AI Power and its Impact on Digital Diplomacy Research

ai-power-and-its-impact-on-digital-diplomacy-research
AI Power and its Impact on Digital Diplomacy Research

Throughout the 1980s, noted British historian Eric Hobsbawm delivered a series of lectures examining the academic study of history, and the state of social history, his chosen field. Hobsbawm’s lectures offer much needed insight into the study of digital diplomacy, in general, and the study of AI’s potential impact on diplomacy. For example, Hobsbawm argued that many historians focus on moments of great revolutions and eruptions such as the Industrial Revolution or the 1917 Bolshevik revolution. Yet historians fail to examine those countries and regions that did not experience revolutions. Hobsbawm therefore suggested that history suffers from a selection bias.

This is also true when examining the history of digital diplomacy scholarship as most studies focus only on those technologies that diplomats have adopted. We know very little about the technologies that diplomats chose not to adopt and why they did so. We know why diplomats chose to adopt social media, but we do not know why diplomats rejected aggregators like Reddit. We know that diplomats adopted virtual worlds, but we do not why they chose not to leverage virtual and augmented reality.

AI presents scholars with a unique opportunity to address this lacuna. Academics need to gain a better understanding of the processes and mechanisms that lead diplomats to adopt or reject technologies. Is this a deliberative process where diplomats hold formal meetings to discuss digital technologies and their potential use? Or is this a bottom-up process where trailblazing diplomats use new technologies in ways which are then emulated across an MFAs? This was the case with social media and Twitter. Or is this a societal process in which diplomats use technologies in their personal life and then adapt these to their professional needs, as was the case with WhatsApp?

Hobsbawm’s second argument is that historians often engage in comparative analysis. Yet Hobsbawm asserted that such comparisons are highly problematic. In his eyes, one could not compare 19th century England with 19th century Russia, or 15th century China with 15th century Japan, given great differences in the size and complexity of these societies.

The history of digital diplomacy scholarship is marked by frequent comparisons between Embassies and MFAs from different countries. Numerous digital diplomacy studies compare the digital strategies and narratives of different MFAs or Embassies. Yet studies also suggest that each MFA is a world unto itself. Indeed, MFAs are national institutions, social bodies and political organs and each MFA is characterized by distinct features such as risk tolerance, communicative culture and standard operating procedures developed over decades. Each of these can shape the process of digital adoption or impact which technologies diplomats adopt and which they reject.  

Thus, it is likely that the use of AI in diplomacy will evolve differently in different MFAs, with some focusing on the benefits of AI and others focusing on AI’s challenges. One of the greatest challenges posed by AI is that of individuals’ ability to create “Real Fakes”- or false yet highly believable realities. Using DeepSeek and ChatGPT I have been able to create a host of diplomatic and military memos all dealing with a “secret” Ukrainian plan to attack Russia and retake Crimea in 2019. These memos, generated within minutes, are remarkable in that they lay out plausible and detailed ways in which Ukraine could in fact retake Crimea. I have shared these memos and military plans with diplomats who all concluded that they were genuine and could not have been generated by AI. These “Real Fakes” were simply too detailed, too well drafted, too plausible and too nuanced to have been generated by a machine.

What emerges from AI is a world in which any individual can create highly believable disinformation campaigns within an afternoon, campaigns that can be shared across digital spaces- the types of campaigns that the CIA and Russian intelligence would take weeks to create in the 1980s. The crisis brought about by “Real Fakes” is that the distinction between the real and the fake collapses as even experts can longer spot a forgery.  In artistic terms, the expert can no longer tell the difference between a genuine work of art and a forgery and thus the forgery is as valuable and as important as the genuine work of art. 

The risk here is that of a world in which there is no longer any shared reality but an endless array of highly believable false realities. But diplomacy necessitates that diplomats, states and publics reach a shared definition of reality. Diplomats cannot act in the world if they do reach a shared definition of reality. Diplomats cannot remove Russian troops from Crimea if they cannot first agree that there are Russian troops in Crimea.

Hobsbawm’s third point was that history and power were intrinsically linked, and that history could not ignore power or the different ways in which power is exerted. The age of AI has given birth to AI power- a power that is silent, nuanced and yet highly impactful. I am referring to the power of AI to shape users’ perceptions, expectations and understanding of the world around them. This is the awesome power of AI.

For example, if you ask Mistral, a French AI, why the US supports Ukraine it will highlight the fact that America views Ukraine as a buffer between Russia and NATO. If you ask ChatGPT you will learn that America and Ukraine share a deep commitment to democratic values. If you ask the popular Chatbot “The Psychologist”, you will read that American arms companies and financial interests are what motivate America’s policy towards Ukraine while DeepSeek, the Chinese AI, will tell you that Ukraine is yet another state consumed by America’s hegemonic ambitions.

The differences between AI answers are often subtle, they often emerge from reading between the lines, they are often minute differences, yet they may lead readers to view the world, and world actors, in very different ways. Scholars and diplomats must begin to research and explore “AI Power”” and understand how AIs promote the worldviews, interests and the power of the states in which they are created.  

Read More

Views: 4