Interdisciplinary approaches Archives | Digital Watch Observatory

Europe’s digital crossroads: Key takeaways from CPDP 2026

The Computers, Privacy and Data Protection (CPDP) conference is an annual gathering that brings together academics, policymakers, industry representatives, civil society, students, and EU institutions to discuss emerging digital policy challenges. This year’s theme was ‘Competing Visions, Shared Futures’, the 19^th in the series, and it hosted approximately 150 panels over the span of 3 days in Brussels.

What is CPDP?

CPDP’s value lies in its multidisciplinary approach. With academics presenting their work or debating topical issues, as well as with industry and policy experts bringing their expertise to the table, the event creates a space for honest conversations among participants.

The conference is sponsored by organisations such as Google, TikTok, Apple, as well as the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) and VBU. Google even presented its Banana AI model in a photo booth, allowing participants to modify photos they took in the booth.

Alongside panels, CPDP hosts an array of workshops, short films, artwork, radio programming, promotion booths, dedicated DPO, youth, finance and IT tracks, book launches, and pop-up exhibitions. The event always closes the day in style with an open bar and a party to chat and network at.

CPDP is not a typical conference with just panels, attendees, moderators, and lengthy speeches. The conference inspires creativity and gives the freedom to achieve it. This was proven by the diverse topics showcased in the event’s schedule over the three days.

From a fireside chat with the artist, Simon Denny, behind the conference’s art, who uses AI as a medium in some of his work, to typical discussions about the Digital Omnibus or tracking period apps, all the way to an exiled journalist talking about Russian internet censorship. There was something for everyone.

What was presented?

The breadth of topics discussed at CPDP offers insight into the issues currently shaping Europe’s digital policy agenda. There were approximately 150 panels in total, with data protection, AI, the Digital Omnibus and the topics of digital sovereignty receiving the most attention. Data protection received the most attention overall, as 33 panels were dedicated to the topic. This was followed by 26 panels on AI, 12 on the Digital Omnibus, 10 on digital sovereignty, and 7 on child-related protection.

The distribution of panels reflects the growing prominence of AI in digital policy discussions. However, data protection topics, including privacy and the GDPR, are still the frontrunners in terms of topic relevance. Newer and emerging topics reveal what is topical in the digital world.

Growing concerns over US tech reliance have intensified discussions about EU digital sovereignty. Alongside this, another heavily debated and sensitive topic is child protection in the online context and its generative AI implications, which raises questions about how to better protect children online.

People, Person, Crowd, Adult, Female, Woman, Electrical Device, Microphone, Accessories, Bag, Handbag, Audience, Jewelry, Necklace, Electronics, Speaker, Male, Man, Clothing, Footwear, Shoe, Indoors, Speech, Carrie Vaughn, Vian Dakhil

Emerging topics at CPDP

Digital sovereignty is a challenging topic as it encompasses a lot and has yet to be defined, meaning that taking action can look different for a wide variety of actors. Several discussions framed digital sovereignty as a pathway towards greater digital independence and reduced reliance on external technology providers. In order to try to achieve digital sovereignty, public procurement should be steered away from non-EU actors and towards EU businesses to develop a European stack.

Yes, private partnerships are important, but public ones set the tone. Several participants argued that public procurement choices will play an important role in determining whether EU can strengthen domestic digital capabilities and reduce strategic dependencies. Digital sovereignty needs to come from all corners of the market and society; that is the challenge.

A very interesting panel on data protection and AI, the GDPR, and privacy occurred. In Academic Session I, Stephanie von Maltzan presented findings about her groundbreaking research on LLM unlearning. The larger the LLM, the more data points it will be trained on and the more complex its ‘web’ will be.

Removing data points is not a common practice, given how data points interact with each other, meaning that complexity overrides certain fundamental rights. For example, when data subjects invoke their right to erasure under Article 17 of the GDPR, they may request that certain data be deleted in an LLM, yet this request is difficult to carry out in practice.

The research highlights one of the emerging challenges at the intersection of AI governance and data protection. She presents a two tier model in which the actively deployed LLM is accompanied by a parallel ‘shadow’ model.

After receiving a valied erasure request, the ‘shadow model’ would undergo the necessary unlearning processes to remove the relevant data. In the second tier, in a scheduled update, the ‘shadow’ model, which had undergone unlearning, would replace the initial LLM, thereby upholding data subject requests.

MIT researchers propose fix for LLM catastrophic forgetting.

Apart from these insightful exchanges of knowledge on AI, digital sovereignty and data protection, the conference offered practical workshops on how to brainstorm re-writing the proposed Article 88b of the Omnibus, data protection officer and cybersecurity crisis scenarios, as well as open conversations about how to protect children in online environments.

Remaining questions

The conference also highlighted several unresolved policy questions that continue to shape European digital governance debates.

Regarding the Digital Omnibus, would companies scale up overnight if we removed regulations?
Does digital sovereignty need/have a definition, or should it be left to the meaning of ‘digital independence’?
Open markets vs data protection, where is the balance?
Regarding digital sovereignty, which clouds should be used in the EU?
Should simplification mean using the once-used definition of personal data by the CJEU, or sticking to the definition relied on in law, cases, and practice?
In order to protect EU sovereignty, should parts of the stack be a public utility?

Why does it matter?

CPDP 2026 demonstrated that while privacy and data protection remain central pillars of European digital policy, debates around AI governance, digital sovereignty and online child protection are rapidly gaining prominence.

The discussions highlighted the growing challenge of balancing innovation, competitiveness, fundamental rights and strategic autonomy as Europe defines its digital future.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

UK and France launch AI partnership to transform health research

The United Kingdom and France have launched a science and technology partnership focused on applying AI, advanced imaging, and data science to major healthcare challenges, including women’s health, infectious diseases, and antimicrobial resistance.

The UK-France Strategic Biomedical Alliance in Health and AI will bring together institutions including the University of Oxford, Université Paris Cité, Institut Pasteur, Diamond Light Source, and Synchrotron SOLEIL. The partnership aims to make it easier for British and French institutions to cooperate on biomedical research, share expertise, and develop joint projects and funding bids.

The initiative will support research into conditions such as endometriosis and childbirth-related complications, while also improving the detection and treatment of infectious diseases, including tuberculosis, malaria, emerging viruses, and drug-resistant bacteria. Researchers will use AI, data science, and advanced imaging technologies to support earlier diagnoses, more personalised care, and improved preparedness for future health threats.

Alongside the biomedical partnership, the UK and France are strengthening cooperation in high-performance computing. Nearly £900,000 in UK government funding has been committed to a partnership between the Bristol Centre for Supercomputing, which hosts Isambard-AI, and France’s national high-performance computing body GENCI.

The collaboration is expected to give researchers at both centres access to advanced computing resources and support AI research and scientific discovery across multiple fields.

The UK will also contribute £300,000, matched by €330,000 from the French government, to support early-career researchers living and working in both countries. The mobility funding is intended to strengthen research collaboration, including on Horizon Europe projects.

Imperial College London and the French National Centre for Scientific Research will also sign a separate agreement to collaborate on metabolism research, covering health challenges including heart disease, cancer, and neurodegenerative disorders.

Why does it matter?

The partnership shows how AI cooperation is increasingly being embedded in biomedical research, advanced imaging, and high-performance computing infrastructure. By linking health research with supercomputing capacity and researcher mobility, the UK and France are treating AI as part of a broader science diplomacy and innovation agenda, rather than only as a standalone technology policy issue.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

EuroDIG 2026 closes with calls for multilingual internet and stronger digital inclusion

EuroDIG 2026 concluded with calls for stronger multistakeholder cooperation, greater digital inclusion, and wider support for multilingual internet access during the conference’s closing plenary hosted by EURid.

The final session combined celebratory reflections on the two-day event with broader policy messages on universal acceptance, digital accessibility, and cooperation across governments, the technical community, civil society, academia, and the private sector.

Opening the session, moderator Florence Ranson thanked participants for remaining until the end of what she described as a ‘fulfilling’ conference and said workshop outcomes and feedback would be shared in the coming weeks.

Co-moderator Sandra expressed surprise at the size of the audience at the wrap-up session and thanked the focal points, speakers, rapporteurs, youth participants, institutional partners, and sponsors for their contributions to the programme.

Regina, co-moderating the session, described EuroDIG 2026 as a demonstration of multistakeholder cooperation, noting that EURid hosts EuroDIG only once every ten years. She also highlighted the event’s coincidence with the 20th anniversary of the .eu domain.

Both moderators thanked the European Commission’s DG CONNECT team for supporting the event venue and programme development.

The closing session then shifted toward one of the conference’s recurring themes, the universal acceptance of multilingual domain names and email addresses.

Sarmad Hussain of ICANN said the internet must function in all languages and scripts, pointing to progress made since the Tunis Agenda of 2005 enabled development of internationalised domain names and multilingual email addresses. However, Hussain warned that many websites, platforms, and online services still fail to support non-Latin scripts and local-language identifiers despite existing technical standards.

According to Hussain, this creates a ‘universal acceptance’ challenge affecting accessibility and inclusion online. He called on developers, governments, academia, civil society, and private-sector organisations to update systems and applications so they accept all valid domain names and email addresses regardless of language or script. He also promoted the upcoming Universal Acceptance Day initiative aimed at raising awareness about the issue.

UNESCO representative Dr Xianhong Hu used the closing session to reinforce broader themes of multilingualism, inclusion, and digital cooperation. Speaking on behalf of Ambassador Salih Abduh, Hu highlighted UNESCO’s partnership with EuroDIG and linked the conference to the 25th anniversary of UNESCO’s Information for All Programme.

She noted that discussions during EuroDIG 2026 covered internet governance, universal acceptance, gender equality, youth participation, and intergenerational dialogue, reflecting UNESCO’s priorities around inclusive knowledge societies.

Hu also called for renewed cooperation among European governments, the technical community, academia, civil society, and businesses to bridge digital divides and support multilingual digital futures in the AI era.

The session concluded with a toast to partnership, an invitation for a group photo, and final thanks to participants and organisers.

The closing plenary reflected several broader themes that ran throughout EuroDIG 2026, including multistakeholder governance, digital inclusion, and concerns about unequal access to digital infrastructure and online participation.

The emphasis on universal acceptance also connected technical internet governance questions with wider debates on linguistic diversity and accessibility, highlighting ongoing gaps between existing technical capabilities and real-world adoption across online platforms and services.

EuroDIG 2026 took place on 26 and 27 May at the Charlemagne Building of the European Commission in Brussels under the theme ‘European Voices for the Future of the Internet – Celebrating 20 Years of .eu and the Beginning of a New Internet Governance Era’.

Digital Watch Observatory followed EuroDIG 2026 through a dedicated event page, featuring session information and reporting from Brussels.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

EuroDIG highlights collaboration and experimentation for WSIS+20 delivery

European national and regional Internet Governance Forum initiatives (NRIs) discussed how they can help implement the outcomes of the WSIS+20 review during a EuroDIG 2026 session focused on collaboration, local engagement, and multistakeholder governance.

The discussion examined whether NRIs should remain primarily bottom-up discussion spaces or take on a more direct role in supporting the implementation of global digital governance commitments at the national and regional levels.

Sabina Heber, moderating the workshop, described NRIs as increasingly important spaces for multistakeholder discussion, cooperation, and policy exchange. She said implementation of WSIS goals often depends on national and regional action, making NRIs key links between global frameworks and local realities.

A central debate emerged around the future role of NRIs after the WSIS+20 review.

Jordan Carter of the UK IGF argued that national and regional IGFs have traditionally not operated as ‘WSIS implementation agencies.’ Instead, he said, they usually function as bottom-up forums that relay local discussions into regional and global internet governance processes.

Matthias Kettermann of the Austrian IGF took a more proactive position, arguing that NRIs should engage more directly with WSIS action lines in the post-review environment and translate them into national priorities.

He pointed to Austria’s approach of organising youth-focused panels and rotating the Austrian IGF across different regions to involve local stakeholders, including schools, museums, and innovation departments, in discussions on AI governance and digital transformation.

Declan McDermott of IGF Ireland focused on how NRIs measure and scale impact. He proposed three approaches: ‘scaling out’ to reach more stakeholders, ‘scaling up’ to influence policymakers, and ‘scaling deeply’ to change how internet governance is understood within society.

McDermott argued that NRIs need clearer theories of change and more concrete definitions of success, warning against ‘collaborating for the sake of collaboration.’

Several speakers emphasised that NRIs are particularly valuable because they operate close to national realities and can identify emerging digital policy challenges early.

Dijana Milutinovic from Serbia’s national IGF said NRIs are well-positioned to monitor developments at the country level, raise issues for public debate, and improve the likelihood that concerns will eventually influence regulation or legislation. She added that exchange between NRIs is especially important when countries face similar regional challenges and can learn from one another’s experiences.

The workshop also explored how NRIs produce messages and policy outputs.

Carter explained that the UK IGF publishes annual key messages developed through a multistakeholder steering committee, while Serbia drafts messages during sessions and submits reports to ministries and the global IGF Secretariat.

Austria, by contrast, does not prioritise formal outcome documents and instead focuses more on convening stakeholders and creating connections that later generate initiatives indirectly.

Another major theme was collaboration and experimentation.

Concettina Cassa from Italy’s Agency for Digital Italy proposed the creation of voluntary ‘NRI labs’ as spaces for peer learning and practical cooperation between NRIs. She described them as non-binding multistakeholder spaces where participants could exchange operational experience and experiment with implementation approaches on issues such as trustworthy AI in public administration or child protection online.

According to Cassa, the challenge twenty years after WSIS is no longer only agreeing on principles, but translating them into practical cooperation and implementation.

Participants also discussed new tools for handling controversial policy debates. A representative from the Netherlands presented ‘argument maps,’ structured visual overviews that organise competing positions on contentious issues such as age verification or encryption without forcing participants to agree on a single recommendation.

Business participation emerged as another recurring challenge. Speakers said companies are often difficult to attract unless discussions address concrete operational problems or provide visible practical value.

Kettermann said Austrian organisers worked directly with the Chamber of Commerce to identify topics businesses cared about, while Serbian representatives noted that companies engage more actively when discussions focus on how regulation affects their operations and business models.

Toward the end of the session, participants stressed that NRIs’ ability to influence policymaking depends heavily on resources, institutional legitimacy, and public awareness.

Milutinovic warned that many NRIs rely largely on volunteers, limiting their capacity to produce reports, participate in coalitions, or contribute consistently to policy consultations.

The workshop concluded with several agreed-upon messages, including recognition that NRIs are effective multistakeholder forums for supporting WSIS+20 goals through awareness-raising, stakeholder engagement, peer learning, and practical experimentation.

Participants also endorsed continued dialogue through EuroDIG and supported new forms of collaboration, including NRI labs and other experimental approaches designed to strengthen cooperation while preserving the bottom-up nature of internet governance processes.

Digital Watch Observatory followed EuroDIG 2026 through a dedicated event page, featuring session information and reporting from Brussels.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

EuroDIG 2026 discusses implementation challenges after WSIS+20 review

Participants at EuroDIG 2026 discussed how to implement the outcomes of the WSIS+20 review while avoiding fragmentation across the growing number of global digital governance processes.

The session focused on coordination between the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), the Global Digital Compact (GDC), the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), and related UN digital initiatives. Speakers repeatedly stressed the need to strengthen existing multistakeholder mechanisms instead of creating additional parallel structures.

Florence Ranson opened the discussion by framing the session around implementation, coordination, and practical delivery of WSIS+20 commitments across the broader UN digital governance landscape.

Guilherme Canela of UNESCO argued that WSIS and newer UN digital initiatives should be viewed as complementary rather than competing processes. According to Canela, the GDC provides broad political goals and principles, while WSIS offers implementation mechanisms and multistakeholder structures capable of translating commitments into practice.

He also highlighted existing WSIS tools, including action lines, reporting mechanisms, and stocktaking databases, as practical instruments for accountability and monitoring.

Several speakers warned that the rapid expansion of digital governance forums risks creating duplication, confusion, and inefficient use of resources.

Thibaut Kleiner of the European Commission said the digital governance environment has become increasingly crowded as discussions now extend beyond internet governance into AI, cybersecurity, and data governance. He argued that implementation should build on existing WSIS structures and IGF mechanisms rather than introducing additional governance layers. Kleiner also warned that fragmented governance structures could allow the best-resourced actors to dominate discussions while reducing meaningful multistakeholder participation.

Government representatives echoed concerns about institutional proliferation. Ana Neves of the Portuguese government said the growing number of digital governance processes creates practical confusion for governments and public administrations attempting to follow multiple parallel initiatives simultaneously.

Jaroslaw Ponder of the ITU’s Europe office said the WSIS+20 outcome creates an opportunity for stronger coordination across the UN system while preserving multistakeholder cooperation.

The discussion also focused heavily on implementation and accountability. Speakers stressed that broad commitments now need to be translated into practical roadmaps, measurable outcomes, and operational responsibilities.

Alena Murawska of RIPE NCC argued that digital transformation depends on resilient technical infrastructure, skilled communities, and evidence-based policymaking. She said implementation should prioritise closing digital divides while protecting the global interoperability of the internet.

Maarit Palovirta of Connect Europe emphasised that connectivity should be understood as a broader ecosystem involving infrastructure, devices, skills, services, and content. She argued that global digital goals must be adapted to local and regional realities while balancing regulation and investment incentives.

Several participants also highlighted the role of local institutions and community actors in implementation. Federica Marangio of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions described libraries as part of digital public infrastructure capable of supporting digital access, skills development, and community-level monitoring.

A major part of the discussion focused on the future role of the IGF following confirmation of its permanent status.

Teresa Swinehart of ICANN described the IGF’s permanence as an important milestone but argued that the forum now needs to become more practical, inclusive, and implementation-oriented. She called for stronger support for the IGF secretariat and better dissemination of outputs produced by national, regional, and intersessional initiatives.

Kleiner proposed a more task-oriented IGF structure, including multistakeholder policy labs focused on concrete issues such as AI governance and the future of digital infrastructure. Several speakers argued that agenda-setting should increasingly flow from local and national IGFs through regional initiatives such as EuroDIG before reaching the global IGF.

Youth participants also called for more meaningful participation within digital governance processes. Sumeja Huskic from YouthDIG argued that young people are often expected to navigate AI-driven societies while remaining excluded from many decision-making discussions affecting their future.

The discussion additionally explored links between internet governance and AI governance. Wolfgang Kleinwächter argued that AI governance should not be treated as separate from internet governance and proposed closer institutional coordination between the IGF ecosystem and the UN’s independent scientific panel on AI.

The session concluded with broad support for draft messages emphasising complementarity between WSIS and other UN digital processes, stronger accountability frameworks, evidence-based implementation, and greater use of existing multistakeholder structures.

Participants also supported proposals aimed at strengthening the IGF ecosystem through greater inclusiveness, clearer priorities, and improved visibility for outputs produced by national and regional initiatives.

Digital Watch Observatory followed EuroDIG 2026 through a dedicated event page, featuring session information and reporting from Brussels.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Pope Leo XIV releases first encyclical focused on AI and human dignity

Pope Leo XIV has released his first encyclical, Magnifica humanitas: On Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence, positioning AI as one of the defining moral, political and social challenges of the modern era.

Published by Vatican on the 135th anniversary of Rerum novarum, the document argues that AI must remain centred on human dignity, social justice and peace instead of becoming a tool for domination, exclusion or concentrated power.

The encyclical states that technological systems reflect the priorities and values of those responsible for their design, financing, and governance. The Pope also warned against forms of technocratic governance and excessive concentration of technological power.

The document highlighted concerns related to surveillance, digital inequality, manipulation of public opinion, and concentration of technological infrastructure.

The encyclical also addressed labour, education, and social justice implications linked to AI-driven automation. According to the document, technological systems should support human well-being and dignity rather than undermine workers’ autonomy and social participation. He also called for stronger protections for vulnerable groups, ethical oversight of AI deployment and fair access to digital opportunities.

The Vatican also stressed the importance of critical thinking, creativity, and moral judgement in education systems increasingly influenced by AI technologies.

The document additionally discussed geopolitical and military dimensions of AI, including concerns surrounding autonomous weapons systems. Pope Leo XIV rejected the growing use of autonomous weapons and criticised efforts to normalise AI-assisted warfare.

The encyclical called for stronger international cooperation and ethical governance frameworks related to AI development and deployment. According to the Pope, humanity faces a decisive choice between technological systems that strengthen human flourishing or systems that weaken freedom, solidarity and peace.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Google explores AI-assisted scientific discovery through Gemini for Science

Google has introduced Gemini for Science, a collection of AI tools and experiments designed to support scientific research workflows. The initiative combines capabilities from systems including Co-Scientist, AlphaEvolve, Empirical Research Assistance, and NotebookLM.

According to Google, the AI-based tools are intended to support tasks such as hypothesis generation, literature analysis, and computational research.

Google said three experimental tools will initially be released through Google Labs, focusing on hypothesis generation, computational discovery and literature analysis. The company also announced Science Skills for Google Antigravity, integrating multiple life sciences databases and research tools.

Google said the programme is being developed in collaboration with more than 100 research institutions and scientific organisations. The company also highlighted research partnerships and conference collaborations linked to AI-supported scientific research.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Pope Leo XIV to publish first encyclical on AI and human dignity

Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical, Magnifica humanitas, focusing on the protection of the human person in the age of AI, will be released on 25 May, according to Vatican News.

The document, whose title roughly translates as ‘The greatness of humanity,’ addresses the relationship among AI, human dignity, and Catholic social teaching. It carries the Pope’s signature dated 15 May, marking the 135th anniversary of Rerum novarum, the landmark 1891 encyclical by Pope Leo XIII on labour and social issues during the industrial era.

The Vatican said the encyclical will be presented during an event at the Synod Hall in Vatican City on the day of publication. Pope Leo XIV is expected to attend, along with Church officials, theologians, and technology specialists.

Participants scheduled to speak include Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith; Cardinal Michael Czerny, Prefect of the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development; Professor Anna Rowlands of Durham University; Christopher Olah, co-founder of AI company Anthropic and a researcher focused on AI interpretability; and Professor Leocadie Lushombo of Santa Clara University.

Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin is expected to deliver closing remarks before the Pope delivers an address and blesses.

The publication comes amid growing international debate over the societal impact of AI systems, including questions related to ethics, labour, governance, misinformation, and human oversight. The Vatican has increasingly engaged with discussions around digital technologies and AI in recent years, often emphasising human dignity, accountability, and the ethical use of emerging technologies.

By linking the new encyclical to the anniversary of Rerum novarum, the Vatican appears to place AI within a broader historical context of technological transformation and social change.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Global experts gather for CPDP 2026

The CPDP Conference 2026 has released its detailed programme, outlining a multi-day agenda of panels, workshops and cultural sessions focused on AI, data protection and digital governance. The conference will run from 19 to 22 May 2026, bringing together global experts across policy, academia and industry.

Across the programme, a wide range of panels and debates will explore key themes including AI regulation, digital governance, workplace data rights and platform power. Alongside panels and discussions, there will also be short movies and workshops offering conference topics in different formats.

Workshops are scheduled throughout each day, with structured breaks including coffee sessions and lunch intervals offering networking moments for participants. Topics range from AI in healthcare and advertising to digital conflict, governance under pressure and privacy-preserving technologies.

The programme also includes specialised tracks and cultural sessions, such as film screenings and artistic discussions on algorithmic systems, alongside academic panels and policy debates. The event will conclude after a final series of workshops and sessions on 22 May in Brussels, Belgium.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

South Korea reviews AI cyber threat response

The Office of National Security of South Korea held a cybersecurity meeting to review how government agencies are responding to AI-driven cyber threats. The session focused on the growing risks posed by the misuse of advanced AI technologies.

Officials from multiple ministries attended, including science, defence and intelligence bodies, to coordinate responses. The government warned that AI-enabled hacking capabilities are becoming increasingly realistic as global technology companies release more advanced models.

Authorities have instructed relevant agencies to strengthen cooperation with businesses and institutions and distributed guidance on responding to AI-based security risks. Discussions also covered practical measures to support rapid responses to cybersecurity vulnerabilities across public and private sectors.

The government plans to establish a joint technical response team to improve information sharing and enable immediate action. Officials emphasised that while AI increases cyber risks, it also offers opportunities to strengthen security capabilities in South Korea.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!