AI, global dynamics and the implications for Africa

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology, with its humanoid thinking, is rapidly becoming an important factor in the power dynamics between competing powers in international relations. The increasing use of AI for military and strategic purposes by major powers, such as the US, China and Russia, has led to concerns about the potential implications for global stability. 

One of the major concerns is the possibility of an AI arms race, with countries competing to develop the most advanced technologies for military purposes. This could lead to an escalation of tension and increase the risk of conflict between nations. Moreover, the development of AI-enabled weapons, such as autonomous drones and robots, could further erode the traditional boundaries between war and peace, making it difficult to distinguish between the two.

There is also the potential for AI to reinforce existing power dynamics between nations. As AI systems become more sophisticated, they may become better at identifying patterns and predicting outcomes, giving those who control them an advantage in decision-making. This could lead to a situation where a few powerful countries dominate global affairs, with smaller countries being relegated to the sidelines. 

At the same time, AI could also be a force for positive change in international relations. For example, AI-enabled systems could be used to monitor and predict global trends, such as the spread of disease, environmental degradation and social unrest. In many countries, AI played an important supporting role in Covid-19 surveillance as well as diagnosis. There is an incentive for countries to collaborate in addressing common challenges, promoting greater cooperation and collaboration between them.

China and the US dominate the AI landscape, through scientific publications as well as research and development (R&D) expenditure. Beyond this, the two states dominate in AI collaboration, according to the Artificial Intelligence Index by Stanford University. Edmund Andrews of Stanford University finds the fact that the US and China collaborate extensively in the field of AI research, despite being geopolitical rivals, is counterintuitive. It is unusual and raises serious concerns that the US work more on AI research with China than with the UK, a vital ally in Europe. 

US-China AI collaboration has grown five times since 2010, reaching 9 660 papers in total in 2021, while US-UK collaboration has tripled to 3 560 papers. This teamwork between the two countries is growing considerably faster than any other pair of countries. This raises concerns regarding the US’s foreign policy goals and research priorities in AI. The US and China appear to be able to set their disagreements aside and cooperate on this critical sector. 

It could be argued that despite China, by 2021, filing the majority of global AI patents at 51.69%, the US, with only 16.92% of global AI patent filings, benefits more from Chinese know-how. It can be observed that the US is making practical decisions by collaborating extensively with China in AI research, as China has a significant AI dominance and knowledge base, and the US stands to benefit from this. On the other hand, China could benefit by gaining access to the US market and academic community. The two geopolitical rivals are suggesting to the world that collaboration is possible when mutually beneficial. 

Other nations appear to be trailing behind in promoting collaborative AI research. This is a worrying trend because AI is a vital field that needs international cooperation to make strides and address global challenges, such as climate change. 

Governments that do not aggressively promote international collaborations in AI research lose out on the advantages of knowledge and technology transfer. Instead, they rely on other nations to give them access to state-of-the-art research and technology, which is not long-term viable. The fact that the US and China can put aside their geopolitical concerns and work closely together in AI development also emphasises the value of international cooperation. To continue to compete in the AI race, other nations must adopt a similar strategy and give priority to international partnerships.

Technology is directly linked to the economic trajectory of countries. Those countries whose AI R&D expenditure surpasses others are likely to see economic benefits. The US and China are clear examples of states which have relied heavily on technology to dominate the global scale, either for war purposes or for manufacturing and production. Overall, AI has a role to play in shaping responses to the top five 2023 global risks of climate change, cybersecurity, food security, energy transition and healthcare. That role could be negative or positive.

For cybersecurity, as the protection of computer systems, networks and assets, those countries leading in AI development will acquire lethal AI-cyberweapons. Cybersecurity is no longer an information technology limited science but also a global political power tool. 

For instance, North Korea is often accused of committing global cybercrime. Cybercrime-as-heist, using cyberspace tools, is a crime of opportunity. Some estimates record that, in 2022 alone, the reclusive regime stole over $1 billion in virtual assets in crypto currency. The cybercrime business enables North Korea to supplement what the state involuntarily surrenders through international sanctions. 

Russia frequently comes under fire for weaponising its cyber capabilities for political purposes. For instance, there was sizable international commentary on how Russia allegedly interfered in the US 2016 elections to benefit now former president Donald Trump by repurposing Facebook and other social media platforms. AI weapons could thus enable regimes to conduct more political interference in the future. 

China and the US are also part of a set of nation-states who conduct cyberespionage, including intellectual property theft, against one another. For instance, China is said to have hacked into the US Office of Personnel Management servers, acquiring the personal identity information of US federal employees. This tactic could be valuable for targeting financially and personally compromised employees to turn them into spies on behalf of another country. 

In 2022, the US was accused of hacking into China’s Northwestern Polytechnical University for the collection of sensitive and strategic data. The US reportedly used the National Security Agency (responsible for foreign signal, electronic and cybersecurity intelligence gathering and signal counterintelligence for the US) to hack into the university for military research data. Ultimately, states are weaponising cyber capabilities. AI is thus an accelerant of lethality for those countries engaged thoroughly in AI research and development.

Amid these global developments, where does Africa stand?

Few African countries have enacted AI laws. Botswana, Egypt, Mauritius, Tunisia and Zambia are among them. From a continent with over 50 states this is counterproductive. For the African Free Trade Agreement to accelerate as a regional economic tool, a common tool for the technology of the future is mandatory. The level of policy disconnect, sluggishness and aloofness in Africa is at odds with the rapid decision-making needed in the dynamic world of AI and technology evolution. 

The intersection between AI and international relations has the potential to shape the global power dynamics in the coming years. While there are concerns about the risks and challenges, there is also an opportunity for AI to be a force for positive change in promoting greater collaboration between nations. For its part, Africa must carve its AI typologies by consolidating and implementing policy at a speed parallel to that of emerging technologies. 

Ultimately, the future of AI in international relations will depend on how we manage the risks and opportunities and whether we can develop a framework that promotes global stability and cooperation. 

The writers are from the 4IR and Digital Policy Research Unit in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Johannesburg.