As a person who checks news websites like the New York Times, BBC,and NOS at least 10 times a day, the start of wars or conflicts between two (or more) areas or countries intrigues me enormously. What happens right now between Jews and Arabs in Israel, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank is a large tragedy. With at least 1400 Israelis and over 4000 Palestinians killed as for now, we all agree upon the fact this is going to increase even further as Israeli troops are preparing a major ground operation (BBC News, 2023).
Also, we tend to forget about the ongoing war on our own continent between Russia and Ukraine, that already lasts for 606 days today with deaths being added every day again. Again, most often these are innocent lives of civilians (The Guardian, 2023).
The growing concern that current peacemaking approaches are proving less and less effective in resolving conflicts and wars (given that the Russian Invasion already takes 606 days), made me wonder out loud whether AI can help in either negotiations between parties to stop a war, but in a preferable case: prevent war in the first place. So I went searching on the internet about this issue, and indeed: there are some implications.
According to Talwar (2022), a combination of situational complexity, intractable positions of opposing sides and escalating costs is the engine for AI-solutions that could assist -or even entirely replace- human involvement in resolving military conflicts.
Not surprisingly, some countries already work with the implications of AI in legal disputes. For example, Baltic State Estonia uses AI to replace judges in business and commercial disputes within minor cases. In British Columbia (Western Canada), an AI-based Solution Explorer is used as an optional first step to a Civil Resolutions Tribunal (Vasdani, n.d.). And then, there is AI frontrunner China who looks at the legal sector as an area where efficiencies and financial saving can be reached.
AI must be taken beyond the courtroom, practitioners say. Though, one big issue occurs here: information asymmetry. Parties in a conflict on both sides, probably do not want to show their full information, potentially leading to an unbalanced conflict resolution. As long as the entire big picture cannot be mapped by AI, it cannot make valuable decisions in such sensitive contexts (Talwar, 2022).
As I think AI cannot fully replace negotiations in war conflicts (like the White House did to set two American hostages free, and let 20 trucks enter the Gaza Strip), it can be used as a tool to create greater inclusivity of the mediation process in conflicts. Opinions can be analysed and weighted based on historical data. Yet, the problem remains one related to ethics. Can we let a computer decide how to resolve large conflicts with so many stakeholders?
I am curious to hear what you guys think!
Sources:
- BBC News. (2023, October 21). Israel Gaza war: History of the conflict explained. BBC News. Retrieved from: https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-44124396
- Talwar, R. (2022). Could artificial intelligence prevent future wars? BRINK – Conversations and Insights on Global Business. Retrieved from: https://www.brinknews.com/could-artificial-intelligence-prevent-future-wars/
- The Guardian, (2023). Russia-Ukraine war at a glance: what we know on day 606 of the invasion. The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/22/russia-ukraine-war-at-a-glance-what-we-know-on-day-606-of-the-invasion
- Vasdani, T. (n.d.). From Estonian AI judges to robot mediators in Canada, U.K. | LexisNexis Canada. Retrieved from: https://www.lexisnexis.ca/en-ca/ihc/2019-06/from-estonian-ai-judges-to-robot-mediators-in-canada-uk.page
Firstly, great and up-to-date post! I like how you have addressed AI together with a serious topic, including relevant sources. I agree that AI can augment negotiations in war conflicts and mediate the process when it accounts for information asymmetry. However, I also think that, besides ethics, AI will face difficulties when accounting for nationalism, culture, religion and emotions. For instance, in the ongoing conflict between Hamas and Israel, a lot of (emotional) history is involved, including the notion of guilt and revenge. How will AI mediate a conflict, where the reason is simply “he attacked first” or “they killed my family so I want to kill them”? If we let a computer decide how to resolve large conflicts, these “subjective” feelings need to be quantified, which is nearly impossible. Also, when it comes to religion or nationalism, how will a computer decide which bargaining points will be dedicated to which religion or nation? Will it favor one religion or nation over the other? Overall, I think you have written a very interesting blog post, which makes people, including me, think about AI, ethics and especially deeply held opinions and feelings such as religion and nationalism!
I share your liking in this blog post, but your concerns as well. I think AI can assist in conflict resolution by providing data analysis and decision-support tools, but it should not replace human judgment in matters of war and peace. While AI can help identify common ground and suggest compromise points, information asymmetry and the ethical complexity of such decisions limit its effectiveness. Also, I think there are legitimate concerns about AI’s potential negative role in warfare, particularly in the development of autonomous weapons. Human mediators bring essential qualities like empathy and cultural understanding to the table, which AI lacks. A balanced approach could involve collaboration between humans and AI, with AI aiding in data analysis while human negotiators make final decisions, preserving the fundamental human aspects of mediation and diplomacy.