Title: Technology Rivalry behind International Relations
Description: Article Summary
This article explores how artificial intelligence (AI), as the defining technology of the 21st century, is reshaping the international system across political, economic, military, cultural, and ethical dimensions, while redefining the concept of superpower status. Using nuclear weapons as a historical reference, the article examines the similarities and differences between nuclear power and AI in terms of power formation, state competition, and global influence. It emphasizes that AI’s impact is broader, continuous, and dynamic, functioning as an embedded, systemic, and pervasive force rather than a singular instrument of deterrence like nuclear weapons.
Politically, the article highlights that AI is no longer merely an advisory tool but is increasingly becoming an active participant in governance. In legislative processes, AI has begun assisting in drafting laws, generating policy proposals, and simulating complex legislative outcomes. Although these applications are currently experimental and often symbolic, they signal the potential for deeper AI integration in governance. In diplomacy, AI-driven simulations and predictive systems allow states to anticipate negotiation strategies, assess second-order effects—from trade conflicts to security cooperation—and make informed decisions in advance. Public diplomacy also leverages AI for monitoring foreign perceptions, disseminating narratives, and managing crises; for instance, China uses AI to promote the Belt and Road Initiative, while the U.S. tracks global sentiment to adjust messaging. This integration indicates a shift in political power, where states increasingly rely on informational superiority and algorithmic capacity alongside traditional legal and military tools.
Economically, AI is portrayed as the core driver of a new productivity revolution, enhancing efficiency, optimizing resource allocation, accelerating research and development, and fostering industry innovation. AI applications across manufacturing, agriculture, finance, and healthcare not only increase national productivity but also reshape global economic structures. However, high costs and technical complexity create uneven development: large corporations leverage capital, data, and expertise to lead, while smaller firms and developing nations risk falling behind, reinforcing economic concentration and global inequality. AI also has dual effects on labor markets, replacing repetitive tasks while creating new roles in data analysis, system maintenance, and ethical oversight. The article stresses that AI is both a source of growth and a potential amplifier of inequality, influencing the future global economic order and the competitive advantage of superpowers.
Militarily, AI differs fundamentally from nuclear weapons. Nuclear arsenals deter through latent destructive power, whereas AI actively participates in warfare by automating operations, analyzing data, and accelerating decision-making. Projects such as Project Maven demonstrate AI’s potential to identify threats, reduce civilian casualties, and compress operational timelines, while also highlighting democratic constraints on innovation compared to authoritarian regimes. AI’s lower barrier to entry compared to nuclear weapons means smaller states, corporations, or research institutions can also innovate militarily, creating unpredictable dynamics. Military advantage increasingly depends on technological ecosystems, integration capacity, and rapid adaptation rather than the size of arsenals. Superpower competition thus becomes more dynamic and less predictable.
In the cultural sphere, AI functions more as a distributor and manipulator than as a genuine creator. While it can generate art, music, or film, AI lacks historical context, emotional depth, and social resonance, limiting its creative authenticity. Its cultural influence is primarily through algorithmic curation—filtering, amplifying, and shaping global attention. AI-powered recommendation systems determine what content spreads and what remains unseen, subtly steering public opinion. For example, the U.S. projects culture through openness and media, China through state-led initiatives, and Russia through disinformation campaigns. Unlike nuclear weapons, which influenced culture indirectly through fear and symbolism, AI actively inhabits cultural circulation, manipulating narratives in real time and at scale.
Ethically, AI presents diffuse, pervasive, and cumulative risks, contrasting with the immediate catastrophic consequences of nuclear weapons. AI penetrates daily life, education, and social institutions, potentially eroding human judgment, critical thinking, and social trust. In education, student reliance on AI parallels broader societal dependence on algorithms, highlighting risks to future governance, diplomacy, and military decision-making. The article argues that while nuclear ethics focused on the singular moral question of using a weapon of mass destruction, AI raises countless smaller, incremental questions—about autonomous killing, algorithmic bias, and human agency—that collectively shape the trajectory of societies and global systems.
The article concludes that AI, unlike nuclear weapons, is not a static or singular technology; it is pervasive, evolving, and integrated across all dimensions of power. Superpowers will be measured not by stockpiles of weapons but by the ecosystems of data, talent, infrastructure, and trust that enable them to harness AI effectively. Economically, politically, militarily, culturally, and ethically, AI serves as a systemic differentiator: those who control it accelerate development and influence, while those who lack access risk falling behind. The article emphasizes that the stability of the future international order depends on how states manage AI: promoting innovation and efficiency while safeguarding accountability, ethics, and human judgment. In the nuclear age, power was defined by fear and restraint; in the AI age, power is defined by integration, adaptation, and responsibility. Ultimately, the article argues that AI will determine not only which nations dominate but also whether global systems evolve toward stability or fragmentation, inclusion or inequality, empowerment or erosion of human agency.