UNSC meeting: Artificial intelligence, peace and security

Artificial Intelligence and International Peace and Security: A United Nations Security Council Debate

The United Nations Security Council convened a landmark session to discuss the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) for international peace and security. This debate brought together representatives from member states, AI experts, and UN officials to address the opportunities and challenges presented by rapidly advancing AI technologies. The session covered a wide range of topics, including AI’s potential benefits for peacekeeping and conflict prevention, its associated risks to global security, and the urgent need for international governance frameworks.

AI’s Potential for Enhancing Peace and Security

Several speakers highlighted AI’s potential to contribute positively to international peace and security efforts. Japan emphasized the importance of human-centric and trustworthy AI, suggesting that AI could enhance efficiency and transparency in Security Council decision-making. The United States and France noted AI’s capacity to bolster global security architecture, augment decision-making processes, and enhance humanitarian efforts.

Specifically, AI was recognized for its potential to improve UN peacekeeping operations. Ghana and Ecuador pointed out that AI could be used for identifying early warning signs of conflicts, facilitating coordination of humanitarian assistance, improving risk assessment, and enhancing the safety and security of peacekeepers. Switzerland mentioned its development of an AI-assisted analysis tool for the UN Operations and Crisis Center, demonstrating concrete steps towards integrating AI into peacekeeping efforts.

Risks and Challenges Associated with AI

While acknowledging its potential benefits, many speakers also expressed concerns about the risks AI poses to international peace and security. The United States, China, and France highlighted potential threats such as AI-enabled cyberattacks targeting critical infrastructure, the spread of disinformation, and the possible misuse of AI for terrorist or criminal purposes.

Ecuador and Malta raised specific concerns about the integration of AI into autonomous weapon systems, calling for human control to be maintained in military applications of AI. The issue of lethal autonomous weapons systems was a recurring theme, with several countries, including Brazil and Switzerland, advocating for their prohibition or strict regulation.

Gabon and Mozambique drew attention to the potential for AI to exacerbate global inequalities, noting that the resources and capabilities necessary for AI development are not evenly distributed across the globe. This disparity could reinforce existing inequalities and create new asymmetries in the international system.

The Need for Global AI Governance

A central theme of the debate was the urgent need for global governance of AI technologies. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres proposed creating a new UN entity to support collective efforts to govern AI and announced the formation of a high-level advisory board on AI to explore global governance options.

Many countries, including Japan, China, and France, expressed support for international collaboration and UN involvement in AI governance. They emphasized the importance of developing ethical principles, legal frameworks, and international standards to guide the responsible development and use of AI technologies.

However, there were differing views on the approach to AI governance. While some countries advocated for binding international agreements, others, like Russia, expressed skepticism about discussing AI in the Security Council at this stage, arguing that more specialized, scientific discussions are needed before addressing it at this level.

Balancing Innovation and Regulation

The debate also touched on the challenge of balancing innovation with regulation in the rapidly evolving field of AI. The United Arab Emirates emphasized the need to establish rules and guardrails for AI governance while cautioning against over-regulation that could stifle innovation, particularly in emerging nations.

China advocated for a balanced approach that promotes innovation while ensuring safety and controllability in AI development. The United States highlighted its efforts to maximize AI’s benefits while mitigating risks through initiatives such as an AI risk management framework and a blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights.

The Role of Multiple Stakeholders

Many speakers stressed the importance of involving multiple stakeholders in AI governance. Guterres called for the integration of the private sector, civil society, and independent scientists in AI governance efforts. Malta supported the development of universal instruments for ethical AI frameworks, emphasizing the need for cooperation among multiple stakeholders.

Brazil and Ghana advocated for a whole-of-society approach to AI governance, highlighting the need to leverage the potential of the private sector while retaining human rights at the core of all ethical principles.

Conclusion

The UN Security Council debate on AI and international peace and security highlighted the complex and multifaceted nature of this emerging technology. While there was broad agreement on AI’s potential to contribute positively to peace and security efforts, concerns about its risks and the need for robust governance frameworks were equally prominent.

The session underscored the urgency of developing international standards and ethical guidelines for AI development and use, particularly in contexts that could impact global peace and security. It also highlighted the need for continued dialogue and cooperation among nations, as well as the involvement of diverse stakeholders in shaping the future of AI governance.

As AI continues to advance rapidly, the international community faces the challenge of harnessing its benefits while mitigating its risks. This Security Council debate marks an important step in addressing these challenges at the highest levels of global governance, setting the stage for future discussions and potential actions to ensure that AI contributes to a more peaceful and secure world.

President – United Kingdom:
The 9,381st meeting of the Security Council is called to order. The provisional agenda for this meeting is maintenance of international peace and security, artificial intelligence, opportunities and risks for international peace and security. The agenda is adopted. I warmly welcome the Secretary General and the distinguished high-level representatives. Your presence today underscores the importance of the subject matter under discussion. In accordance with Rule 39 of the Council’s Provisional Rules of Procedure, I invite the following briefers to participate in the meeting. It is so decided. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of Item 2 of the agenda. I wish to draw attention of the Council members to the document S-2023-528, a letter dated 14th July 2023 from the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary General transmitting a concept paper on the item under consideration. I give the floor to the Secretary General, His Excellency Mr. António Guterres.

Secretary General – Antonio Guterres:
Mr. President, Excellencies, I thank the United Kingdom for convening the first debate on artificial intelligence ever held in this Council. I have been following the development of AI for some time, and indeed I told the General Assembly six years ago. We know that AI would have a dramatic impact on sustainable development, the world of work, and the social fabric. But like everyone here, I’ve been shocked and impressed by the newest form of AI, generative AI, which is a radical advance in its capabilities. The speed and reach of this new technology in all its forms are utterly unprecedented. It has been compared to the introduction of the printing press. But while it took more than 50 years for printed books to become widely available across Europe, CHET-GPT reached 100 million users in just two months. The finance industry estimates AI could contribute between 10 and 15 trillion US dollars to the global economy by 2030. Almost every government, large company, and organization in the world is working on an AI strategy. But even its own designers have no idea where their stunning technological breakthrough may lead. It is clear that AI will have an impact on every area of our lives, including the three pillars of the United Nations. It has the potential to turbocharge global development, from monitoring the climate crisis to breakthroughs in medical research. It offers new potential to realize human rights, particularly to health and education. But the High Commission for Human Rights has expressed alarm over evidence that AI can amplify bias, reinforce discrimination, and enable new levels of authoritarian surveillance. Today’s debate is an opportunity to consider the impact of artificial intelligence on peace and security, where it is already raising political, legal, ethical, and humanitarian concerns. I urge the Council to approach this technology with a sense of urgency, a global lens, and a learner’s mindset. Because what we have seen is just the beginning. Never again will technological innovation move as slow as it is moving today. Mr. President, AI is being put to work in connection with peace and security, including by the United Nations. It is increasingly being used to identify patterns of violence, monitor ceasefires, and more, helping to strengthen our peacekeeping, mediation, and humanitarian efforts. But AI tools can also be used by those with malicious intent. AI models can help people to harm themselves and each other at massive scale. Let’s be clear. The malicious use of AI systems for terrorist, criminal, or state purposes could cause horrific levels of death and destruction, widespread trauma, and deep psychological damage on an unimaginable scale. AI-enabled cyberattacks are already targeting critical infrastructure and our own peacekeeping and humanitarian operations, causing great human suffering. The technical and financial barriers to access are low, including for criminals and terrorists. Both military and non-military applications of AI could have very serious consequences for global peace and security. The advent of generative AI could be a defining moment for disinformation and hate speech, undermining truth, facts, and safety, adding a new dimension to the manipulation of human behavior, and contributing to polarization and instability on a vast scale. Deepfakes are just one new AI-enabled tool that, if unchecked, could have serious implications for peace and stability. And the enforcing consequences of some AI-enabled systems could create security risks by accident. Look no further than social media. Tools and platforms that were designed to enhance human connection are now used to undermine elections, spread conspiracy theories, and incite hatred and violence. Malfunctioning AI systems are another huge area of concern. And the interaction between AI and nuclear weapons, biotechnology, neurotechnology, and robotics is deeply alarming. Generative AI has enormous potential for good and evil at scale. And creators themselves have warned that much bigger, potentially catastrophic and existential risks lie ahead. Without action to address these risks, we are derelict in our responsibilities to present and future generations. Mr. President, the international community has a long history of responding to new technologies with the potential to disrupt our societies and economies. We have come together at the United Nations to set new international rules, sign new treaties, and establish new global agencies. While many countries have called for different measures and initiatives around the governance of AI, this requires a universal approach. And questions of governance will be complex for several reasons. First, certain powerful AI models are already widely available to the general public. Second, and unlike nuclear material and chemical and biological agents, AI tools can be moved around the world, leaving very little trace. And third, the private sector’s leading role in AI has few parallels in other strategic technologies. But we already have entry points. For example, one is the 2018-2019 Guiding Principles on Lethal Autonomous Women’s Systems agreed through the the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. I agree with the large number of experts that have recommended the prohibition of lethal autonomous weapons without human control. We also have the recommendations on the ethics of artificial intelligence agreed through UNESCO in 2021. The Office of Counterterrorism, working together with the Interregional Crime and Research Center Institute of the United Nations, has provided recommendations on how member states can tackle the potential use of AI for terrorist purposes. And the AI for Good summits, hosted by the International Telecommunications Union, have brought together experts, the private sector, United Nations agencies and governments around the world, to address the existing challenges while also creating the capacity to monitor and respond to future risks. It should be flexible and adaptable, and consider technical, social and legal questions. It should integrate the private sector, civil society, independent scientists and all those driving AI innovation. The need for global standards and approaches makes the United Nations the ideal place for this to happen. The Charter’s emphasis on protecting succeeding generations gives us a clear mandate to bring all stakeholders together around the collective mitigation of long-term global risks. AI poses just such a risk. I therefore welcome calls from some member states for the creation of a new United Nations entity to support collective efforts to govern this extraordinary technology, inspired by such models as the International Atomic Energy Agency, the International Civil Aviation Organization, or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The overarching goal of this body is to ensure that the United States and the rest of the world are prepared to respond to the challenges of climate change. The United States and the rest of the world are prepared to respond to the challenges would be to support countries to maximize the benefits of AI for good, to mitigate existing and potential risks, and to establish and administer internationally agreed mechanisms of monitoring and governance. Let’s be honest, there is a huge skills gap around AI in governments and other administrative and security structures that must be addressed at the national and global levels. A new UN entity would gather expertise and put it at the disposal of the international community, and it could support collaboration on the research and development of AI tools to accelerate sustainable development. Mr. President, as a first step, I am convening a multi-stakeholder, high-level advisory board for artificial intelligence that will report back on the options for global AI governance by the end of this year. My upcoming policy brief on a new Agenda for Peace will also make recommendations on AI governance to Member States. First, it will recommend that Member States develop national strategies on the responsible design, development, and use of AI, consistent with their obligations under international humanitarian law and human rights law. Second, it will call on Member States to engage in a multilateral process to develop norms, rules, and principles around military applications of AI, while ensuring the engagement of other relevant stakeholders. And third, it will call on Member States to agree on a global framework to regulate and strengthen oversight mechanisms for the use of data-driven technology, including artificial intelligence, for counterterrorism purposes. The policy brief on a new Agenda for Peace will also call for negotiations to be concluded by 2026 on a legally binding instrument to prohibit little or most weapons systems that function without human control or oversight, and which cannot be used in compliance with international humanitarian law. I hope Member States will debate these options and decide on them. the best course of action to establish the AI governance mechanisms that are so urgently needed. In addition to the recommendations of the new Agenda for Peace, I urge agreement on the general principle that human agency and control are essential for nuclear weapons and should never be withdrawn. The Summit of the Future next year will be an ideal opportunity for decisions on many of these interrelated issues. Mr. President, I urge this Council to exercise leadership on artificial intelligence and show the way towards common measures for the transparency, accountability and oversight of AI systems. We must work together for AI that bridges social, digital and economic divides, not one that pushes us further apart. I urge you to join forces and build trust for peace and security. We need a race to develop AI for good, to develop AI that is reliable and safe, and that can end poverty, banish anger, cure cancer and supercharge climate action. AI that propels us towards the Sustainable Development Goals. And that is the race we need. And that is a race that is possible and achievable. And I thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the Secretary General for his briefing. I now give the floor to Mr. Jack Clark.

Jack Clark:
Thank you very much. I come here today to offer a brief overview of why AI has become a subject of concern for the world’s nations, what the next few years hold for the development of the technology, and some ideas for how policymakers may choose to respond to this historic opportunity. The main takeaway from my remarks should be, we cannot leave the development of artificial intelligence solely to private sector actors. The governments of the world must come together, develop state capacity, and make the development of powerful AI systems a shared endeavor across all parts of society, rather than one dictated solely by a small number of firms competing with one another in the marketplace. So why am I making this statement? It helps to have a sense of recent history. One decade ago, a company in England called DeepMind published research that showed how to teach an AI system to play old computer games like Space Invaders and Pong. Fast forward to 2023, and the same techniques that were used in that research are now being used to create AI systems that can beat military pilots in air fighting simulations, stabilize the plasma in fusion reactors, and even design the components of next generation semiconductors. Similar trends have played out in computer vision. For a decade ago, scientists were able to create basic image classifiers and generate very crude pixelated images. And today, image classification is used across the world to inspect goods on production lines, analyze satellite imagery, and improve state security. And for AI models which are drawing attention today, like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s BARD, and my own company AnthropX Claude, are themselves also developed by corporate interests. So a lot has happened in 10 years, and we can expect new and even more powerful systems in the coming years. We can expect these trends to continue. Across the world, private sector actors are the ones that have the sophisticated computers and large pools of data and capital resources to build these systems. And therefore, private sector actors seem likely to continue to define the development of these systems. While this will bring huge benefits to humans across the world, it also poses potential threats to peace, security, and global stability. These threats stem from two essential qualities of AI systems. First, their potential for misuse, and second, their unpredictability, as well as the inherent fragility of them being developed by such a narrow set of actors. On misuse, these AI systems have an increasingly broad set of capabilities, and some beneficial capabilities sit alongside ones that compose profound misuses. For example, an AI system that can help us in understanding the science of biology may also be an AI system that can be used to construct biological weapons. On unpredictability, a fundamental sense of AI is that we do not understand these systems. It is as though we are building engines without understanding the science of combustion. This means that once AI systems are developed and deployed, people identify new uses for them, unanticipated by their developers. Many of these will be positive, but some could be misuses like those mentioned above. Even more challenging is the problem of chaotic or unpredictable behavior. An AI system may, once deployed, exhibit subtle problems which were not identified during its development. Therefore, we should think very carefully about how to ensure the developers of these systems are accountable so that they build and deploy safe and reliable systems which do not compromise global security. To dramatize this issue, I think it’s helpful to use an analogy. I would challenge those listening to this speech to not think of AI as a specific technology, but instead as a type of human labor that can be bought and sold at the speed of a computer and which is getting cheaper and more capable over time. And as I have described, this is a form of labor that has been developed by one narrow class of actors, companies. We should be clear-eyed about the immense political leverage this affords. If you can create a substitute or augmentation for human labor and sell it into the world, you are going to become more influential over time. Many of the challenges of AI policy seem simpler to think about if we think of them like this. How should the nations of the world react to the fact that anyone who has enough money and data can now easily create an artificial expert for a given domain? Who should have access to this power? How should governments regulate this power? Who should be the actors able to create and sell these so-called experts? And what kinds of experts can we allow to be created? These are huge questions. Based on my experiences, I think the useful things we can do are to work on developing ways to test the capabilities, misuses, and potential safety flaws of these systems. If we’re creating and distributing new types of workers which will go into the global economy, then it stands to reason we would like to be able to characterize them, evaluate their capabilities, and understand their failings. After all, humans go through rigorous evaluation and on-the-job testing for many critical roles ranging from the emergency services to the military. Why not the same for AI? For this reason, it has been encouraging to see many countries emphasize the importance of safety testing and evaluation in their various AI policy proposals, ranging from the European… Union’s AI framework, to China’s recently announced generative AI rules, to the United States National Institute of Standards and Technology’s risk management framework for AI systems, to the United Kingdom’s upcoming summit on AI and AI safety. All of these different AI policy proposals and events rely in some form on testing and evaluating AI systems, so the governments of the world should invest in this area. Right now, there are not standards or even best practices for how to test these frontier systems for things like discrimination, misuse, or safety. And because there aren’t best practices, it’s hard for governments to create policies that can create more accountability for the actors developing these systems, and correspondingly, the private sector actors enjoy an information advantage when dealing with governments. In closing, any sensible approach to regulation will start with having the ability to evaluate an AI system for a given capability or flaw, and any failed approach will start with grand policy ideas that are not supported by effective measurements and evaluations. It is through the development of robust and reliable evaluation systems that governments can keep companies accountable and companies can earn the trust of the world that they want to deploy their AI systems into. If we do not invest in this, then we run the risk of regulatory capture, compromising global security, and handing over the future to a narrow set of private sector actors. If we can rise to this challenge, however, I believe we can reap the benefits of AI as a global community and ensure there is a balance of power between the developers of AI and the citizens of the world. Thank you very much.

Yi Zeng:
My name is Yi Zeng and I would like to take this opportunity to share with distinguished representatives my personal view on AI for good on international peace and security. And I hope it may be useful to promote the discussion and understanding of the necessity of AI global governance. There’s no doubt that AI is a powerful enabling technology to push forward global sustainable development. When investigating on the use of AI for SDGs, we find that most of the efforts are on AI for quality education and AI for healthcare. Well, many of other important topics such as AI for biodiversity, climate actions and AI for peace have been put very few efforts on. Well, I think these are the essential topics for the future of humanities and governments should definitely work together on these important topics. Military AI and AI for peace and security are very related topics, but fundamentally different in important aspects. As a essential pillar for sustainable development goals, we should push forward AI for international peace, reduce not to enhance security and safety risks. When thinking about AI for good from the perspective of peace and security, it will be much better to make efforts on using AI to identify disinformation, misunderstanding among different countries and political bodies and use AI for network defense, not to attack, instead of seeking ways to create disinformation for military and political purpose. AI should be used to connect people in cultures, not to disconnect them. And this is why we create an AI enabled cultural interactions engine to find commonalities and diversities among different UNESCO world heritages. From these world heritages, we find we are not that disconnected from cultural side and these commonalities serve as roots and friendly hands that help us to appreciate and understand or even learn from these diversities in various cultures. The current AI’s including recent generative AI’s are all information processing tools that seems to be intelligent. Well, they are without real understandings and hence are not truly intelligent. This is why they of course cannot be trusted as responsible agents that can help human to make decisions. For example, although the world still has to reach a concrete enough consensus on lethal autonomous weapon systems, at least AI should not be used to directly make death decisions for human. Effective and responsible human control must apply for sufficient human AI interactions. AI should also not be used for automating diplomacy tasks, especially foreign negotiations among different countries. since it may use and extend human limitations and weaknesses, such as cheating distrust, to create bigger or even catastrophic risks for humans. It is very funny, misleading, and irresponsible that dialogue systems powered by generative AI always argue, I think, I suggest, while there are no I or even no me in the AI models. Hence, again, to emphasize, AI should never and ever pretend to be human, take the human position, or mislead humans to have the wrong perception. We should use generative AIs to assist but never trust them to replace human decision making. We must ensure human control for all AI-enabled weapon systems, and the human control has to be sufficient, effective, responsible. For example, cognitive overload during human-AI interactions has to be avoided. We must prevent the proliferation of AI-enabled weapon systems since related technology is very likely to be maliciously used or abused. Both near-term and long-term AIs will have the risk to create human extinctions simply because in the near term, we haven’t found a way to protect ourselves from AI’s utilization on human weaknesses. Well, when AIs are using it, they even don’t know what do we mean by human death and life. And in the long term, we haven’t given superintelligence any practical reasons why they should protect humans, and the solution may need decades to find. Our preliminary research suggests that we may need to change the way we interact with each other, other species, the ecology, and the environment, which may need decision making for the whole human species. And we need to work deeply and thought-provokingly all together. Due to these near-term and long-term challenges, I’m quite sure that we cannot solve AI for peace and security issue today, and the discussion may be a good starting point for member states. Challenging though, here I would suggest that the UN Security Council consider the possibility of having a working group on AI for peace and security, working on near-term and long-term challenges. Since at the expert level, it would be more flexible and scientific to work together and easier to reach a consensus from scientific and technical point of view, and to provide assistance as well as support for the council member countries to make decisions. The Security Council members should set a good model and play an important role for other countries on this important issue. AI is proposed to help humans solve problems, not creating problems. I was asked by a boy, besides its appearance on sci-fi, whether nuclear bomb assisted by AI can be used to blow up the… asteroid attacking the Earth or alter its trajectory to avoid a collision with the Earth to save our lives. I think although the idea may not be sufficiently solid and very risky at this point, it is at least using AI to solve problems for humankind, which is at least much better compared to empower AI to attack each other with nuclear weapons on this planet, which creates problems for human society and may create catastrophic risks to us, to our next generation, or even to human civilization. In my own view, humans should always maintain and be responsible for final decision-making on the use of nuclear weapons, and we have already affirmed that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. Many countries have announced their own strategy and opinions towards AI for security and governance in general, including but not limited to P5, and we can see there are commonalities and serve as important inputs for international consensus. But this is still not enough. The United Nations must play a central role to set up a framework on AI for development and governance to ensure global peace and security. As a shared future for all, we need to set up the agenda and the framework all together, leaving no one behind. With all that, I thank you for your attention.

President – United Kingdom:
I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of the United Kingdom.This is the first-ever discussion of artificial intelligence in the Security Council, and ahistoric meeting. Council. Since the early development of Artificial Intelligence by pioneers like Alan Turing and Christopher Strachey, this technology has advanced with ever greater speed. Yet, the biggest AI-induced transformations are still to come. Their scale is impossible for us to comprehend fully, but the gains to humanity will surely be immense. AI will fundamentally alter every aspect of human life. Groundbreaking discoveries in medicine may be just around the corner. The productivity boosts to our economies may be vast, and AI may help us adapt to climate change, beat corruption, revolutionize education, and deliver the Sustainable Development Goals and reduce violent conflict. But we are here today because AI will affect the work of this Council. It could enhance or disrupt global strategic stability. It challenges our fundamental assumptions about defence and deterrence. It poses moral questions about accountability for lethal decisions on the battlefield. There can already be no doubt that AI changes the speed, scale, and spread of disinformation with hugely harmful consequences for democracy and stability. AI could aid the reckless quest for weapons of mass destruction by state and non-state actors alike. But it could also help us stop proliferation. That’s why we urgently need to shape the global governance of transformative technologies. Because AI knows no borders. The UK’s vision is founded on four irreducible principles. Open. AI should support freedom and democracy. Responsible. AI should be consistent with the rule of law and human rights. secure. AI should be safe and predictable by design, safeguarding property rights, privacy and national security. And resilient. AI should be trusted by the public and critical systems must be protected. The UK’s approach builds on existing multilateral initiatives such as the AI for Good Summit in Geneva or the work of UNESCO or the OECD and the G20. Institutions like the Global Partnership for AI, the G7’s Hiroshima process, the Council of Europe and the International Telecommunications Union are all important partners. Pioneering AI strategies will also need to work with us so that we can capture the gains and minimise the risks to humanity. No country will be untouched by AI so we must involve and engage the widest coalition of international actors from all sectors. The UK is home to many of the world’s trailblazing AI developers and foremost AI safety researchers. So this autumn the UK plans to bring together world leaders for the first major global summit on AI safety. Our shared goal will be to consider the risks of AI and decide how they can be reduced through coordinated action. Momentous opportunities on a scale that we can barely imagine lie before us. We must seize these opportunities and grasp the challenges of AI including those for international peace and security, decisively, optimistically and from a position of global unity on essential principles. of men which, taken at the flood, leads to fortune. In that spirit, let us work together to ensure peace and security as we pass across the threshold of an unfamiliar world. I now resume my function as President of the Council. I now give the floor to His Excellency Mr. Shunsuke Takei, State Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan.

Japan:
Thank you, Mr. President. I commend your initiative to take up AI in the Security Council. This will be a good beginning for future global discussion. I also thank the Secretary-General and the other briefers. AI is changing the world. AI has transformed human life. Its speed potential and risks go beyond our imagination and national borders. We are being tested at this historical juncture. Can we have the mind of self-discipline to control it? Mr. President, my political belief is, instead of worrying, deal with it. I believe that the key to take on the challenge is twofold. Human-centric and trustworthy AI. Human beings can and should control AI to enhance human potential, not the other way around. Let me make two points. First, the human-centric AI, the development of AI, should be consistent with our democratic values. fundamental human rights. AI should not be a tool of rulers, but should be placed under the rule of law. The military use of AI is a case in point. It should be responsible, transparent, and based on international law. Japan will continue to contribute to the international rule-making process of the laws in the CCW. Second, trustworthy AI. AI can be more trustworthy with a wide range of stakeholders included in the process. I believe that this is where is convening power of the UN can make a difference and bring together with them from around the world. Last month, Japan led the discussion at the UN on the misuse of AI by terrorists by hosting a side event with UNOCT and UNIQLO. Japan is also proud to have to launch the G7 Hiroshima AI process this year and to contribute to the global discussion on generative AI. Mr. President, the Security Council and the UN can update its existing toolkits through the use of AI. First, we should consider how to the active use of AI can enhance the efficiency and the transparency of this Council in its decision-making and working method. We welcome the effort of the Secret military art to utilize AI for mediation and peace-building activities. Moreover, we can make the UN work more efficiently and effectively through AI-based early warning systems for the conflict, sanctioned implementation monitoring and countermeasures against disinformation and on-peak operations. Let me conclude by expressing our willingness and activity participate in the discussion on AI at the UN and beyond. Thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank His Excellency Mr. Takei for his statement. I now give the floor to His Excellency Mr. Manuel Goncalves, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of the Republic of Mozambique.

Mozambique:
Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General of the United Nations, Your Excellencies and distinguished members of Council, Mozambique warmly congratulates United Kingdom for its brilliant presidency and for convening this timely and important debate on artificial intelligence, opportunities and risks for international peace and security. We wish to convey our gratitude to His Excellency Antonio Guterres, Secretary General of United Nations for his insightful remarks. We thank the briefers for their thoughtful and pertinent contributions. Mr. President, allow me to begin with a candid disclosure. This statement was made solely by humans and not by generative artificial models like the well-known charting GPT. This disclosure is important. It unveils some of the axioms surrounding the rapid advancement in AI. Especially, we are approaching a point where a digital machine can now execute a task that, for the majority of human existence, were exclusively within the realm of human intelligence. The recent acceleration in both the power and visibility of AI systems, along with the increasing awareness of their capacity and limitation, has sparked concern that technology is advancing at such a rapid pace that it may no longer be safely controllable. Discussion is warranted. While recently, advancement in AI presents immense opportunities to enhance various fields such as speech-making, medicine, welfare, through democratization of innovation, certain models have also exhibited capabilities that surpass the understanding and control of their creators. This poses risks of various kinds, including the potential of catastrophic outcomes. Indeed, we should take heed and cautiously tell of the sources of apprentices. As AI engineers increasingly and convincingly imitate it, and in some cases even surpass, vice behavior is associated with the human being, they have become an ideal tool for spreading misinformation, scamming individuals, engaging in academic cheating, deceitfully initiate conflicts, recruiting terrorists, selling division, and perpetuating numerous other nefarious activities. AI models have evolved in a self-programming machine capable of automating their learning process through continuous loop of self-improvement. This necessitates the establishment of robust governance structure that aim to mitigate the risk of accidents and misuse while still forcing innovation, hamstring the potential of positive outcomes. Mr. President, as I currently stated in concept note for this briefing, artificial intelligence technology posses the potential to profoundly transform our society having multitude of positive effects. AI can contribute to eradicate disease, combat climate change, and currently predict natural disasters, making it a valuable ally for the global south. Similarly, by leveling the extensive database generated by organizations like SEAD, regional organization, and wide UN system, which are there to rigorous standard of quality control, source and member state involvement, we have the potential to enhance the early warning capability, customizing mediation effort, and strengthening strategic communication in peacekeeping among other various examples. AI can be a valuable tool in enhancing this vast data. for the benefit of these endeavors. Mr. President, first, with the opportunity and the threat posed by U.S. artificial intelligence, the Republic of Mozambique recognizes the importance, as a member state of the United Nations, of adopting a balanced approach that encompasses the following aspects. First, in the event that credible evidence emerged indicating that AI poses an existential risk, it is crucial to negotiate an intergovernmental treaty to govern and monitor its use. Second, it is essential to develop relevant regulation and appropriate legislation to safeguard privacy and data security. This entails ensuring that all relevant actors, including the government and companies, provide digital technology or ties with AI in an ethical and responsible manner, while respecting the principle outlined in Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 17 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. Third, the Global Digital Pact should be promoted, facilitating the sharing of technological knowledge between advanced countries and those in the early stages of AI development. This collaborative effort between AI specialists, governments, companies, and civil society aims to mitigate the risks of misuse and foster responsible AI practice. Mr. President, in conclusion, it is important to recognize that the impetus required for AI are not disconnected from the real world. The necessary resources such as data, computer power, electricity, skills, and technological infrastructure are not evenly distributed across the globe. By shrinking a balance between the advantage of AI and the social safeguards in place, we are sure that AI does not become a source of conflict that reinforce inequalities and asymmetries potentially posing threat to global peace and security. This approach aims to harm the potential of human-wide activity mitigating any negative consequence that may arise. Thank you, Mr. President.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank His Excellency, Mr. Gontalves, for his statement. I now give the floor to His Excellency, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation for Advanced Science and Technology of the United Arab Emirates.

United Arab Emirates:
I will begin by thanking Secretary General Guterres for his attentive remarks today. Thank you to Foreign Secretary Cleverly and the UK presidency for bringing such a salient topic to the Council for discussion. I would also like to thank our other briefers for their illuminating statements. Mr. President, how we negotiate the threats and opportunities for artificial intelligence is fast becoming one of the defining questions of our time. Five years ago, the UAE and Switzerland brought forward a proposal to Secretary General Guterres to establish a deliberative group to consider this very question. Under the Secretary General’s leadership, a high-level panel on digital cooperation was created and it was clear. for their deliberations that technologies such as AI could no longer go unchecked. Computation processing power has followed Moore’s Law, doubling every 18 months since the down of the computer age. Not anymore. AI development is now outpacing Moore’s Law and moving at breakneck speed and governments are unable to keep up. This is the wake-up call we need. It is time to be optimistic realists when it comes to AI, not just for assessing the threats this technology poses to international peace and security, but to harness the opportunities it offers. To this end, I will make four brief points today. First, we must establish rules of the road. There is a brief window of opportunity available now where key stakeholders are willing to unite and consider the guardrails for this technology. Member states should pick up the mantle from the Secretary General and establish commonly agreed-upon rules to govern AI before it’s too late. This should include mechanisms to prevent AI tools from promoting hatred, misinformation and disinformation that can fuel extremism and exacerbate conflict. As with other cyber technologies, the use of AI should be firmly guided by international law since international law continues to apply in cyberspace. But we must also recognize that strategies may need to be adopted so that we can effectively apply the conventional principles of international law in the rapidly evolving context of AI development. Second, artificial intelligence should become a tool to promote peace-building and the de-escalation of conflicts, not a threat multiplier. AI-driven tools have the potential to more effectively analyze vast amounts of data, trends and patterns. That translates to an increased ability to detect terrorist activity in real time and predicting how the that the adverse effects of climate change may impact peace and security. It also paves the way for limiting the misattribution of attacks, as well as ensuring response in conflict settings as proportionate. At the same time, we must be aware of the potential misapplication of this technology in targeting critical infrastructure and fabricating false narratives to fuel tensions and incite violence. Third, the biases of the real world should not be replicated by AI. Decades of progress on the fight against discrimination, especially gender discrimination towards women and girls, as well as against persons with disabilities, will be undermined if we do not ensure that an AI that is inclusive. The high-level panel on digital cooperation was clear in stating that an inclusive digital economy and society was a priority action for immediate attention. Any opportunity that AI offers can only be a true opportunity if it is based on the principle of equality, both in its design and access. Fourth, we must avoid over-regulating AI in a way that hinders innovation. The creativity, research and development activities occurring in the context of AI taking place in emerging nations are critical for the sustainable growth and development of those nations. To maintain this, emerging countries need flexibility and agile regulations. We should nurture a sector that encourages responsible behavior using smart, effective and efficient regulations and guidelines, and avoid too rigid rules that can hamper the evolution of this technology. Mr. President, Throughout history, major shifts and leaps forward have often followed moments of major crisis. The creation of the United Nations and the Security Council following the Second World War is a major step forward. speaks to this very fact. When it comes to AI, let’s not wait for the moment of crisis. It’s high time to get ahead of the curve and shape an AI arena that is geared towards preserving international peace and security. Thank you, Mr. President.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank His Excellency Mr. Sharaf for his statement. I now give the floor to the representative of China.

China:
Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, China welcomes you to preside over today’s Security Council meeting and thanks Secretary General Guterres for his briefing. Many of his insights deserve our study. I would also like to thank Professor Zeng Yi and Professor Jack Clark for their briefings. Their insights can help us better understand and handle issues related to AI. In recent years, the world has witnessed a rapid development and wide application of AI with complex effects constantly emerging. On the one hand, the empowering role of AI in areas such as scientific research, health care, autonomous driving, smart decision-making is becoming increasingly prominent, generating huge technological dividends. On the other hand, the scope of AI application has been constantly expanding, causing increasing concerns in areas such as data privacy, spreading false information, exacerbating social inequality, and disrupting employment structures. In particular, the misuse or abuse of AI by terrorist or extremist forces will pose a significant threat to the international peace and security. At present, as a cutting-edge technology, AI is still in its early stage of development. As a double-edged sword, whether it is good or bad, good or evil, depends on how mankind utilizes it, regulates it, and how… We balance scientific development with security. The international community should uphold the true spirit of multilateralism, engaged in extensive dialogue constantly, seek consensus, and explore the development of guiding principles for AI governance. We support the central coordinating role of the U.N. in this regard, and support the Secretary General and Secretary General’s efforts in holding discussions amongst all parties, as well as the full participation of all countries, especially developing countries. In participating in this cause and making their own contributions, I would like to make some preliminary observations. First, we should adhere to the principle of putting ethics first. The potential impact of AI may exceed human cognitive boundaries. To ensure that this technology always benefits humanity, it is necessary to take people-oriented and AI for good as the basic principles to regulate the development of AI, and to prevent this technology from turning into a runaway wild horse. Based on these two guidelines, efforts should be made to gradually establish and improve ethical norms, laws, and regulations, and policy systems for AI, while allowing countries to establish AI governance systems that are in line with their own national conditions based on their own development stages and social and cultural characteristics. Second, adhere to safety and controllability. There are many uncertainties in the development and application of AI-related technologies, and safety is the bottom line that must be upheld. The international community needs to enhance risk awareness, establish effective risk warning and response mechanisms, ensure that risks beyond human control do not occur, and ensure that autonomous machine killing does not occur. We need to strengthen the detection and evaluation of the entire life cycle of AI, ensuring that mankind AI has the ability to press the pause button at critical moments. Leading technology enterprises should clarify the responsible parties, establish a sound accountability mechanism, and avoid developing or using risky technologies that may have serious negative consequences. Thirdly, we must adhere to fairness and inclusiveness. The impact of AI on science and technology is worldwide and revolutionary. Equal access and utilization of AI technology products and services by developing countries are crucial to bridging the technological, digital, and development divide between the North and the South. The international community should work together to ensure that developing countries equally enjoy the development dividends brought by AI technology and continuously enhance their representation and voice in this field. Fourthly, certain developed countries, in order to seek technological hegemony, make efforts to build their exclusive small clubs and maliciously obstruct the technological development of other countries and artificially create technological barriers. China firmly opposes these behaviors. Fourthly, adhere to openness and inclusiveness. The development of science and technology needs to achieve a relative balance between technological progress and safe applications. The best path is to maintain open cooperation, encourage interdisciplinary, inter-industrial, inter-regional, and cross-border exchanges and dialogues, and oppose various forms of exclusive clubs and decoupling and disconnection. We need to promote coordination and interaction among international organizations, government departments, research and educational institutions, enterprises, and the public in the field of AI development and governance under the UN framework and jointly create an open, inclusive, just, and non-discriminatory environment for scientific and technological development. Fifth, I’d adhere to peaceful utilization. The fundamental purpose of developing AI technology is to enhance the common well-being of humanity. Therefore, it is necessary to focus on exploring the potential of AI in promoting sustainable development, promoting cross-disciplinary integration and innovation, and better empowering the global development cause. The Security Council could focus on the application and impact of AI in conflict situations to enrich the toolkit of the UN for peace. AI in the military field may lead to major changes in the weight of warfare and the format of war. All countries should uphold a responsible defense policy, oppose the use of AI to seek military hegemony or to undermine the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other countries, and avoid the abuse, unintentional misuse, or even intentional misuse of AI weapon systems. Mr. President, today’s discussion on AI highlights the importance, necessity, and urgency of building a community of shared future for mankind. China adheres to the concept of community of shared future for mankind and has actively explored the scientific path of AI development and governance in all fields. In 2017, the Chinese government issued the New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan, which clearly laid out basic principles such as technology, leadership, system layout, market leadership, open source, and openness. In recent years, China has continuously improved relevant laws and regulations, ethical norms, intellectual property standards, safety monitoring, and evaluation measures to ensure the healthy and orderly development of human beings. development of AI. China has always participated in global cooperation and governance in AI with a highly responsible attitude. As early as 2021, China hosted the Impact of Emerging Technologies on International Peace and Security area conference during its presidency of the Security Council. For the first time, bringing the Council’s attention to emerging technology such as AI, China has successively submitted two position papers on military application of AI and its ethical governance on UN platforms, offering systematic proposals from the perspective of strategic security military policy, legal ethics, technological security, rulemaking and international cooperation. Last February, the Chinese government released the Global Security Initiative concept paper, which clearly stated that China is willing to strengthen communication and exchange with the international community on AI security governance, promote the establishment of an international mechanism for universal participation, and form a governance framework and standard with broad consensus. We stand ready to work with the international community to actively implement the Global Development Initiative, Global Security Initiative and Global Civilization Initiative proposed by President Xi Jinping. In the field of AI, we will continue to prioritize development, maintain common security, promote cross-culture exchanges and cooperation, and work with other countries to share the benefit of AI while jointly prevent and respond to risks and challenges. I thank you, Mr. President.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the representative of China for their statement. And I now give the floor to the representative of the United States.

United States:
Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you to the U.K. for convening this discussion. And thank you to the Secretary General, Mr. Jack Clark, and Professor Yang. Thank you for your valuable insights. Mr. President, artificial intelligence offers incredible promise to address global challenges, such as those related to food security, education, and medicine. Automated systems are already helping to grow food more efficiently, predict storm paths, and identify diseases in patients, and thus, used appropriately, AI can accelerate progress toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. AI, however, also has the potential to compound threats and intensify conflicts, including by spreading mis- and disinformation, amplifying bias and inequality, enhancing malicious cyber operations, and exacerbating human rights abuses. We therefore welcome this discussion to understand how the Council can find the right balance between maximizing AI’s benefits while mitigating its risks. This Council already has experience addressing dual-use capabilities and integrating transformative technologies into our efforts to maintain international peace and security. As those experiences have taught us, success comes from working with a range of actors, including member states, technology companies, and civil society activists, through the Security Council and other UN bodies, and in both formal and informal settings. The United States is committed to doing just that and has already begun such efforts at home. On May 4th, President Biden met with leading AI companies to underscore the fundamental responsibility to ensure AI systems are safe and trustworthy. These efforts build on the work of the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology, which recently released an AI risk management framework to provide organizations with a voluntary set of guidelines to manage risks from AI systems. Through the White House’s October 2022 blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, we are also identifying principles to guide the design, use, and deployment of AI. automated systems so rights, opportunities, and access to critical resources or services are enjoyed equally and are fully protected. We are now working with a broad group of stakeholders to identify and address AI-related human rights risks that threaten to undermine peace and security. No member state should use AI to censor, constrain, repress, or disempower people. Military use of AI can and should also be ethical, responsible, and enhance international security. Earlier this year, the United States released a proposed Political Declaration on Responsible Military Use of AI and Autonomy, which elaborates principles on how to develop and use AI in the military domain in compliance with applicable international law. The proposed declaration highlights that military use of AI capabilities must be accountable to a human chain of command and that states should take steps to minimize unintended bias and accidents. We encourage all member states to endorse this proposed declaration. Here at the UN, we welcome efforts to develop and apply AI tools that improve our joint efforts to deliver humanitarian assistance, provide early warning for issues as diverse as climate change or conflict, and further other shared goals. The International Telecommunication Union’s recent AI for Good Global Summit represents one step in that direction. Within the Security Council, we welcome continued discussions on how technological advancements, including when and how to take action to address governments’ or non-states’ actors’ misuse of AI technologies to undermine international peace and security. We must also work together to ensure AI and other emerging technologies are not used primarily primarily as weapons or tools of oppression, but rather as tools to enhance human dignity and help us achieve our highest aspirations, including for a more secure and peaceful world. The United States looks forward to working with all relevant parties to ensure the responsible development and use of trustworthy AI systems serves the global good. I thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the representative of the United States. I now give the floor to the representative of Brazil.

Brazil:
Thank you, Mr. President, Mr. President, dear colleagues. I thank the Secretary General for his briefing today and for joining us in the briefing. I also thank Mr. Jack Clark and Mr. Yi Zheng for their statements. The rapid development of AI holds immense potential to bolster our global security architecture, augment decision-making processes, and enhance humanitarian efforts. We must also address the multifaceted challenges it poses, including the potential for autonomous weapons, cyber threats, and the exacerbation of existing inequalities. As we embark on this crucial discussion, let us seek a comprehensive understanding of the risks and opportunities associated with AI and work towards harnessing its potential for the greater benefit of humanity while ensuring the preservation of peace, stability, and human rights. The paragraph I just read was entirely written in CHAT-GPT. Although with conceptual imprecisions, it shows how sophisticated these tools have become. This technology is developing so fast that even our best researchers are still unable to assess the full scale of the challenges that await us. us and the benefits these new technologies can provide. Any discussion today must be couched in the humility that we do not fully know what it is that we do not know about AI. What we know for sure is that artificial intelligence is not human intelligence. Most AI relies on large amounts of data and, through complex algorithms, manage to establish patterns and relationships that allow them to generate contextually appropriate results. The outcomes, therefore, are crucially dependent on the inputs. Human oversight is essential to avoid bias and errors. Otherwise, we are running the risk that the aphorism, trash in, trash out, will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Unlike other innovations with potential implications for security, AI has been mostly developed as a civilian application. Hence, it would be premature to see AI primarily through the lens of international peace and security, as its peaceful uses are likely to produce the most significant effects on our societies. Nevertheless, we can predict with certainty that its applications will be extended to the military field with relevant impact on peace and security. While the Council should remain vigilant and ready to respond to any incidents involving the use of AI, we must also be cautious not to overly securitize this topic by concentrating discussions in this chamber. Due to the intrinsically multidisciplinary nature of AI, which deals with every aspect of life, international discussions must remain open and inclusive. Only a wide and diverse range of views will allow us to scratch the surface and start to make sense of the different facets of AI. This briefing is a good start for bringing in different views on the development and use of AI. Nevertheless, in light of the wide-ranging implications and impacts of AI, the General Assembly, with its universal composition, is the forum best suited for a structured, long-term discussion on artificial intelligence. AI is crucial among the different topics under the mandate of the ongoing Open-Ended Working Group on ICTs, which will hold its fifth substantive session next week. This group, which is open to all UN member states, has been able to make progress on gradually developing global, common understandings on ICTs issues related to international peace and security, despite challenging geopolitical circumstances. Due to their particular nature, this is what we should aim for when discussing challenges deriving from cyber technologies. Mr. President, Madam President, military applications of AI, and especially in the use of force, must strictly abide by international humanitarian law, as enshrined in the Geneva Conventions and other pertinent international commitments. Brazil has been consistently guided by the concept of meaningful human control. As approved in 2019 by the High Contracting Parties of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Guiding Principle B indicates that human responsibility for decisions on the use of weapon systems must be retained, since accountability cannot be transferred to machines. The centrality of the human element in any autonomous system is essential for the establishment of ethics standards and for full compliance with international humanitarian law. There is no replacement for human judgment and accountability. Military applications of AI must be based on transparency and accountability throughout their life cycle, from development to deployment and use. Moreover, weapon systems with autonomous functions should eliminate bias. bias in their systems operations. We must move ahead swiftly with the progressive development of regulations and norms governing the use of autonomous weapons systems via robust norms to prevent biases and abuses and to guarantee compliance with international law, particularly international humanitarian law and human rights law. Compliance with international law is mandatory to state uses of AI technologies as well as to any use this Council may wish to make of them in its peacekeeping missions or in its broader mandate for the preservation of international peace and security. Beyond the challenges posed by conventional weapons with autonomous functions, we should not shy away from issuing a very stern caution as to the inherent risks posed by the interaction of AI and weapons of mass destruction. We took note with alarm of the news that AI-assisted computer systems were capable of developing, in a matter of hours, new poisonous chemical compounds and of designing new pathogens and molecules. We also must not allow the possibility that nuclear weapons might be linked to AI at the risk of our common future. Madam President, AI has tremendous potential both to remake and to break our societies in the coming years. Navigating between the two will require a broad and concerted international effort, which will include but is in no way limited to this Council. The UN remains the only organisation capable of promoting the global coordination needed to oversee and shape the development of AI so that it works to the betterment of humanity and according to the shared purposes and principles that have brought us here. Thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the representative of Brazil for their statement. And I now give the floor to the representative of Switzerland.

Switzerland:
Thank you, Madam President. We are grateful to the Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, for participating in this important debate. My thanks also go to Mr. Jack Clarke and Professor Yi Zeng for their valuable and impressive contributions. …time before we see thousands of robots like me out… they’re making a difference. Those words are the words of the robot Ameka, speaking to a journalist at the AI for Good conference that the Secretary General has just mentioned, on which was co-organized by the International Telecommunication Union in Switzerland. It took place in Geneva two weeks ago. Artificial intelligence can be a challenge because of its speed and apparent omniscience, but it can and must serve peace and security as well. As we turn our attention to the new agenda for peace, it is in our hands to ensure that AI makes a difference for the benefit of and not to the detriment of humanity. In this context, let’s seize the opportunity to lay the groundwork towards AI for good by working closely with cutting-edge science. In this regard, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology is developing a prototype of an AI-assisted analysis tool for the United Nations Operations and Crisis Center. This tool could explore the potential of AI for peacekeeping, in particular for the protection of civilians and peacekeepers. In addition, Switzerland recently launched the Swiss Call for Trust and Transparency Initiative, where academia, the private sector and diplomacy jointly seek practical and rapid solutions to AI-related risks. The Council must also work to counter the risks to peace posed by artificial intelligence. We are very grateful, therefore, to the United Kingdom for having organized this important meeting. Let us look, by way of example, at cyber operations and disinformation, false narratives undermine public trust in governments and peace missions. In this respect, AI is a double-edged sword. Whilst it can accentuate disinformation, it can also be used to detect false narratives and hate speech. So how can we harvest the benefits of AI for peace and security while minimizing the risks? I’d like to make three suggestions in this regard. First, we need a common framework shared by all the players involved in the development and application of this technology. This means governments, states, companies and civil society and research organizations. And I think Mr. Clark was very clearly saying that. AI does not exist in a normative vacuum. Existing international law, including the United Nations Charter, international humanitarian law and human rights, applies. Switzerland is involved in all UN processes aimed at reaffirming and clarifying the international legal framework for AI and, in the case of lethal autonomous weapon systems, at developing prohibitions and restrictions. Second, AI must be human-centered. As Professor Zeng was saying this so rightly, AI should never pretend to be human. We call for its development, deployment and use to always be guided by ethical and inclusive considerations. Clear responsibility and accountability must be maintained, both for states and for companies or individuals. Finally, the relatively early stages of AI development offers us an opportunity to ensure equality and inclusion and to counter discriminatory stereotypes. AI is only as good and reliable as the data we provide it with. If this data reflects prejudices and stereotypes, for example of gender, or is simply not representative of its operational environment, AI will give us poor advice for maintaining peace and security. It is the responsibility of developers and users, both governmental and non-governmental, to ensure that AI does not reproduce the harmful societal biases we are striving to overcome. President, the Security Council has a responsibility. to proactively monitor developments around AI and the threat that it may pose to the maintenance of international peace and security. It should be guided by the results of the General Assembly on the related legal framework. The Council must also use its powers to ensure that AI serves peace, such as by anticipating risks and opportunities or by encouraging the Secretariat and peace missions to use this technology in innovative and responsible ways. My delegation used artificial intelligence in our first debate on trust under our presidency, as well as in the context of an exhibition on digital dilemmas with the ICRC. We were able to recognize the impressive potential of this technology at the service of peace. We therefore look forward to making artificial intelligence for good an integral part of the new agenda for peace. I thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the representative of Switzerland for their statement. And I now give the floor to the representative of Ghana.

Ghana:
Madam President, I thank the United Kingdom for convening this high-level debate on artificial intelligence and Secretary General António Guterres for his important statement to the Council this morning. We are equally grateful for the expert views provided by Mr. Jack Clark and Mr. Zeng Yi to this meeting. The emergent dominance of artificial intelligence as a pervasive fabric of our societies is one that could positively impact on several vistas, including beneficial applications for medicine, agriculture, environmental management, research and development, the realm of arts and culture, and for trade. As we see in the horizon, opportunities to enhance outcomes in different areas of life by embracing the further application of artificial intelligence, we can also already see dangers that must motivate all of us to work quickly and collaboratively to avert risk that could be detrimental to our common humanity. Artificial intelligence, especially in peace and security, must be guided by a common determination not to replicate the risk that powerful technologies have created for the world by the ability to unleash disaster of global proportions. We must constrain the excesses of individual national ambitions for combative dominance and commit to work towards. the development of principles and frameworks that will govern AI technologies for peaceful purposes. For Ghana, we see opportunities in the development and application of AI technologies for identifying early warning signs of conflicts and defining responses that have a higher rate of success and that may also be more cost effective. Such technologies can facilitate the coordination of humanitarian assistance and improve risk assessment. The application for law enforcement is already well appreciated in many jurisdictions and where law enforcement has been effective, risk of conflicts are usually low. Moreover, the application of AI technologies for peace mediation and negotiation efforts has revealed early remarkable outcomes that must be pursued for the cause of peace. The deployment of AI technologies, for instance, in determining the Libyan population’s reactions to policies has facilitated the peace as reflected in the improvements in that country’s 2022 global peace index. We also see in similar context and within ISR function of peacekeeping missions an opportunity to enhance the safety and security of peacekeepers and the protection of civilian populations through the responsible deployment of AI technologies. Madam President, despite these encouraging developments, we see risk with AI technologies from the perspective of both state actors and non-state actors. The integration of AI technologies into autonomous weapon systems is a foremost source of concern. While states seeking to develop such weapon systems may be genuinely interested in reducing the human cost of their involvement in conflicts, it belies their commitment to a pacific world. The history of our experience with mankind’s mastery in atomic manipulation shows that should such desires persist, it only generates in equal measure efforts by other states to cancel the advantage. that such a deterrent seeks to create. The additional danger of non-human control over such weapon systems is also a risk that the world cannot afford or ignore. The increasingly digitalized world and the creation of virtual reality means that the capacity to tell the difference between what is real and what is made up is diminishing by the day. This can create unchecked platforms that non-state actors especially could instrumentalize to destabilize societies or cause friction between or among states using AI technologies. While AI technologies can be used to counter misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech, they also have the capacity to be used by negative forces in pursuing the campaigns of their nefarious and malicious agenda. Madam President, the potential of AI technologies for good should however lead us to work towards its peaceful uses. As indicated earlier, there is a need for the development of some principles and frameworks, mindful of the fact that we do not yet have a full sense of the evolution of AI technologies. Such a process should however not be the preserve of the Security Council, but of the wider membership of the United Nations that have an equal stake in how we guide the further evolution of AI technologies. Without global consensus, it would be difficult to limit the flourishes of AI technologies. Since presently a significant part of the developments on AI technologies occur within the private sector and academia, it is important to also broaden the dialogue beyond governments to ensure that in filling industry gaps, there can be no diversion or misuse of AI technologies, including unarmed aerial vehicles. There are negative consequences for peace and security, including on the African continent, where terrorist groups may be experimenting with such technologies should be anticipated and abated. In recognition that AI technologies can create disruptions in military balance, it is important that states should deliberately pursue confidence-building measures that rest on a shared interest in preventing conflicts that are not deliberately intended. This can be done through setting standards for voluntary information sharing and notifications concerning AI-enabled systems, strategies, policies, and programs implemented by states. We hope that in considering the Secretary General’s upcoming policy brief on the new agenda for peace, Member States will be able to advance durable solutions to address new threats to international peace and security. We indicate our support for the Secretary General’s efforts in this regard. In the process, we must also deepen work on existing initiatives and ongoing processes such as the Secretary General’s roadmap on digital cooperation, the ongoing negotiations on a global convention on countering the use of ICT for criminal purposes, and the open-ended working group on security of and in the use of information and communication technologies. Equally, we encourage the Security Council’s further engagement with the strategy for the digital transformation of United Nations peacekeeping under the A4P-Plus initiative. During the upcoming peacekeeping ministerial meeting in Accra, Ghana would welcome conversations on how AI can be deployed to enhance peacekeeping operations under the relevant themes. In Africa, our continental digital transformation strategy spanning the period 2020 to 2030 would also continue to be an important ancillary to the African continental free trade area, which is an anchor for addressing many of the underlying security challenges. challenges of the continent and silencing the guns in Africa. Finally, Madam President, I affirm Ghana’s commitment in advancing constructive discussions on AI technologies for the peace and security of our world. We highlight the need for a whole-of-society approach that leverages the potentials of the private sector, especially the tech giants, and which retains the human rights of citizens at the core of all ethical principles. I thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the representative of Ghana for their statement, and I now give the floor to the representative of France.

France:
Madam President, I thank the Secretary-General, as well as Mr. Clark and Yijing for their briefings. Artificial intelligence is the revolution of the 21st century as we see the emergence of a harsher world, punctuated by competition, ravaged by hybrid wars. It is essential that artificial intelligence be made a tool for the benefit of peace. France firmly believes that artificial intelligence can play a decisive role in the maintenance of peace. These technologies can contribute to the safety of blue helmets, to the performance of operations, inter alia to improve protection of civilians. The technology can also help to facilitate conflict resolution by facilitating civil society mobilization, but also possibly in the future by facilitating the delivery of humanitarian assistance. Artificial intelligence can also help to advance sustainable development goals achievement. This is the aim of our contribution to the Global Digital Compact. On the fight against climate change, preventing natural risks, there can be more accurate meteorological predictions advanced, and AI can help to support implementation of the Paris agreements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Turning to the development of AI, it also includes risks. There’s a need for us to consider these risks head on. AI is liable to heighten the cyber threat. These technologies help and facilitate. malicious actors in their waging of increasingly sophisticated cyber attacks. Systems with artificial intelligence themselves can be more vulnerable to cyber attacks. Securing these systems is thereby a key challenge at the military level. There’s a vital need for AI to be modified to reflect the nature of conflict, and this is possible. It’s possible that AI can be modified based on nature of conflict. We need to develop an applicable framework for autonomous lethal weapons. This framework can help to ensure future conflicts are conducted in a way that respects international humanitarian law. Generative artificial intelligence can particularly exacerbate the war of information through the massive spread at large scale and low cost of artificial content and messages tailored to certain recipients. One can consider the massive disinformation campaigns currently underway in the CAR and Mali, and those that have compounded the war waged by Russia against Ukraine. This interference in elections also destabilizes countries and undermines the pillars of democracies. France is committed to advancing an ethical and responsible approach for artificial intelligence. This is the aim of the Global Partnership, which we launched in 2020 with the European Union and the Council of Europe. France has been working on rules to regulate and support its developments. Given these developments, the United Nations offers an invaluable framework. We applaud the work underway of the New Agenda for Peace and the forthcoming organization of the Summit of the Future, which will help us to collectively consider these challenges and to devise norms for the future. France will fully contribute to ensuring that artificial intelligence is advanced for the prevention of conflict, for peacekeeping, and for peacebuilding. Thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I now give the floor to the representative of Ecuador.

Ecuador:
Thank you, Madam President. The primary obligation of intelligence is to distrust itself, said the Polish writer Stanislaw Lem, that this element is something that cannot be expected of artificial intelligence. I therefore underline the relevance of the topic which brings us here today upon the initiative of the United Kingdom, and I’m grateful for the briefings from the Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, and the other briefers. The question cannot be whether or not we support the development of artificial intelligence. Against the backdrop of rapid technological change, artificial intelligence has already developed at breakneck speed and will continue to do so. Artificial intelligence, like any other technological tool, can contribute to peacekeeping and peacebuilding efforts or it can undermine these objectives. Artificial intelligence can contribute to preventing conflicts and moderating dialogues in complex situations, as was the case with COVID-19. Emerging technologies were essential to overcome the obstacles thrown up by the pandemic. Artificial intelligence can assist in protecting humanitarian personnel, allowing greater access and action by them, including through predictive analysis. The preparation, early warning, and timely reaction can benefit from this tool as well. Technological solutions can help United Nations peacekeeping operations to fulfill their mandates more effectively. effectively, inter alia, by facilitating the adaptation to changing dynamics of conflict. On the 30th of March 2020, Ecuador co-sponsored Security Council Resolution 2518, which supported more integrated use of new technologies with a view to improving the situational awareness of personnel and their capacities. This was reiterated in the presidential statement of the 24th of May 2011. All of this must include artificial intelligence, because of its ability to improve the security of camps and convoys by monitoring and analyzing conflicts. As an organization, we cannot become more effective if we are not equipped with the tools which allow us to overcome new challenges to security. Our responsibility is to promote and make the most of technological development as a facilitator of peace. This must be done while strictly upholding international public law, human rights law and international humanitarian law. We cannot ignore the threats stemming from the misuse or abuse of artificial intelligence for malicious or terrorist ends. The artificial intelligence system also brings with it other risks, such as discrimination or massive surveillance. Ecuador also rejects the militarization or weaponization of arms placement in artificial intelligence. We reiterate the risks posed by lethal autonomous weapons and the need for all armaments systems to be used upon the basis of a human decision, control and judgment. by the only viable framework, which is that of responsibility and accountability. The ethical principles of responsible behavior are indispensable, but are not sufficient. The response to benefit from artificial intelligence, without exacerbating the threats it poses, is to establish a legally binding international framework. And Ecuador will continue to advocate for this. In cases where it is not possible to ensure sufficient human control over lethal autonomous weapons or to ensure the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution, they must be prohibited. I agree with the concern expressed by the Secretary General on the alarming potential link between artificial intelligence and nuclear weapons. We welcome the recommendations made today in relation to the new agenda for peace. And also agree with the need to reduce the digital divide and foster partnerships and cooperation which allow us to seize the opportunities offered by emerging technologies for peaceful ends. As well as ethical considerations, robotization of conflict is a great challenge for disarmament efforts and an existential challenge that this Council ignores at its peril. Madam President, AI researchers today talk about problems of alignment. So how can we, in other words, ensure that their discoveries will serve us rather than destroying us? This was the question asked by Oppenheimer, Heinstein and Newman and other scientists, for example, and it is the challenge that we still have before us today. Thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the representative of Ecuador for their statement, and I now give the floor to the representative of Malta.

Malta:
Thank you, President. And I thank the UK Presidency for holding today’s briefing on this highly topical issue. I also thank the Secretary General for enriching our discussion with his thoughts and insights. Artificial intelligence is reshaping the way we work, interact and live. Peaceful applications of AI can help achieve the Sustainable Development Goals or support UN peacekeeping efforts. Such efforts include the use of drones for humanitarian assistance deliveries, monitoring and surveillance. On the other hand, the proliferation of AI technologies raises significant risks that demand our attention. The potential misuse or unintended consequences of AI, if not carefully managed, could pose threats to international peace and security. Malicious actors could exploit AI for cyber attacks, disinformation and misinformation campaigns or autonomous weapons systems, leading to increased vulnerabilities and geopolitical tensions. There can also be negative human rights consequences associated with AI, including through discriminatory algorithmic decision-making. We must address these risks collectively, though through international cooperation frameworks and norms. Madam President, Malta believes that the cooperation of multiple stakeholders across the various levels and sectors of international, regional and national communities is essential for implementing ethical frameworks regarding AI around the world. In this regard, the international community needs to develop universal instruments that focus not only on the articulation of values and principles, but also on their practical realisation with a strong emphasis on the rule of law, human rights, gender equality and protection of the environment. As governmental and non-governmental actors race to be first in the development of AI, governance and control practices must be developed at a comparable pace for safeguarding international peace and security. Therefore, the Security Council must push for strong AI governance and ensure its inclusive, safe and responsible deployment through the sharing of experiences and governmental frameworks. Since 2019, Malta is developing an ethical AI framework in alignment with the EU Ethics Guideline for Trustworthy AI. This framework is based on four guiding principles. 1. Build on a human-centric approach. 2. Respect for all applicable laws and regulations, human rights and democratic values. 3. Maximise the benefits of AI systems while preventing and minimising their risks. 4. Align with emerging international standards and norms around AI ethics. Malta is ready to work hand-in-hand on AI with all stakeholders involved to develop a global agreement on common standards for the responsible use of AI. Moreover, within the EU we are working on an Artificial Intelligence Act which seeks to ensure that citizens can trust what AI has to offer. It takes a human-centric and innovation-friendly approach to AI based on fundamental rights and the rule of law. In this line, Malta strongly supports the work of the UN Open-Ended Working Group on ICT and International Security and underlines that confidence-building measures are essential to increase the level of dialogue and trust for more transparency in the use of AI to ensure better accountability. Malta expresses its concerns regarding the use of AI systems in military operations since machines cannot make human-like decisions involving the legal principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution. We believe that lethal autonomous weapons systems currently exploiting AI should be banned and only those weapons systems that are in full respect of international humanitarian law and human rights law should be regulated. Likewise, the integration of AI, international security, counter-terrorism and law enforcement systems raises fundamental human rights, transparency and privacy concerns which must be addressed. To conclude, Madam President, Malta believes that the Security Council has an important anticipatory role to play on this issue. We have the responsibility to monitor developments closely and address any threats to international peace and security that may arise in a timely manner. It is only by promoting responsible governance, international cooperation and ethical considerations that we can harness the transformative power of AI whilst mitigating potential risks. Thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the representative of Malta for their statement and I now give the floor to the representative of Gabon.

Gabon:
Thank you, Madam President. I thank the United Kingdom for organizing this debate on artificial intelligence at a time when technological innovation is constantly proliferating and revolutionizing our societies whilst also having an impact on international security. I also thank the Secretary General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres. Professor Yi Xing and Mr. Jack Clark for their briefings. Artificial intelligence is as fascinating as it is bewildering, and in just a few years has already revolutionized our ways of life and our method of production, our ways of thinking, and has shifted the horizons of our everyday life. As a result of their precision and their ability to resolve complex problems, AI systems set themselves apart from more classic IT mechanisms and offer numerous opportunities for peacekeeping and international security. Madam President, peacekeeping and international security have for many years been solidly anchored in a robust technological ecosystem which allows us to bolster the management and crisis prevention capacities but also fosters heightened understanding of situations on the ground, whilst improving the protection of civilians, particularly in complex environments. Artificial intelligence is making its own specific contribution by increasing manifold the analytical capacities of early warning systems. It is now quicker and easier to detect emerging threats by analyzing vast quantities of data from various sources very quickly. Thanks to AI, the operational mechanisms of the United Nations peace missions are performing ever better. Indeed, the use of drones, night vision systems and geolocalization enable us in Terralia to detect activities of armed and terrorist groups, to secure the delivery of humanitarian aid in difficult-to-reach areas and to improve the ceasefire monitoring missions or detections of mines on the ground. AI also buttresses the implementation of very complex peacekeeping mandates, particularly civilian protection. AI also plays a major role in peacebuilding processes. It contributes to the reconstruction efforts of states in post-conflict situations and fosters the implementation of quick-impact projects whilst offering opportunities of employment to young people and reintegration opportunities for former combatants. However, to better exploit the advantages of AI for peace and security, particularly when deploying peacekeepers, keeping operations. It is essential for local communities to take on ownership of and absorb these new technologies so as to perpetuate the beneficial effects after with the withdrawal of international forces. If they are not anchored at the local level, the benefits of AI are doomed to disappear and crises to resurface. States, national and international organizations and local populations must be educated about the processes of manufacturing and dissemination so as to bolster trust in the legitimacy of AI systems used. AI, Madam President, certainly contributes to bolstering international peace and security, but also poses numerous risks which we must address right away. Terrorist and criminal groups can have recourse to the great potential of AI to pursue their illicit activities. Over recent years, hacker networks have stepped up their cyber attacks, disinformation actions, and theft of sensitive data. The threats resulting from the malicious use of AI must stop the international community in its tracks and constitute the point of departure for greater control over the development of new technologies. This means bolstering transparency, international governance with the United Nations as a guarantor, but above all, accountability. The UN must absolutely bolster international cooperation to develop a regulatory framework with appropriate control mechanisms and robust security systems. Information sharing and establishing ethical norms will also allow us to prevent abuse and to preserve international peace and security. Madam President, Gabon remains attached to promoting the peaceful and responsible use of new technologies, including artificial intelligence. Against this backdrop, it is important to foster the sharing of best practices for security and control, to encourage states to adopt national regulatory policies, to to initiate, right away, awareness-raising programs about the challenges of artificial intelligence, particularly amongst young people. To conclude, Madam President, clearly, artificial intelligence offers a whole range of opportunities. It supports sustainable development initiatives, helps us to prevent humanitarian and security crises, to combat climate change and its negative effects. However, in the absence of reliable regulation and effective management and control tools, AI can constitute a real threat to international peace and security. Therefore, our enthusiasm for these increasingly sophisticated technologies must be marked by prudence and restraint. Thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
Representative of Gabon for their statement. And I now give the floor to the representative of Albania.

Albania:
Thank you, Madam President, for convening this important meeting and for bringing this issue to the Security Council for a first-ever debate on the matter. Artificial intelligence has been around since decades as part of the world’s scientific and technological drive. The recent spike in its development has opened vast avenues for its use in almost every sector of human activity, as mentioned earlier by the Secretary General, our briefers, and other colleagues. Everything indicates that it is having to be front and center in an ever-seeing revolutionary technological advancement in the years to come. Our world is no stranger to scientific evolution, and including disruptive technological drive. This is part of the uninterrupted human quest for progress, part of our genome, and engraved in human history. But there is something fundamentally different with the artificial intelligence. It stands out for both its rate of progress and its scope for applications, and holds great promise to transform the world like never before, to automate processes to a scale we cannot even imagine now. While this technology advances at a mind-blowing pace, we are caught between fascination and fear, weighing benefits and worries, anticipating applications that can transform the world, but also aware of its other side, the dark side, the potential risks that could impact our safety, our privacy, our economy, and our security. Some, more alarmist, go as far as to warn about AI’s risks for our civilization. The vertiginous rhythm of development of a technology with far-reaching consequences that we are not fully able to grasp raises serious questions, and rightfully so. Because of the nature of technology, because of the lack of transparency and accountability in how algorithms reach their results, because of the fact that often not even the scientists and the engineers who design the AI models fully understand how they arrive at the outputs they produce. Depending on how the data sets they are trained on, or the way in which the algorithm is organized, AI models and systems could lead to discrimination on the basis of race, sex, age, or disability. While these can be prevented or corrected, it is far more difficult to prevent the serious risks presented by those who use the technology with the intention to cause harm. Internet and social media have already shown how detrimental such behaviors can be. Some countries continually attempt to deliberately mislead information, distort facts, interfere in the democratic process of others, spread hatred, promote discrimination, incite violence or conflict by misusing digital technologies. Deep fakes and doctored photos are being used to create convincing but false information and narratives, to produce convincing complot theories, to undermine public trust, undermine democracy and even be used to cause panic. To all these actors, artificial intelligence will provide infinite possibilities for malicious activities. Colleagues, the misuse of the AI could have a direct impact on international peace and security and poses grave security challenges for which we are currently ill-prepared. AI may be used to perpetuate bias through large-scale disinformation attacks, to develop new cyber weapons, power autonomous weapons and to design advanced biological weapons. As we reap the benefits of the technological advancement, it is a matter of urgency to use the existing rules and regulations, improve and update them and define the ethics of the use of the AI. We must also establish at national and international level the necessary safeguards, governance frameworks and clear lines of responsibility and authority to ensure that AI systems are used appropriately, safely and responsibly for the good of all and they do not infringe on the human rights and freedoms and do not affect peace and security. We must promote standards for responsible state behaviour and the applicability of the international law in the use of the AI and its technologies, but also in the monitoring and assessment of risks and implications. And this provides a role for the Security Council in this respect. Albania will continue to promote open, free and safe AI technologies where human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law are respected. And I thank you.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the representative of Albania for their statement, and I now give the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation.

Russian Federation:
Thank you, Madam President. We welcome the participation in today’s meeting of the Secretary General of the United Nations. We listened closely to his statement. We also thank the briefers for their interesting observations. The Russian Federation attributes tremendous significance to issues of the development of advanced technologies which are designed to help to benefit humankind, to facilitate socioeconomic progress as well. Artificial intelligence is one of the most modern, groundbreaking technologies which, without a doubt, kindles significant scientific interest. However, its practical significance, the potential of its application, not to mention the hypothetical impact on political processes, is yet to be fully assessed. Given assessments that were voiced today by the briefers, the impression is created that artificial intelligence as a technology is at its early stages of development. And for now, there is a lot more unknown, many more unknowns in this area. So the selection of the organizers, the presidency as the Security Council for the platform for the discussion is not necessarily evident in our view. And even in the concept note for the meeting itself, it is clear that specific arguments in support of the premise of some kind of organic link between AI and issues of international peace and security, at least for now, is not present. This merely lists a varied selection of trends that can be applied to any sphere. Madam President, in preparing for today’s meeting, I decided to pose a question about whether AI threatens international peace and security as a source, AI as a source. And here was the response. AI can pose certain threats to international peace and security, but it can also have a positive influence. These are some aspects which should be taken into account. Cyber security, development of AI could result in the emergence of new vulnerabilities and threats in cyberspace. AI can be used for the creation of potent cyber weapons, automization of cyber attacks, and circumvention of relevant defense systems. Autonomous weapons and systems, the development of autonomous weapons and systems. created based on AI can pose risks to security because such systems can make decisions about the use of force without the direct participation of individuals. This can result in certain consequences, unpredictable consequences in the emergence of armed conflict, and lastly, the spread of disinformation. Artificial intelligence can be used for the creation and the spread of disinformation and fake news, and this can undermine trust in information and help to result in greater socioeconomic tensions. So, for this reason, we believe, we view attempts to link the issue of AI to generically to threats to international peace and security as somewhat artificial, and as you see, artificial intelligence agrees with us on that. To begin, the international community has yet to determine the nature and the character of certain risks and threats, of possible risks and threats to assess their scale, possible response measures, and so on. To that end, what is necessary is a professional, scientific expertise-based discussion that can take several years, and this discussion is already underway at specialized platforms. Certain military aspects of AI, which theoretically could impact on global and regional security, are also discussed in specialized formats. With respect to lethal autonomous systems, that is the group of government experts, the states parties to the Inhumane Weapons Convention, questions of security and the use of ICTs are comprehensively discussed by the specialized U.N. Open-Ended Working Group under the aegis of the General Assembly. We believe that the duplication of these efforts is counterproductive. Madam President, as with any advanced technology, AI can can help to benefit humankind, but it can also generate destructive consequences, and this depends on who controls it and for what purposes it is applied. Today, unfortunately, we see how the West, led by the United States, with its actions is undermining trust in their own technological solutions and its own IT industry and companies. This is frequently uncovered, showing interference by American intelligence bodies and activities of major corporate sectors, the manipulation and content moderation algorithms, tracking of users, including built-in features with hardware and software. At the same time, the West has no ethical qualms about knowingly allowing AI to generate misanthropic statements in social networks if this advances a political agenda convenient to them. This is the case with the extremist Medicom Corporation and its permission for calls to destroy Russians. At the same time, algorithms instruct on how to spread fakes and disinformation and how to automatically block information that is deemed to be inaccurate by owners of networks and their sponsors and intelligence services. That is the shameful truth which is hidden. In the spirit of the notorious cancel culture, AI forces the adjustment to tailor to their needs of digital compilations, thereby generating false narratives. To summarize, the main threat generator and challenge generator in this area first and foremost is from unscrupulous champions of AI from among so-called advanced democracies. This issue has been seen in the UK deciding on the issue for today’s meeting. Today, there’s a popular premise about serious prospects of AI in terms of facilitating the emergence of new markets and sources. At the same time, we see a deceitful sidestepping of the issue of unequal distribution of these benefits. These aspects were considered in detail by the Secretary-General in the recently issued report on digital cooperation. Digital inequality has reached such a level that if in Europe, access to Internet is enjoyed by approximately 89% of residents. In low-income countries, only one-quarter of the population enjoys these benefits. Nearly two-thirds of global trade and services is currently carried out at the digital format, and yet the cost of a smartphone in South Asia and Africa, south of the Sahara, represents more than 40% of the average monthly income. And payment for mobile data for African users is more than three times greater than the global average. And citizens gaining access to digital skills is supported by governments in less than half of countries in the world. There’s an unequal distribution of benefits, and we see a handful of major platforms and states dominating here. Digital technologies have resulted in significant increase in production and generated value, but these benefits do not lead to general prosperity. The latest UNCTAD report, Technology and Innovation 2023, states that developed countries will enjoy most of the benefits of digital technology, including AI. Digital technologies are expediting the concentration of economic might in the hands of a smaller and smaller group of elites and companies. The aggregate wealth of technology billionaires in 2022 amounted to 2.1 trillion U.S. dollars. This divide reflects a massive gap in governance and cross-border governance in state investments. Historically, digital technologies were developed at

Secretary General – Antonio Guterres:
the private level. Governments frequently lag behind in regulating them for the benefit of the general public. This trend needs to be reversed. In the development of AI, governance mechanisms of leadership roles should be played by states. Any tools for self-regulating the sector should comply with national legislations of states where companies operate. We object to the establishment of supranational oversight bodies for AI. We also view as unacceptable the extraterritorial application of any norms in this area. The adoption of universal agreements in this area is acceptable only on the basis of equitable, mutually respectful dialogue among members of the international community, as well as in a way that reflects the legitimate interests and concerns of negotiating parties. Russia has already contributed to this process. In Russia, major IT companies have developed a national code of ethics for artificial intelligence, which establishes guidelines for developers and users for the safe and ethical use of systems with AI. This does not establish any legal obligations and is open for the inclusion of foreign specialized agencies, private companies, academic and social structures. This code was established as a national contribution to the implementation of the UNESCO recommendation on ethical aspects of AI. Madam President, to conclude, I wish to emphasize that no systems with AI should cast doubt on the moral and intellectual autonomy of the individual. Developers should regularly conduct risk assessments linked to the use of AI, and they should adopt measures to bring those to a minimum. Thank you for your attention.

President – United Kingdom:
I thank the representative of the Russian Federation for their statement. There are no more names inscribed on the list of speakers. I thank again our technical experts for joining us today and colleagues for your contributions. The meeting is adjourned.