OPINION - Countries should pursue national AI programs, yet human decision-making must stay paramount

The author, a mother of five, has a degree from Oxford University and is currently researching ethics in big data and AI at the University of Cambridge.

ISTANBUL

On Sept. 26, 1983, Stanislav Petrov, a Soviet military officer, was sitting in the command room, tasked with overseeing the USSR's early warning system amid high Cold War tensions. When an alarm indicated a missile launch from the US, Petrov's duty was to retaliate immediately. Yet he hesitated, recognizing the grave consequences of such actions: potentially starting World War III and, at the same time, potentially ending life on the earth. Believing it was a false alarm, Petrov chose not to report the alert or press the launch button. Those critical seconds, which felt like a lifetime, highlight the delicate balance between human judgment and automated systems, especially when faced with the prospect of global catastrophe. Ultimately, it was discovered that the system had mistaken rays of sunlight on top of clouds for missile launches, highlighting the potential danger of relying solely on automated technologies.

Strategic implications of AI in warfare

Since Petrov's pivotal decision, technology has evolved dramatically, but the concept of an arms race remains constant. Nations now are investing heavily in AI technology, recognizing its transformative potential in various sectors, including healthcare, industry, and most significantly, autonomous weapons systems. However, the debate over the ethical and strategic implications of AI in warfare continues to rage, and particularly delegating decision-making authority to automated systems versus human operators. This ongoing discussion urges the need for a balanced approach to AI development, one that respects the power of technology while also valuing the importance of human judgment.

The question of whether countries should pursue national AI programs emphasizes the broader implications of technological sovereignty. Just as the Spanish conquistadors' superior weaponry reshaped the power dynamics of the Americas in the 16th century, advanced AI technologies have the potential to influence geopolitical rivalries and national security strategies in the modern era. Nations without AI capability face the risk of compromising their sovereignty and becoming vulnerable to exploitation or colonization, akin to historical examples of technological disparity leading to conquest. This highlights the need to invest in AI research and development to protect national security interests.

​​​​​​​AI dimension of modern cold war

In many ways, we are already witnessing the AI dimension of the modern cold war, as major powers leverage AI capabilities for surveillance, decision-making, and strategic advantage. For the rest of the world, adapting to the realities of this new era is imperative to avoid falling behind and facing dire consequences. Central to this adaptation, the most important aspect is the effective harnessing and control of data, which serves as the lifeblood of AI algorithms. Nations that prioritize big data and invest in AI research and development stand a better chance of protecting their national borders in the infosphere.

Circling back to Petrov's decision, it serves as a poignant reminder of the importance of human judgment in the age of AI. While technology may evolve, the essence of nationhood encompasses more than just geographical boundaries – it encompasses shared values, cultural heritage, and collective consciousness. Therefore, in navigating the complexities of AI in a cold war scenario, human decision-making must remain paramount to prevent potential catastrophes. As Petrov himself once remarked, "We are cleverer than machines because we created them."

*Opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Anadolu.