Artificial Intelligence, International Competition, and the Balance of Power (May 2018)

World leaders, CEOs, and academics have suggested that a revolution in artificial intelligence is upon us. Are they right, and what will advances in artificial intelligence mean for international competition and the balance of power? This article evaluates how developments in artificial intelligence (AI) — advanced, narrow applications in particular — are poised to influence military power and international politics. It describes how AI more closely resembles “enabling” technologies such as the combustion engine or electricity than a specific weapon. AI’s still-emerging developments make it harder to assess than many technological changes, especially since many of the organizational decisions about the adoption and uses of new technology that generally shape the impact of that technology are in their infancy. The article then explores the possibility that key drivers of AI development in the private sector could cause the rapid diffusion of military applications of AI, limiting first-mover advantages for innovators. Alternatively, given uncertainty about the technological trajectory of AI, it is also possible that military uses of AI will be harder to develop based on private-sector AI technologies than many expect, generating more potential first-mover advantages for existing powers such as China and the United States, as well as larger consequences for relative power if a country fails to adapt. Finally, the article discusses the extent to which U.S. military rhetoric about the importance of AI matches the reality of U.S. investments.LBJ School of Public Affair

Geopolitics and the Digital Domain: How Cyberspace is Impacting International Security

The digital domain is the emerging environment for which the internet and data connectivity exists. This new domain is challenging the traditional place for geopolitics to exist, and creating new challenges to international relations. The use of cyberweapons through direct cyberattacks, such as the possibility of an attack on the U.S. power grid, or misinformation campaigns, such as the one launched by Russia against the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, can expand the international threat landscape. While these new threats increase, states are widely not prepared to address the new challenges in the digital domain. This paper will use three primary sources and a variety of secondary sources to analyze the aspects of cyberwarfare, how to effectively secure nations against threats from the digital domain, and how developing versus developed countries react differently to advances in technology

Always in control? Sovereign states in cyberspace

For well over twenty years, we have witnessed an intriguing debate about the nature of cyberspace. Used for everything from communication to commerce, it has transformed the way individuals and societies live. But how has it impacted the sovereignty of states? An initial wave of scholars argued that it had dramatically diminished centralised control by states, helped by a tidal wave of globalisation and freedom. These libertarian claims were considerable. More recently, a new wave of writing has argued that states have begun to recover control in cyberspace, focusing on either the police work of authoritarian regimes or the revelations of Edward Snowden. Both claims were wide of the mark. By contrast, this article argues that we have often misunderstood the materiality of cyberspace and its consequences for control. It not only challenges the libertarian narrative of freedom, it suggests that the anarchic imaginary of the Internet as a ‘Wild West’ was deliberately promoted by states in order to distract from the reality. The Internet, like previous forms of electronic connectivity, consists mostly of a physical infrastructure located in specific geographies and jurisdictions. Rather than circumscribing sovereignty, it has offered centralised authority new ways of conducting statecraft. Indeed, the Internet, high-speed computing, and voice recognition were all the result of security research by a single information hegemon and therefore it has always been in control

The Future of the Cyber Theater of War

Few could imagine how it would develop when the air was the new theater of war. The literature showcases that a lack of imagination and state-level institutionalized power structures, particularly in the U.S., hampered the progress of air as a new theater of war both in thought and application. Today, a similar lack of imagination on the cyber theater of war is a great source of insecurity in the world system; it sets the stage for strategic shocks like the ones to the U.S. on December 7, 1941, and 9/11. To avoid this, states should imagine how a convergence of cyber technologies into new weapons could be used in war and by whom. Popular movies today form the basis for considering what has yet to be realized in the cyber theater of war. Its nascent history and designation as a theater of war foreshadow the expectation that eventual traditional war will occur in the cyber realm. When nanocomputers, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, speed, and advanced robotics fully converge, new weapons are possible and likely. The Just War Theory, understood through the Christian lens rather than only as a matter of secular international law, is applied to the evolving cyber theater of war to fill current doctrinal gaps in the just cause and conduct of future war within the cyber realm

The AI carbon footprint and responsibilities of AI scientists

This article examines ethical implications of the growing AI carbon footprint, focusing on the fair distribution of prospective responsibilities among groups of involved actors. First, major groups of involved actors are identified, including AI scientists, AI industry, and AI infrastructure providers, from datacenters to electrical energy suppliers. Second, responsibilities of AI scientists concerning climate warming mitigation actions are disentangled from responsibilities of other involved actors. Third, to implement these responsibilities nudging interventions are suggested, leveraging on AI competitive games which would prize research combining better system accuracy with greater computational and energy efficiency. Finally, in addition to the AI carbon footprint, it is argued that another ethical issue with a genuinely global dimension is now emerging in the AI ethics agenda. This issue concerns the threats that AI-powered cyberweapons pose to the digital command, control, and communication infrastructure of nuclear weapons systems

Business Warfare

Businesses are under attack. State and non-state adversaries are assaulting companies using drones, mercenaries, cyberweapons, sanctions, and restrictions. Instead of military installations and government institutions, private firms are often the preferred targets in this mode of warfare. Instead of soldiers and squadrons with bullets and bombs, the weapons of choice are frequently economic hostilities and cyberattacks. This is the new war on business. This Article offers an original examination of contemporary business warfare, its growing importance to national and corporate affairs, and the need for better pragmatic approaches to understanding and addressing its rising threat to our economic stability, national security, and social welfare. It begins by providing an overview of the business theater of war, investigating the combatants, targets, and weapons. Next, this Article analyzes recent episodes of business warfare involving the United States, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and China to ground the theoretical discussion in the real world. These case studies illustrate the complex matrix of considerations posed by business warfare. The Article then contends with the fundamental legal and practical tensions of economic impact, business hostilities, cyberattacks, and non-state actors that emanate from business warfare. Finally, moving from problems to solutions, this Article proposes three workable initiatives to better protect firms and nations against the risks of business warfare. Specifically, it argues for robust business war games, smart cybersecurity guidance and incentives, as well as greater supply chain and market diversification. Ultimately, this Article aspires to provide a practical blueprint for government and corporate leaders to reflect, plan, and act with more urgency about the consequential realities of business warfare

Global Artificial Intelligence Governance: Challenges and Complications

The development of artificial intelligence (AI) is bringing transformative changes to the political landscape of the world by having profound effects on numerous spheres. In addition, it poses challenges to global governance by intensifying international competition, fostering aggressive diplomacy, and subverting existing international norms. This study seeks to investigate the challenges of AI development to global economic and political governance, as well as the challenges of global AI regulation, in order to provide recommendations for the development of international AI regulatory frameworks

Towards a Peaceful Development of Cyberspace - Challenges and Technical Measures for the De-escalation of State-led Cyberconflicts and Arms Control of Cyberweapons

Cyberspace, already a few decades old, has become a matter of course for most of us, part of our everyday life. At the same time, this space and the global infrastructure behind it are essential for our civilizations, the economy and administration, and thus an essential expression and lifeline of a globalized world. However, these developments also create vulnerabilities and thus, cyberspace is increasingly developing into an intelligence and military operational area – for the defense and security of states but also as a component of offensive military planning, visible in the creation of military cyber-departments and the integration of cyberspace into states' security and defense strategies. In order to contain and regulate the conflict and escalation potential of technology used by military forces, over the last decades, a complex tool set of transparency, de-escalation and arms control measures has been developed and proof-tested. Unfortunately, many of these established measures do not work for cyberspace due to its specific technical characteristics. Even more, the concept of what constitutes a weapon – an essential requirement for regulation – starts to blur for this domain. Against this background, this thesis aims to answer how measures for the de-escalation of state-led conflicts in cyberspace and arms control of cyberweapons can be developed. In order to answer this question, the dissertation takes a specifically technical perspective on these problems and the underlying political challenges of state behavior and international humanitarian law in cyberspace to identify starting points for technical measures of transparency, arms control and verification. Based on this approach of adopting already existing technical measures from other fields of computer science, the thesis will provide proof of concepts approaches for some mentioned challenges like a classification system for cyberweapons that is based on technical measurable features, an approach for the mutual reduction of vulnerability stockpiles and an approach to plausibly assure the non-involvement in a cyberconflict as a measure for de-escalation. All these initial approaches and the questions of how and by which measures arms control and conflict reduction can work for cyberspace are still quite new and subject to not too many debates. Indeed, the approach of deliberately self-restricting the capabilities of technology in order to serve a bigger goal, like the reduction of its destructive usage, is yet not very common for the engineering thinking of computer science. Therefore, this dissertation also aims to provide some impulses regarding the responsibility and creative options of computer science with a view to the peaceful development and use of cyberspace

Mapping power and jurisdiction on the internet through the lens of government-led surveillance

Facing the fragmentation of digital space in the aftermath of the Snowden revelations, this article considers regulatory models available to avoid the balkanisation of the internet. Considering government-led surveillance in particular, available strategies are investigated to create a trustworthy and universal digital space, based on human rights principles and values. After analysis and discussion of salient aspects of two relevant proposals, it is submitted that the lack of a common understanding of concepts makes global regulation unlikely. Nevertheless, a possible alternative to universal frameworks and national regulation might be the creation of ‘blocs of trust’, established through international conventions