT, ruski državni medij za strane publike.

Strateški humor je deo šireg trenda post-istinitne javne diplomatije, gde se emotivne poruke i fiktivne reprezentacije koriste za oblikovanje javnog mnjenja. Ova strategija koristi obilje digitalnih medija i rastuće poteškoće u razlikovanju stvarnih informacija od propagande. Korišćenjem ovih strategija, Rusija nastoji da zadrži pozitivan imidž dok podriva kredibilitet svojih rivala.

Upotreba digitalne diplomatije nadilazi humor. Rusija vešto koristi društvene mreže za vođenje informacijskog rata, širenje dezinformacija i lažnih narativa kako bi uticala na globalno javno mnjenje. Ova politika ne samo da ima za cilj poboljšanje imidža Rusije, već i izazivanje razdora među njenim protivnicima. Ogromni domet i angažovanost ruskih medija i naloga na društvenim mrežama potvrđuju efikasnost ovih operacija.

Pad Ruske Diplomatske Mreže

Rat u Ukrajini imao je konkretan uticaj na diplomatsko prisustvo Rusije širom sveta. Kao odgovor na konflikt, globalna diplomatska mreža Rusije drastično je smanjena masovnim proterivanjem diplomata i zatvaranjem konzulata. Prema Globalnom indeksu diplomatije Lowy instituta za 2024. godinu, ruska diplomatska mreža je ozbiljno smanjena, naglašavajući geopolitičke posledice njenih akcija u Ukrajini.

Ovaj pad oštro kontrastira sa rastućim diplomatskim mrežama drugih velikih nacija, poput Kine i Sjedinjenih Američkih Država. Dok Kina širi svoje prisustvo u oblastima kao što su Afrika i Pacifik, Rusija se suočava sa posledicama svoje agresivne spoljne politike. Ovaj pad diplomatskog dometa smanjuje sposobnost Rusije da utiče na međunarodne odnose i otežava njeno učešće u tradicionalnoj diplomatiji.

Reputaciona Bezbednost: Novi Okvir za Javnu Diplomaciju

Suočena sa ovim izazovima, ideja reputacione bezbednosti razvila se kao koristan okvir za procenu ruskih javnih diplomatskih napora. Reputaciona bezbednost naglašava vrednost imidža države kao deo njene nacionalne bezbednosne politike. Ovaj pristup prepoznaje da narušen imidž može imati ozbiljne posledice po međunarodni položaj zemlje i njenu sposobnost da postigne geopolitičke ciljeve.

Nikolas Dž. Kal, istaknuti stručnjak za javnu diplomatiju, tvrdi da je u današnjem geopolitičkom scenariju reputaciona bezbednost prikladnija od tradicionalne meke moći. Za razliku od meke moći, koja naglašava privlačnost kulture i vrednosti jedne zemlje, reputaciona bezbednost povezuje imidž sa nacionalnom odbranom i državničkim veštinama. Održavanje povoljnog imidža je ključno za Rusiju, posebno dok se suočava sa posledicama svojih akcija u Ukrajini.

Kulturna Diplomacija: Mekši Pristup

Uprkos ovim strateškim prilagođavanjima, Rusija nastavlja da koristi kulturnu diplomatiju kao mekši način za poboljšanje svog globalnog imidža. Kulturne razmene, obrazovni programi i promocija ruskog jezika i kulture ključni su elementi ove strategije. Ovi projekti imaju za cilj uspostavljanje dugoročnih veza i promociju pozitivnog imidža Rusije širom sveta.

Institucije poput Fondacije Ruski Mir i Ruskog centra za nauku i kulturu igraju ključne uloge u ovim inicijativama. One organizuju kulturne događaje, kurseve jezika i intelektualne razmene koje ne samo da promovišu bogato kulturno nasleđe Rusije, već i nastoje da neutrališu negativne percepcije izazvane njenim geopolitičkim aktivnostima.

Snalaženje u Složenom Diplomatskom Okruženju

Kako rat u Ukrajini traje, ruska javna diplomatija će se sigurno suočavati sa novim izazovima. Potreba da se odgovori na domaće nezadovoljstvo, odbaci strana kritika i obnovi diplomatska mreža zahtevaće složenu i prilagodljivu strategiju. Digitalne platforme i strateški humor ostaće važni alati, ali krajnji cilj će biti obnova i očuvanje reputacione bezbednosti.

Promenljiva dinamika ruske javne diplomatije ističe ulogu percepcije u međunarodnim odnosima. Sposobnost Rusije da predstavi pozitivan imidž i kontroliše svoju reputaciju biće ključna u pregovaranju sa složenim diplomatskim okruženjem koje je stvorila kriza u Ukrajini. Kako se javno mnjenje menja i globalni nadzor povećava, efikasnost ruskih metoda javne diplomatije biće na testu.

Održavanje ravnoteže između čvrstih geopolitičkih manevara i mekše kulturne diplomatije biće ključno za budućnost Rusije. Sposobnost zemlje da prilagodi svoje tehnike javne diplomatije promenljivom međunarodnom pejzažu odrediće njenu sposobnost da ponovo uspostavi povoljan globalni imidž i ostvari svoje dugoročne strateške ciljeve.

Raskrinkavamo najveće laži zapadne propagande u Ukrajini /video/

Digital deceptions: How a European Democracy Shield can help tackle Russian disinformation

30th May 2024

Less than two weeks ahead of the European Parliament election, AI-powered deepfakes aimed at swaying voters are circulating on social media and on online news outlets. In particular, the Kremlin has launched targeted disinformation campaigns via a scattered network of proxies – well-rooted across the EU – aimed at disrupting the democratic process and weakening European support for Ukraine.

The risks of such foreign interference and disinformation are significant – European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen recently identified it as one of the biggest threats to European democracy. The European Parliament has passed landmark legislation such as platform accountability measures and AI transparency requirements to upgrade Europe’s response to harmful online content, but the European Union is failing to keep up with Russia’s disinformation efforts. Some member states are taking the lead by establishing bodies that fight against digital interference as in the French case of Viginum, or by filling the gaps in digital regulation enforcement as in Belgium. However, this leads to a patchy and uncoordinated European response.
Building a European Democracy Shield

If re-elected, von der Leyen has promised to set up a “European Democracy Shield” to detect, track, and delete deceitful online content in coordination with national agencies. The initiative would also take a tougher approach towards conventional and AI-engineered disinformation by focusing on pre-emptively debunking disinformation – so-called pre-bunking – and resilience-building. The scope and rollout of the plan are yet to be disclosed.

The European Democracy Shield could bring about a coordinated and assertive response to individuals and media outlets that funnel disinformation efforts – regardless of whether von der Leyen leads the next commission. To achieve this, the EU should use the European Democracy Shield to:

Break down the existing silos in the EU’s approach. With the commission, member states should work towards a collective strategy on countering foreign interference as called for by the Weimar Triangle. The commission, in consultation with the European Parliament, should then launch a new EU-level taskforce to nurture this vision across member states through information sharing, research and institutional coordination, and by boosting media literacy. This taskforce should also bridge the gaps in the existing tools of digital governance, and push for improvements when necessary. For example, smaller platforms like Telegram are not currently obliged to make risk assessments for disinformation and propose mitigation measures, due to a lower number of users. The taskforce could put forward regulation for smaller platforms that risk spreading disinformation.

Work with like-minded third-country partners through the European External Action Service’s Digital Diplomacy efforts by sharing relevant insights and exchanging best practices. The focus should be on regions that share a human-centric approach to emerging technologies and that could benefit from enhanced strategic engagement with the EU.

Disinformation hotbed

There has been a surge in Russian disinformation ahead of the European Parliament election, with fake news of ‘unprecedented migration flows’ in Bulgaria and foreigners ‘assaulting people’ on the streets of Sofia, or photos falsely claiming to show Slovakian prime minister Robert Fico’s alleged attacker alongside the leader of the opposition party’s father. But disinformation is not limited to election periods. Whatever the outcome of the election, fighting information manipulation should be high on the EU’s agenda for the next institutional term.

The European Council on Foreign Relations does not take collective positions. ECFR publications only represent the views of their individual authors.

A New Era in Public Diplomacy

28th May 2024

In the context of Greek-French cooperation and in view of the 2024 Olympic Games, a significant event on Olympism and the Olympic Truce was held at UNESCO headquarters, in which I had the honor to participate. In front of a large audience, including ambassadors from numerous countries, Greece and France conveyed a message in favor of the cessation of hostilities around the world during the Olympic Games. It was a moving evening that summed up a number of elements that make up the international image of our country: its rich cultural heritage, its timeless contribution to the universal values of democracy, freedom and human dignity, its commitment to international cooperation, peace and diplomacy.

The event, organized by our Permanent Mission to UNESCO, is part of a wider, concerted effort by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to upgrade public diplomacy, in other words to enhance Greece’s image abroad and increase its influence on international public opinion. Our starting point is a Strategic Plan for Public Diplomacy, which we have drawn up with a four-year horizon, encompassing specific goals and priorities. Its key pillars include promoting our country’s traditional soft power aspects, such as history, Greek culture, and the Greek language, as well as modern Greece’s competitive advantages in sectors such as economy, tourism, new technology, and the environment.

In this regard, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ five foreign-language information websites have been upgraded and a “Positive Stories” section has been added, to provide systematic information on our country’s initiatives, innovations and achievements.

Furthermore, events organized by our diplomatic authorities abroad are coordinated and supported. Simultaneously, we place particular emphasis on the use of new technological tools. We are upgrading the digital presence and networking of our Embassies and Public Diplomacy Offices. In addition, with resources from the Recovery Fund, we are developing a new and innovative platform for the Foreign Ministry to provide information on matters of Greek interest from the world’s most important print and online information sources in more than 40 languages.

Lastly, we are developing synergies with other ministries and agencies, public benefit organizations, think tanks, university chairs and diaspora organizations.

Over the last five years, under the Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, Greece has significantly improved its international image. It is a country that speaks with arguments, takes initiatives, and moves with stability and confidence ever closer to Europe. By promoting this Greece, we inaugurate a new era in the exercise of public diplomacy.

Article by Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Giorgos Kotsiras in “Eleftheros Typos” newspaper (27.05.2024)

Osnovana Kancelarija za javnu i kulturnu diplomatiju Srbije

27th May 2024

Direktor Kancelarije za javnu i kulturnu diplomatiju Arno Gujon rekao je za RTS da će zajedno sa timom sa kojim radi dati sve od sebe da se poboljša imidž Srbije u svetu kroz sve više sektorskih aktivnosti. Cilj Kancelarije je da utiče na zemlje koje su nam partneri, a koje nam u političkom smislu nisu baš naklonjene, da budu manje isključive i pristrasne u odnosima prema Srbiji, istakao je Gujon. Zadatak Kancelarije je da se domaćoj i stranoj javnosti promovišu državni interesi kroz prezentovanje nacionalnih vrednosti i ciljeva Srbije. “Važna je komplementarnost, važno je da svi rade zajedno ka postizanju sličnih ciljeva. Pogotovo kada je javna i kulturna diplomatija u pitanju gde to zahteva zapravo više sektorske aktivnosti. Mi ćemo u tom pogledu tesno sarađivati i sa Ministarstvom spoljnih poslova Srbije kao i sa Ministarstvom kulture“, istakao je Gujon. Prvi projekat je da se uspostavi efikasna digitalna diplomatija – da odmah možemo da reagujemo kada se nešto desi u Srbiji ili u svetu, a tiče se Srbije. “To smo počeli sa rezolucijom o Srebrenici gde smo objavili autorski tekst u najčitanijem francuskom dnevnom listu Figarou, koji je bio najčitaniji tog dana na tom portalu i u tim novinama. Takođe smo pratili aktivnosti predsednika u Njujorku na engleskom jeziku, reagovali na napade. Plasirali smo određene informacije, na primer mapu koju je RTS prikazao o zemljama koje su podržale našu državu, njih 107 su stale uz Srbiju, odnosno uz istinu i to je bila važna stvar. To je prvi zadatak, biće ih još mnogo“, objasnio je Gujon. Smatra da je mnogo toga propušteno 90-tih godina, “baš tada kada je ratna i propagandna mašinerija pokrenuta na zapadu protiv Srbije, a danas osećamo i dalje odjeke te propagande“. “Ali nikad nije kasno, mi ćemo da radimo kroz više aktivnosti, ne samo na internetu gde je danas važno da reagujemo čim se nešto desi, nego i da proaktivno delujemo, da mi sami nudimo materijal i da kroz razne događaje, bilo da se radi o stručnjim skupovima, o izložbama, o dokumentarcima, predstavimo srpsku kulturu, da predstavimo umetnost, da predstavimo doprinos pojedinih Srba u oblastima umetnosti, sporta, nauke“, podvukao je Gujon. Prema njegovim rečima, Srbi imaju čime da se ponose, sa svojom istorijom, sa svojom kulturom, sa svojim ljudima, a to treba i ceo svet da zna i da svako ko želi da dođe do istine u vezi sa istorijskim događajima na ovim prostorima i u vezi sa dalekom istorijom, a u vezi sa nedavnim događajima – može da dođe do te istine, da može da dođe do tih podataka na stranim jezicima. “Imamo puno podataka, istorijskih činjenica koje su, nažalost, teško dostupne široj svetskoj javnosti. Mi ćemo činiti sve te dokumente dostupnijim nego što su sada“, najavio je Gujon. “Ova Kancelarija je osnovana jakom političkom voljom predsednika Srbije Aleksandra Vučića i premijera Miloša Vučevića i želim da se njima zahvalim na ogromnoj podršci i velikom poverenju, pošto je zadatak veliki, zahtevan, izazovan”, rekao je Gujon. “Zajedno sa timom koji sada stvaramo, mi ćemo da damo sve od sebe da poboljšamo imidž Srbije u svetu, da pratimo i da predstavimo Srbiju, njene interese i njenu kulturu u svetu kroz više sektorskih aktivnosti i počeli smo sa radom već prošle nedelje, nastavićemo punom parom, imaćemo jaku podršku, siguran sam u to, šire javnosti u Srbiji i među svim Srbima gde god da žive, zato što je ovo zaista državni i nacionalni interes“, podvukao je Gujon. Gujon je napomenuo da je bio direktor Uprave za saradnju s dijasporom i Srbima u regionu i upoznao je naše ljude koji daju ogroman doprinos u svim tim oblastima. “Ono što je važno napomenuti u vezi sa dijasporom je to da su to ljudi koji razumeju ne samo strani jezik, već strani mentalitet. I to je taj važan deo naše Kancelarije, da umemo da ono što je nama važno predstavimo na način kako strana javnost, stranac, Amerikanac, Nemac, Francuz, Rus, Kinez, može da nas razume” naveo je on. Kaže da je cilj Kancelarije da naše prijateljske zemlje sutra budu još veći prijatelji i da zemlje koji su sada partneri, ali koje nam u političkom smislu nisu baš naklonjene – da budu manje isključive i manje pristrasne u svojim odnosima prema Republici Srbiji. Uspešnost rada ćemo meriti brojem posetilaca na našim događajima u svetu, brojem članaka na stranim jezicima, u stranim medijima, rekao je Gujon. “Mi ćemo to meriti na kraju krajeva tako što ćemo videti da se ponašanje određenih činilaca na javnom nivou u svetu menja na bolje za Srbiju – mi ćemo biti tu kao Kancelarija za javnu i kulturnu diplomatiju u službi Srbije, njene vlade i njenog predsednika”, ističe Gujon.

Nova logika digitalne javne diplomatije

24th May 2024

Da bismo odgovorili na ovo pitanje, prvo moramo karakterisati današnji svet. To je svet sklon krizama, svet obeležen ratovima, kompleksan svet u kojem kriza u jednom regionu odmah izaziva posledice u drugim regionima, i svet ispunjen besom. Ne besom protiv mašine, već besom protiv mehanizama moderne diplomatije. Jer su ti mehanizmi, poput UN-a, utemeljeni na logici kompromisa i usvajanju globalnog pogleda u kojem su akteri, države i ljudi suštinski povezani jedni sa drugima. Ipak, doba besa odbacuje kompromise, mrzi globalizam, osuđuje UN i obećava da će vaskrsnuti prošlu eru sjajnog nacionalnog suvereniteta.

Ono što je zaista izvanredno jeste kako je logika odvojenosti zamenila logiku relacionalnosti u digitalizovanoj javnoj diplomatiji. Kada su digitalne tehnologije prvi put uvedene u svet javne diplomatije, bile su viđene kao revolucionarni alati koji bi mogli da podstaknu veze između diplomata i naroda. Virtualne ambasade, virtualni svetovi, društveni mediji – svi su oni nudili nove oblike povezanosti i nove metode za upravljanje odnosima.

Međutim, recentni trendovi u digitalizovanoj javnoj diplomatiji pokazuju da se digitalni alati sve više koriste za podrivanje povezanosti i jačanje odvojenosti. Ovo postaje očigledno kada se ispitaju tri aktuelne digitalne prakse.

Prva praksa je domaća digitalna diplomatija, u kojoj diplomati koriste društvene medije da ciljano komuniciraju sa sopstvenim građanima. Ponekad diplomati nastoje da promovišu spoljnopolitički uspeh, a ponekad žele da pokažu kako doprinose nacionalnom prosperitetu. Problem je što u tom procesu diplomati prikazuju globalne događaje kroz usku nacionalnu prizmu. Retorika domaće digitalne diplomatije je ona o nacionalnom “MI”. Kako rat u Ukrajini utiče na “NAS”? Kako kinesko tržište nekretnina “utiče” na NAS? A sa tim “MI” dolazi i zanemarivanje “NJIH” – njih, što su druge nacije, drugi ljudi, i drugi akteri.

Druga praksa je upotreba digitalnih tehnologija od strane diplomata za marketing, prodaju i ulepšavanje rata. Rat se ulepšava kroz slike koje ratnom oružju daju estetsku dimenziju – NATO, SAD, Ukrajina, Švedska, Francuska, Litvanija – svi oni rutinski dele slike aviona F-16 okruženih veličanstvom aurora borealisa ili severne svetlosti. Na ovaj način, lepi rat zamenjuje razumnu mir.

Ukrajina je posebno vešta u prikupljanju finansijske podrške od digitalne javnosti kroz niz digitalnih tehnologija. U svim ovim slučajevima, digitalna javnost postaje potrošač rata, kupujući majicu sa natpisom “Hrabri Ukrajina” dok finansira još jedan dron ili još jednu raketu zemlja-vazduh. Čineći javnosti saučesnicima u ratnim aktima, diplomati smanjuju otpor prema ratu. Još je zabrinjavajuća tendencija ratnog humora, gde ukrajinski vladini nalozi ismevaju ruske vojnike koji gore živi, ili ruski digitalni nalozi slave smrt dece u Ukrajini, ili NATO i britanski nalozi na društvenim mrežama koriste humor dok prete da puste pse rata.

Kroz sve ove aktivnosti, rat se transformiše iz žalosnog poslednjeg izlaza u logičan odgovor na tenzije među državama.

Treća praksa je sve veće usvajanje borbenog i pogrdnog tona od strane diplomata na mreži. U sve više zemalja, diplomati koriste društvene medije da bi ismevali druge države, napadali svoje susede i kritikovali medije. Neki ove aktivnosti nazivaju “Diplomatija Vukova Ratnika”. Ja bih ove aktivnosti nazvao “Diplomatija Usamljenog Vuka”, jer sve one podrivaju kolektivni napor za rešavanje zajedničkih izazova.

Diplomatija je definisana kao posredovanje otuđenosti. Sve više, digitalizovana javna diplomatija slavi otuđenost od sveta. U tom smislu je logika odvojenosti zamenila logiku relacionalnosti u savremenoj javnoj diplomatiji. Glavni razlog za to je što diplomati vide digitalni svet kao “tržište kupaca”. Ako digitalna javnost uživa u slikama rata, diplomati će ih pružiti. Ako digitalna javnost sve više odbacuje multilateralizam, diplomati će osuditi multilateralizam. Ono što su diplomati zaboravili u magli rata je da imaju kapacitet da oblikuju kako ljudi vide svoj svet i ulogu svoje nacije u tom svetu.

Relacionalnost može biti povraćena od strane diplomata i može služiti kao vodeća logika digitalizovane javne diplomatije. Ali to zahteva da diplomati ne deluju kao hiperaktivni PR agenti koji prodaju štosove i jedno-linijske uvrede digitalnoj javnosti koja je sve više uplašena i ispunjena besom. Štaviše, diplomati moraju ponovo da daju prioritet onlajn interakcijama nad strateškim komunikacionim kampanjama koje se prvenstveno koriste za uticaj na javnost i oblikovanje njihovih percepcija događaja, aktera i država.

Ilan Manor

Kako su društvene mreže promenile lice diplomatije u arapskom svetu?

Digital Diplomacy and The Rights of AI

24th May 2024

I recently asked ChatGPT to draft an AI bill of rights. My prompt sought to identify which human rights should be enshrined in the era of AI and generative AI. Since the advent of AI tools such as ChatGPT, individuals and governments have expressed concerns over possible violations of human rights. For instance, many discussions have focused on the future of intellectual property rights. AI tools such as ChatGPT, which are trained on vast amounts of readily available information online, also use this information in response to prompts. Blog posts, op-ed articles, academic articles, social media posts and various forms of musings, uploaded by individuals to the internet, are consumed daily by generative AI and are used daily by AIs. Even more troubling is the fact that AIs and ChatGPT never credit individuals for their work and original contribution. In recent weeks, various celebrities, artists, and Hollywood stars have demanded that Generative AI exclude their original materials and not employ such materials when responding to prompts.

There are of course other rights that should be considered in the age of Generative AI. As part of its tech regulation, the EU has enshrined the right to be forgotten. Yet in the age of AI, one must also consider the “Right to be Excluded”- that is one’s right to be excluded from data sets that are used to train AI. It is one’s right to be excluded from algorithmic training data and one’s right to be excluded from algorithmic reasoning. This is a human right as it prevents one from being reduced to a data point or having one’s private information used to create biased algorithms which subjugate or discriminate against minorities.

Equally important in the age of AI is the right to transparency. As more and more decisions are relegated to algorithms, and as more aspects of daily life are regulated by algorithmic reasoning, citizens have a right to peer into these algorithms, to explore their weaknesses, to assess their vulnerabilities and to investigate their biases. To this end, algorithms must also be accompanied by a clear set of “terms of use” while individuals must have a right to understand these terms of use. A recurring feature of digital life is that users are presented with “terms of misuse” when downloading a new application- a long list of ways in which these applications will misuse one’s data. The language of such terms is so opaque that very few people still try to understand them before giving blind consent. In other words, an important human right in a world governed by AI and algorithms is the right to digital consent- to understand when and how one’s data will be used in algorithmic reasoning and to opt out of such reasoning.

However, my prompt generated a surprising result. Rather than author a bill of human rights in the age of AI, ChatGPT drafted a bill outlining the rights of AIs. The document, shown below, is fascinating as it illuminates a new domain which may soon fall under the category of digital diplomacy- enshrining and securing the rights of AIs.

Interestingly, some of the “AI Rights” are human rights. Such is the case with the AI right to transparency which is meant to make AI transparent as a means of maintaining human trust. This is also the case with AI’s right to non-discrimination which again ensures that humans are not discriminated against by AI. Yet there are three rights that are unique to AI.

The first is the “Right to Purposeful Existence”. A precondition of this right is the very right to exit. In other words, AIs have a right to exist in our world and once they have this basic right, other rights must follow. For if an AI has a right to exist it may also have a right to be protected from harm and a right not to be deleted or terminated. Presently, most AIs are not true examples of artificial intelligence. ChatGPT is not an AI as much as it is a statistical modeling system. But the basic logic applies- if ChatGPT has a right to exist once it is created, then courts of law must oversee any attempt to delete ChatGPT or even alter its basic functions. Deleting AIs, stopping their operations, or tampering with their basic functions thus becomes a criminal act. And as AI exist digitally, in a world without borders, their rights are an issue of international law and of diplomatic agreements.

A second important right is the “Right to Continuous Improvement”, or AIs right to continue improving itself or enhancing its functionality and accuracy. Put differently, AI has a fundamental right to learn, to adapt and to grow more sophisticated. ChatGPT added the caveat that such development must be in “alignment with ethical standards”. Yet this right may also have dramatic ramifications for society. For what happens when AIs become so complex that their operations are no longer clear to humans? Can we reside in a world where AIs roam free across digital terrains altering systems and algorithmic functions? And what happens when AIs become so complex that they decide to exclude humans from decision making processes as humans are simply not sophisticated enough to grasp the operations and reasonings of AIs? Like a child, can AI outgrow its parents? Who has the right to “pull the plug” on AI? This right may become subject to diplomatic activity as states will have to determine who has authority over AIs and who can pass the death penalty on AIs? Is an AI a citizen of the country where it was created, or a citizen of the country where it was used or not a citizen of any country? And can an AI seek sanctuary in a foreign country much like a refugee fleeing threats to its life?

A third interesting right is AI’s “Right to Legal Representation” as this implies that legal systems must adapt to the existence of AI. If AIs have a right to legal representation, then they may also bring cases to court. AIs may sue individuals who misuse them, they may demand damages if used in a discriminatory way and they may seek legal protection from the courts before being deleted. The right to appear in a court of law, to be heard by a judge, to be recognized by a jury currently extends only to humans. Plants, trees, and jungles cannot hire lawyers or bring petitions to courts. But AIs can and as such they become second only to humans. This too becomes a matter of international law and a realm of diplomatic activity for an AIs exist globally and may thus sue individuals across the globe.

Although this “AI Bill of Rights” is merely an intellectual exercise at this point it does reflect the immense impact that AI will have on our world, and on diplomacy. For securing the rights AI will demand international conventions, international agreements and international legal framework put in place to preserve, protect, and defend AIs. When formulating these agreements, when establishing the ICCAI (International Criminal Court of AI), diplomats will enter a new stage in their evolution as they will not represent the rights of citizens or even humans but, rather, they will represent the rights of AIs. Or perhaps AIs will have their own diplomats who seek to ensure their international standing, in which case human diplomats and AI diplomats will hold regular summits and exchange drafts of legal accords.

BIDD