Categories
-Top News EU News Europe

India-Russia Trade Ties Need A Civilian Focus

2024 needs to witness Moscow freeing itself from the chokehold of Beijing by increasing economic involvement with India, writes Prof. Madhav Das Nalapat

2024 needs to witness Moscow freeing itself from the chokehold of Beijing by increasing economic involvement with India.

During the visit to Moscow of External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, efforts were reportedly on from the Russian side to increase the joint production of defence items by the two countries. This would be an error. Given the configuration of players in what is now the Cold War 2.0 period, it is consumer goods such as shoes, textiles and other items that need to be produced in India by Russian investors. White goods such as refrigerators or washing machines could also be part of the menu, meeting the needs of Russian consumers.

Were defence items to be the main focus of investment by Russian entities of the rupees earned by the country through a surplus of trade with India, that surplus would only grow still more, to levels that are unsustainable. Emphasis where production by Russian businesses in India is concerned needs to be on items that are of use to consumers in Russia, so that the India-Russia trade balance becomes more balanced. Rather than increase further, the proportion of defence-related items in Indo-Russian trade needs to steadily get replaced with other items in the way that is taking place now. Rather than seek a return to the past, when that vast country was the USSR, what is needed by Russian leaders is to look to the future, and in the desirability of creating manufacturing opportunities in India that would enable Russia to lower its dependence on other countries for meeting several of its needs.

Although sought by NATO policy to be barred from western markets, items produced in India by Russian companies would find a market in the Global South in particular. By next year, the war in Ukraine that is increasingly being termed as “Biden’s Folly” will end in a manner unfavourable to Kiev. This need not have been the case. It was the US President together with then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Boris Johnson who persuaded President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to reject the Kremlin’s March 2022 offer of an immediate halt to the hostilities that will soon be entering its second year of operations.

As mentioned earlier, Johnson’s motivation for seeking to continue the war was transparent. Under attack within his own party for repeatedly breaking Covis-19 rules that his own government had enforced, his view was that the Conservative Party would not remove a leader as deliberately seeming to be Churchillian as Boris Johnson. Sadly for him, they nevertheless did. In Biden’s case, the President of the US appears not to have been able to shake off the Cold War 1.0 way of thinking that marked his career in the US Senate.

In the case of Ukraine, Biden has acted as though in the 21st century it is still Moscow that is the primary threat to the US and not Beijing. The war in Ukraine has been a disaster not just for Ukraine, several parts of which look like present-day Gaza, but for other countries in Europe, especially Germany. If Chancellor Ludwig Erhard was the originator of the transformation from collapse into prosperity of the German economy, Chancellor Olaf Scholz has been its destroyer, by permitting without protest the shutting down of gas supplies from Russia through Nord Stream I and the sabotage of Nord Stream II by as yet unacknowledged Russophobes within NATO. Interestingly, it is Germany’s “liberal” Green Party that is the fiercest proponent of NATO’s prosecution of the Ukraine war, and it is the “right-wing” Alternative for Germany that opposes involvement in the war.

Given their interest in prolonging the Ukraine war and other diversionary flashpoints across the globe, the Greens in Germany must be favourites of the CCP leadership. As for Chancellor Scholz, he has pivoted away from the longtime external policies of the Social Democratic Party, evidence that he has been completely house-trained into an old-fashioned Cold War 1.0 conservative through his loyal apprenticeship under Chancellor Angela Merkel during the period when her Christian Democrats were the dominant party in government. Merkel kneecapped the prospects for her own party by allowing two million immigrants from societies that were not entirely congruent with the values and needs of Germany, to put it mildly. By her generous gesture, Merkel will enter the history books as the mother of indiscriminate immigration into Germany. Her party paid the price for expanding the population of Germany quickly and substantially through an infusion of vast numbers of migrants from entirely different cultures, and Scholz was the beneficiary, taking over as Chancellor in 2021.

Surprisingly for a Social Democratic Chancellor, he acted as a Cold War 1.0 warrior, adopting a soft line towards the PRC even as the CCP was working to ensure that China remained on track to replace Germany as the manufacturing hub of several sophisticated engineering products, including luxury automobiles and machinery. While several countries in Europe have paid a substantial price for the impulsive sanctions that were slapped on Russian individuals and exports since 2022, none has suffered as much as Germany, a country that is emerging as the “sick man of Europe” courtesy the policy errors made by Chancellor Scholz, who seems to be going by the Biden playbook as faithfully as postwar Japan responded to the cues received from US President Truman. The difference is that Truman’s guidance proved helpful in the rebuilding of Japan, whereas adoption of the Putinophobic line of President Biden is substantially harming German interests.

In the US and in most countries in Europe, the folly of driving Russia into the clutches of China is becoming more evident. The anger directed at India by the Ursula von der Leyens during the initial months of the Ukraine war has abated. 2024 needs to witness Moscow freeing itself from the chokehold of Beijing by increasing economic involvement with India. A rupee-rouble agreement is needed that results in the production within India of items unrelated to kinetic conflict but central to an improvement in the daily lives of the Russian people. The future of India-Russia trade is bright, but it needs to be in the civilian and not in the military field.

ALSO READ: Russian strikes hit three Ukrainian cities

Categories
-Top News EU News Europe

Islamophobic politics amplified across Europe in 2023

Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni is often in the news for making bold statements, but she recently scoffed at Islamic culture and said that there is no place for it in Europe….writes Asad Mirza

Recent events and political upheavals in many European countries point to the increasing Islamophobic and anti-Islam right-wingers inching closer to power in these countries.

Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni is often in the news for making bold statements, but she recently scoffed at Islamic culture and said that there is no place for it in Europe. She said that there is no place for Islam in Europe: ‘There is a problem of compatibility’

Her comments were made at a political festival organised by her far-right party – the Brothers of Italy, in Rome, which was attended by the British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and X’s owner Elon Musk, too.

In her speech Meloni said, “The Islamic cultural centres in Italy are financed by Saudi Arabia where Sharia is in force. In Europe, there is a very Islamisation process distant from the values of our civilisation! I believe that there is a problem of compatibility between Islamic culture and the values and rights of our civilisation.”

Meanwhile, an old video of her also re-surfaced on various social media platforms that shows her saying she would not allow Sharia law to be implemented in Italy. Meloni also criticised Saudi Arabia for its strict Sharia Law.

“I believe that these should be raised, which does not mean generalising on Islam. It means raising the problem that there is a process of Islamisation in Europe that is very distant from the values of our civilisation,” she added.

During his speech at the event, Rishi Sunak said that he would push for global reforms to the asylum system while warning that the threat of a growing number of refugees could ‘overwhelm’ parts of Europe.

He even warned that some ‘enemies’ were deliberately ‘driving people to our shores to try and destabilise our societies’.

“If we do not tackle this problem, the numbers will only grow. It will overwhelm our countries and our capacity to help those who actually need our help the most,” Rishi Sunak said, adding, “If that requires us to update our laws and lead an international conversation to amend the post-war frameworks around asylum, then we must do that.”

Meanwhile, Tesla’s founder and X’s owner Elon Musk marked a rare appearance as he met world leaders at the annual gathering.“Immigration isn’t enough to combat population shrinking,” he said at the event, explaining: “There is value in cultures, we don’t want Italy as a culture to disappear, we want to maintain a reasonable cultural identity of those countries or they won’t be those countries.”

Analysing the speeches given by these three leaders, makes it clear that not only political leaders alone but even business leaders are increasingly turning to Islamophobia, based on their belief systems and also converting political issues to anti-Islam utterances, to gain public support.

Both Sunak and Musk couched their Islamophobic feelings into anti-immigrants policies. This could be partly blamed to these countries’ own doing. Firstly, various European nations opened their doors for immigrants from the Muslim dominated countries.

The migrant flow to many western countries increased as the increasing prosperity there was matched with no desire to engage in menial jobs at lower wages, gaps which were filled by the migrants. Further, they allowed Muslim immigrants entry to assuage their own guilt feeling, as many of the migrants fleeing their homes were coming from those countries where these countries had started or were supporting wars against the so-called radical or Islamist elements.

Though many of these immigrants were not connected to any radical ideology, but they became an easy scapegoat to be blamed for any wrongs happening in these western societies.

Rishi Sunak has been accused of adopting the “toxic” rhetoric of his former home secretary Suella Braverman, after he warned that migration would “overwhelm” European countries without firm action.

Sunak also said that both he and Meloni, with whom he has been forging a close relationship over hardline migration policies, were taking inspiration from Margaret Thatcher’s steadfast radicalism in their quest to do “whatever it takes” to “stop the boats”.

Sunak’s relationship with Meloni, Italy’s first female premier has blossomed over their shared hardline approach towards immigration through policies that have pushed the limits of legality. They have also bonded over their admiration of Thatcher.

As far as Elon Musk is concerned, recently studies have found that Islamophobic comments are being spread widely through X and the company does not respond to complaints or seem to take any remedial action, to handle the issue. X users resort to spelling mistakes intentionally while debating controversial subjects like religion, terrorism, crime, and even the Indian history.

These are not errors made in the heat of the moment, but careful distortions meant to keep the tweet from being flagged or deleted for hateful content. For example, a tweet posted in November 2022 that singled out people with Muslim names from a series of random crime news reports did not refer to the perpetrators as “Muslims” but instead used the phrase “Ola keBande” (Ola’s group or Ola’s gang). The word “Ola,” which refers to the Indian ride-hailing taxi service, was used in place of “Allah.” The tweet author currently has close to 7,00,000 followers.

ALSO READ: UK to increase family visa salary requirement in stages

Categories
-Top News Europe UK News

Migration threatens to ‘overwhelm’ Europe, says Sunak

Sunak then hinted at the need to change international law on immigration, telling the crowd at Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s Atreju political festival: “If we do not tackle this problem, the numbers will only grow…reports Asian Lite News

Rishi Sunak has said illegal migration threatens to “overwhelm” Europe and hinted a change is needed in international law in order to tackle it.

Speaking to Italian conservatives at an event in Rome, the prime minister said “enemies” could use immigration as a “weapon” by “deliberately driving people to our shores to try to destabilise our society”.

“Criminal gangs will find ever cheaper ways to ply their evil trade,” he added. “They will exploit our humanity. They think nothing of putting people’s lives at risk when they put them in these boats at sea.”

Sunak then hinted at the need to change international law on immigration, telling the crowd at Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s Atreju political festival: “If we do not tackle this problem, the numbers will only grow.

“It will overwhelm our countries and our capacity to help those who actually need our help the most. If that requires us to update our laws and lead an international conversation to amend the post-war frameworks around asylum, then we must do that. Because if we don’t fix this problem now, the boats will keep coming and more lives will be lost at sea.”

Back in Britain, Sunak has been fighting to pass his flagship Rwanda bill, which was ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court last month. Tuesday saw the prime minister survive a possible rebellion as a new draft of the bill – which declares in law that Rwanda is a safe country – was passed by MPs at its second reading by 313 votes to 270, a majority of 43.

The revised bill will allow ministers to disapply the UK’s Human Rights Act, but does not extend the same powers to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which hardline Tory MPs demanded.

While in Rome, Sunak was embraced by Meloni – who has taken a hard-line stance on migration and who’s populist Brothers of Italy party hosted the event. The two leaders had held bilateral talks where they “agreed on the vital importance of tackling the scourge of illegal migration and the shared sense of urgency that they feel on this issue”, according to a Downing Street spokesperson.

Meloni and Sunak also met with Albania’s prime minister Edi Rama, who’s country has a deportation scheme with Italy.

It comes as some 292 people made a journey across the English Channel in seven boats on Friday, according to Home Office figures published on Saturday.

It was also confirmed a migrant died during an incident on Friday, while another was left in a critical condition. Shadow immigration minister Stephen Kinnock said it was “not too late” for the prime minister to change direction on his migration policy.

“Once again we have the Prime Minister ramping up the rhetoric but failing to get a grip,” he added.

“After a week in which the Prime Minister has failed to convince many of his own backbenchers that he has a workable plan to end dangerous boat crossings, we hit a new grim milestone – far from stopping the boats, on Rishi Sunak’s watch this year, 600 boats have crossed.

ALSO READ-Gaza Unrest Fuels Sectarian Violence in US, Europe

Categories
-Top News Europe

Europe grappling for united Gaza ceasefire call

Europe’s response to the Israel-Hamas conflict has been chaotic and rifts have been evident within the EU…reports Asian Lite News

More than two months into the Israel-Hamas conflict, violence in the Middle East has no end in sight and Europe as a neighbor is still struggling to unify around a call for ceasefire in Gaza.

The European Union (EU) summit ended on Friday without a much-expected tougher stance on the conflict or a call for immediate ceasefire, though 17 out of all its 27 members had voted for a resolution calling for a ceasefire at the United Nations (UN) on Tuesday. In October, only eight members voted for a UN resolution advocating for a truce.

Despite Europe’s strong will to intercede, the conflict has torn apart the bloc itself, revealing some of its profound political, social and economic divides and triggering grave concerns among the public.

Europe’s response to the Israel-Hamas conflict has been chaotic and rifts have been evident within the EU. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s statement of unconditional support for Israel and her initial reactions after the Oct. 7 attack contrasted sharply with the approach of other EU leaders, including foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, and angered many both in Brussels and in the member states’ capitals.

Nearly three weeks after the outbreak of the conflict, last-minute talks at an EU summit centered on whether to call for “a pause” or “pauses.” The bloc, struggling to agree on a united stance, has largely limited itself to supporting Israel’s right to defend itself within international law and called for “pauses.”

Individual member countries, such as Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic and Hungary, have voiced strong support for Israel, while others, including Ireland, Belgium and Spain, have criticized Israel’s military action.

The cacophony of European messages showed “not only a deplorable failure of coordination among EU officials,” Stefan Lehne, a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe, said in an article published on the international affairs think tank’s website. “It also brought to the surface the long-standing divisions between the member states that support Israel unconditionally and others that feel equal sympathy for the suffering of the Palestinians.”

From London to Paris and Berlin, Europe feels the ripples from the crisis in the Middle East as it struggles to balance fears of rising anti-Semitism and the rights of protesters, who have marched for weeks in the streets of big cities.

Rifts within the EU challenge the bloc’s cohesion as members, such as Italy, re-imposed border controls, leading to “an erosion of the Schengen border-free area,” Luigi Scazzieri, senior research fellow at the Center for European Reform think tank, commented.

Growing nativist anti-immigration sentiment and Islamophobia may reshape the political landscapes in many countries and boost the popularity of radical right parties, such as Germany’s Alternative fur Deutschland or France’s Rassemblement National, he said.

“These same political forces would be strengthened if the fighting sparked an influx of refugees from Gaza or from other countries in the region,” Scazzieri said.

As far-right parties are garnering growing public support in countries such as Italy, Spain, Germany and the Netherlands, Europe’s shift to the right is expected to continue during the European Parliament elections next year.

While authorities across Europe have been grappling with divisions, disaccord and frailty, the people — many of them still traumatized by nightmarish memories from last century’s wars — are anxious to see an end to the atrocity.

Aghast at the bloodshed, many Europeans are angered by the soft stance and passive reactions from the EU and the governments of its member states.

A neighbor of the Middle East and home to huge Jewish and Muslim populations, the EU has a major stake in the crisis, and the ripple effects of the conflict in Europe are feared to fuel both anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

Eighty-two percent of the French people think the conflict will have repercussions on the terrorist risk in France, according to the Harris Interactive barometer for the French news channel LCI, published towards the end of October.

Europe now faces a “huge risk of terrorist attacks” over the Christmas holiday period, EU Home Affairs Commissioner Ylva Johansson warned in early December.

The conflict also imperils Europe’s fragile economy which is still battling recession amid inflation concerns and the aftermath of last year’s energy crisis.

Goldman Sachs said in November that the most important and potentially impactful way in which tensions could spill over into the European economy is through the oil and gas markets. Unless the energy price pressures remain contained, the Israel-Hamas conflict could have a significant impact on economic growth and inflation in the eurozone, it warned.

Following the EU summit on Friday, European Council President Charles Michel said that leaders had solidified their common position and discussed the bloc’s vision for a long-term peaceful solution to the conflict based on the two-state solution.

ALSO READ-Migration Threatens to Overwhelm Europe, Warns UK PM

Categories
-Top News EU News UK News

UK Researchers to Rejoin Horizon Europe from January 2024

Horizon Europe stands as the EU’s key funding program for research and innovation, boasting a budget of 95.5 billion euros (about $103.48 billion) for the period 2021-2027…reports Asian Lite News

A specialized committee of the European Union (EU) gave a final pass for the UK’s rejoining the Horizon Europe program, the European Commission has said in a press release.

Starting on January 1, 2024, British researchers will again participate in the research and innovation program on equal footing with their EU counterparts, after the EU-UK Specialized Committee on Participation in Union Programs formally approved a new association agreement.

British researchers will also gain access to Horizon Europe funding, Xinhua news agency reported, citing the press release.

Horizon Europe stands as the EU’s key funding program for research and innovation, boasting a budget of 95.5 billion euros (about $103.48 billion) for the period 2021-2027.

Monday’s agreement also gave the green light to the UK’s involvement in the Copernicus component of the Space Program, which is the Earth observation component of the EU Space program, offering information services based on satellite Earth Observation and in-situ (non-space) data.

The UK will contribute around 2.43 billion euros per year on average to the EU budget for its participation in Horizon Europe, and roughly 154 million euros for participation in Copernicus, said the press release. (1 euro = $1.08)

ALSO READ-Why Sisi’s India visit can expand strategic horizons

Categories
-Top News Europe Tech Lite

Europe’s Dilemma in Cyberspace, AI

Europe’s technological trajectory is bleak, lacking optimism for future influence. Over 15 years, R&D investments in European tech have sharply declined, with the share relative to global tech R&D diminishing steadily, writes Cristina Vanberghen

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is defining a new international order. Cyberspace is reshaping the geopolitical map and the global balance of power.  Europe, coming late to the game, is struggling to achieve strategic sovereignty in an interconnected world characterised by growing competition and conflicts between States. Do not think that cyberspace is an abstract concept. It has a very solid architecture composed of infrastructure (submarine and terrestrial cable, satellites, data centers etc), a software infrastructure (information systems and programs, languages and protocols allowing data transfer and communication between the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), and a cognitive infrastructure, which includes massive exchange of data, content, exchanges of information beyond classic “humint”.

Cyberspace is the fifth dimension: an emerging geopolitical space which complements land, sea, air and space, a dimension undergoing rapid militarization and in consequence deepening the divide between distinct ideological blocs at the international level. In this conundrum, the use and misuse of data – transparency, invisibility, manipulation, deletion – has become a new form of geopolitical power, and increasingly a weapon of war. The use of data is shifting the gravitational center of geopolitical power.

This geopolitical reordering is taking place not only between states but also between technological giants and States. The Westphalian confidence in the nation state is being eroded by the dominance of these giants which are oblivious to national borders, and which develop technology too quickly for states to understand, let alone regulate. What we are starting to experience is practically an invisible war characterized by data theft, manipulation or suppression, where the chaotic nature of cyberspace leads to a mobilization of nationalism, and where cyberweapons – now part of the military arsenal of countries such as China, Israel, Iran, South Korea, the United States and Russia – increases the unpredictability of political decision-making power. The absence of common standards means undefined risks, leading to a level of international disorder with new borders across which the free flow of information cannot be guaranteed. There is a risk of fragmentation of networks based on the same protocols as the Internet but where the information that circulates is now confined to what government or the big tech companies allow you to see.

Whither Europe in this international landscape?

The new instruments for geopolitical dominance in today’s world are AI, 5 or 6G, quantum, semiconductors, biotechnology, and green energy. Technology investment is increasingly based on the need to encounter Chinese investment. In August 2022, President Joe Biden signed the Chips and Science Act granting 280 billion US$ to the American Tech industry, with 52.7 billion US$ being devoted to semiconductors.

Europe is hardly following suit. European technological trends do not reflect a very optimistic view of its technological influence and power in the future. With regard to R&D invested specifically in Tech, the share of European countries’ investments, relative to total global R&D in Tech, has been declining rapidly for 15 years. Germany went from 8% to 2%; France from 6% to 2%. The European Union invests five times less in private R&D in Tech than the United States. Starting from ground zero 20 years ago, China has now greatly overtaken Europe and may catch up with the US.

The question we face is whether given this virtual arms race, each country will continue to develop its own AI ecosystem with its own (barely visible) borders, or whether mankind can create a globally shared AI space anchored in common rules and assumptions.  The jury is out.

In the beginning, the World Wide Web was supposed to be an open Internet. But the recent trend has been centrifugal. There are many illustrations of this point: from Russian efforts to build its own Internet network to Open AI threatening to withdraw from Europe; from Meta withdrawing its social networks from Europe due to controversies over user data, to Google building an independent technical infrastructure.

This fragmentation advances through a diversity of methods, ranging from content blocking to corporate official declarations.

But could the tide be turning? With the war in Ukraine we have seen a rapid acceleration of use of AI, along with growing competition from the private sector, and this is now triggering more calls for international regulation of AI.  And of course, any adherence to a globally accepted regulatory and technological model entails adherence to a specific set of values and interests.

Faced with this anarchic cyberspace, instead of increasing non-interoperability, it will be better to set up a basis for an Internationalized Domain Name (IDN), encompassing also the Arabic, Cyrillic, Hindi, and Chinese languages, and avoiding linguistic silos. Otherwise, we run the clear risk of undermining the globality of the Internet by a sum of national closed networks.

And how can we ensure a fair technological revolution?  If in the beginning military research was at the origin of technological revolution, we are now seeing that emerging and disruptive technologies  (EDTs), not to mention with dual-use technologies including artificial intelligence, quantum technology or biotechnology are mainly being developed by Big Tech, and sometimes by start-ups.  It is the private sector that is generating military innovation. To the point that private companies are becoming both the instruments and the targets of war.   The provision by Elon Musk of Starlink to the Ukrainian army is the most recent illustration of this situation. This makes it almost compulsory for governments to work in lockstep with the private sector, at the risk of missing the next technological revolution.

The AI war

At the center of AI war is the fight for standardization, which allows a technological ecosystem to operate according to common, interoperable standards. The government or economic operator that writes the rules of the game will automatically influence the balance of power and gain a competitive economic advantage. In a globalized world, we need however not continued fragmentation or an AI arms race but a new international Pact. Not however a Gentlemen’s Pact based on goodwill because goodwill simply does not exist in our eclectic, multipolar international (dis)order. We need a regulatory AI pact that, instead of increasing polarization in a difficult context characterized by a race for strategic autonomy, war, pandemics, climate change and other economic crises, reflects a common humanity and equal partnerships. Such an approach will lead to joint investment in green technology and biotechnologies with no need of national cyberspace borders.

EU AI Act

Now the emergence of ChatGPT has posed a challenge for EU policymakers in defining how such advanced Artificial Intelligence should be addressed within the framework of the EU’s AI regulation.

An example of a foundation model is ChatGPT developed by OpenAI which has been widely used as a foundation for a variety of natural language processing tasks, including text completion, translation, summarization, and more. It serves as a starting point for building more specialized models tailored to specific applications. According to the EU AI Act, these foundations models must adhere to transparency obligations, providing technical documentation and respecting copyright laws related to data mining activities.  But we shall take into consideration that the regulatory choices surrounding advanced artificial intelligence, exemplified by the treatment of models like ChatGPT under the EU’s AI regulation, carry significant geopolitical implications.

The EU’s regulatory stance on this aspect will shape its position in the global race for technological leadership. A balance must be struck between fostering innovation and ensuring ethical, transparent, and accountable use of AI. It is this regulatory framework that will influence how attractive the EU becomes for AI research, development, and investment.

Stricter regulations on high-impact foundational models may impact the competitiveness of EU-based companies in the global AI market. It could either spur innovation by pushing companies to develop more responsible and secure AI technologies or potentially hinder competitiveness if the regulatory burden is perceived as too restrictive.

At international level the EU’s regulatory choices would influence the development of international standards for AI. If the EU adopts a robust and widely accepted regulatory framework, it may encourage other regions and countries to follow suit, fostering global cooperation in addressing the challenges associated with advanced AI technologies.

The treatment of AI models under the regulation can have implications for data governance and privacy standards. Regulations addressing data usage, transparency, and protection are critical not only for AI development but also for safeguarding individuals’ privacy and rights.

The EU’s AI regulations would have impact its relationships with other countries, particularly those with differing regulatory approaches. The alignment or divergence in AI regulations could become a factor in trade negotiations and geopolitical alliances.

Last but least, the regulatory decisions will reflect the EU’s pursuit of strategic technological autonomy. By establishing control over the development and deployment of advanced AI, the EU intends to reinforce its strategic autonomy and reduce dependence on non-European technologies, ensuring that its values and standards are embedded in AI systems used within its borders.

The EU AI Act can influence to the ongoing global dialogue on AI governance. It may influence discussions in international forums, where countries are working to develop shared principles for the responsible use of AI.

The EU’s regulatory choices regarding advanced AI models like ChatGPT are intertwined with broader geopolitical dynamics, influencing technological leadership, international standards, data governance, and global cooperation in the AI domain.

We have noticed that a few days before the discussion on the final format of EU AI Act, the OECD made an adjustment to its definition of AI,  in anticipation of the European Union’s AI regulation demonstrate a commitment to keeping pace with the evolving landscape of AI technologies.

The revised definition of AI by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) appears to be a significant step in aligning global perspectives on artificial intelligence. The updated definition, designed to embrace technological progress and eliminate human-centric limitations, demonstrates a dedication to staying abreast of AI’s rapid evolution.

G7

At international level, we can notice that the  G7 also reached urgent Agreement on AI Code of Conduct!  In a significant development, the G7 member countries have unanimously approved a groundbreaking AI Code of Conduct. This marks a critical milestone as the principles laid out by the G7 pertain to advanced AI systems, encompassing foundational models and generative AI, with a central focus on enhancing the safety and trustworthiness of this transformative technology.

In my view, it is imperative to closely monitor the implementation of these principles and explore the specific measures that will be essential to their realization. The success of this Code of Conduct greatly depends on its effective implementation. These principles are established to guide behavior, ensure compliance, and safeguard against potential risks. Specifically, we require institutions with the authority and resources to enforce the rules and hold violators accountable. This may involve inspections, audits, fines, and other enforcement mechanisms but also educating about these principles, their implications, and how to comply with them is essential. It will be essential to ensure regular monitoring of compliance and reporting mechanisms that can provide insights into the effectiveness of the regulations. Data collection and analysis are crucial for making informed decisions and adjustments. Periodic reviews and updates are necessary to keep pace with developments. Effective implementation often necessitates collaboration among governments, regulatory bodies, industry stakeholders, and the public. Transparent communication about these principles is crucial to build trust and ensure that citizens understand the rules.

As the AI landscape evolves, it becomes increasingly vital for regulators and policymakers to remain attuned to the latest developments in this dynamic field. Active engagement with AI experts and a readiness to adapt regulatory frameworks are prerequisites for ensuring that AI technologies are harnessed to their full potential while effectively mitigating potential risks. An adaptable and ongoing regulatory approach is paramount in the pursuit of maximizing the benefits of AI and effectively addressing the challenges it presents.

Some brief conclusions

First, the ideological differences between countries on whether and how to regulate AI will have broader geopolitical consequences for managing AI and information technology in the years to come. Control over strategic resources, such as data, software, and hardware has become important for all nations. This is demonstrated by discussions over international data transfers, resources linked to cloud computing, the use of open-source software, and so on.

Secondly, the strategic competition for control of cyberspace and AI seems at least for now to increase fragmentation, mistrust, and geopolitical competition, and as such poses enormous challenges to the goal of establishing an agreed approach to Artificial Intelligence based on respect for human rights.

Thirdly, despite this, there is a glimmer of light emerging. To some extent values are evolving into an ideological approach that aims to ensure a human rights-centered approach to the role and use of AI. Put differently, an alliance is gingerly forming around a human rights-oriented view of socio-technical governance, embraced, and encouraged by like-minded democratic nations: Europe, the USA, Japan, India. These regions have an opportunity to set the direction through greater coordination in developing evaluation and measurement tools that contribute to credible AI regulation, risk management, and privacy-enhancing technologies. Both the EU AI Act and the US Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2022 or US Act for example, require organizations to perform impact assessments of their AI systems before and after deployment, including providing more detailed descriptions on data, algorithmic behavior, and forms of oversight. India is taking the first steps in the same direction.

The three regions are starting to understand the need to avoid the fragmentation of technological ecosystems, and that securing AI alignment at the international level is likely to be the major challenge of our century.

Fourthly, undoubtedly, AI will continue to revolutionize society in the coming decades. However, it remains uncertain whether the world’s countries can agree on how technology should be implemented for the greatest possible societal benefit or what should be the relationship between governments and Big Tech.

Finally, no matter how AI governance will be finally designed, the way in which it is done must be understandable to the average citizen, to businesses, and practising policy makers and regulators today confronted with a plethora of initiatives at all levels. Al regulations and standards need to be in line with our reality. Taking AI to the next level means increasing the digital prowess of global citizens, fixing the rules for the market power of tech giants, and understanding that transparency is part of the responsible governance of AI.

The governance of AI of tomorrow will be defined by the art of finding bridges today! If AI research and development remain unregulated, ensuring adherence to ethical standards becomes a challenging task. Relying solely on guidelines may not be sufficient, as guidelines lack enforceability. To prevent AI research from posing significant risks to safety and security, there’s a need to consider more robust measures beyond general guidance.

One potential solution is to establish a framework that combines guidelines with certain prescriptive rules. These rules could set clear boundaries and standards for the development and deployment of AI systems. They might address specific ethical considerations, safety protocols, and security measures, providing a more structured approach to ensure responsible AI practices.

However, a major obstacle lies in the potential chaos resulting from uncoordinated regulations across different countries. This lack of harmonization can create challenges for developers, impede international collaboration, and limit the overall benefits of AI research and development. To address this issue, a global entity like the United Nations could play a significant role in coordinating efforts and establishing a cohesive international framework.

A unified approach to AI regulation under the auspices of the UN could help mitigate the competition in regulation or self-regulation among different nations. Such collaboration would enable the development of common standards that respect cultural differences but provide a foundational framework for ethical and responsible AI. This approach would not only foster global cooperation but also streamline processes for developers, ensuring they can navigate regulations more seamlessly across borders.

In conclusion, a combination of guidelines, prescriptive rules, and international collaboration, potentially spearheaded by a global entity like the United Nations, could contribute to a more cohesive and effective regulatory framework for AI research and development, addressing ethical concerns, safety risks, and fostering international collaboration.

(Cristina Vanberghen is a professor at EUI Florence. She has been a senior expert at the EU commission and worked at the Stanford Center for Internet. Views expressed are personal and exclusive to India Narrative)

ALSO READ: NASA Chief Says US Ready to Help India Build Own Space Station

Categories
-Top News World World News

World is much more than Europe, says Lavrov

The Russian Foreign Minister was speaking at the Primakov Readings International Forum in Moscow on Monday….reports Asian Lite News

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov cited the statement of India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishanakar while elaborating on the change in global structure and multipolarity due to the rise of players like Global South and Global East.

He quoted Jaishankar’s remarks that the “world is much more than Europe” and the “world is much more than the West”.

The Russian Foreign Minister was speaking at the Primakov Readings International Forum in Moscow on Monday.

“The key difference of the current edition of multipolarity is the chance to acquire genuinely global proportions, relying on the fundamental principle of the UN Charter: the sovereign equality of states. Previously, decisions of global importance were driven by a small group of countries with the predominant voice coming from the Western community, for obvious reasons,” the Russian Foreign Ministry quoted Lavrov as saying at the event.

It is pertinent to note that EAM Jaishankar while defending India’s position to buy Russian oil amid the conflict in Ukraine had made a similar statement.

“Europe has to grow out of the mindset that Europe’s problems are the world’s problems but the world’s problems are not Europe’s problems,” Jaishankar had stated.

Speaking further, Lavrov said that today new players representing the Global South and Global East have stepped onto the international political stage and their numbers are growing.

“We rightfully call them the Global Majority. They are strengthening their sovereignty in addressing pressing issues, demonstrating independence, and prioritising their national interests rather than someone else’s whims,” Lavrov said.

He added, “To back this up, I will cite my Indian colleague, Minister for External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar who said that the world is much more than just Europe. Clearly, this statement means that the world is much more than the West. Russia consistently advocates the democratisation of relations between countries and a fairer distribution of global benefits”. (ANI)

ALSO READ: Sunak praises ‘competitive visa regime’

Categories
-Top News Europe

Italy, Albania Forge Strategic Partnership to Tackle Migration

The European Commission has backed Italy’s efforts to find a common European solution for migrant-related problems, but it stopped short on Tuesday of endorsing the deal between Italy and Albania…reports Asian Lite News

A new plan jointly announced by Italy and Albania aimed at curbing the number of would-be refugees landing on Italy’s shores could serve as a “model” for Europe’s efforts to grapple with migration-related issues, Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said.

Speaking to reporters, Meloni on Tuesday added that the plan “strengthens the strategic partnership between Italy and Albania with three objectives: combat human trafficking, prevent irregular migrant flows and receive only people who truly have the right to international protection in Europe”.

According to the UNHCR, Italy is set to receive the highest number of refugees since at least 2016. Nearly 145,000 refugees have landed in Italy so far this year, up from 105,000 last year. The total in 2016 was just more than 180,000.

The UNHCR said that Italy is by far the most common European landing spot for refugees from Africa, the Middle East and Asia, Xinhua news agency reported.

The memorandum of understanding signed on Monday by Meloni and Albania’s Prime Minister Edi Rama states that Italy will construct two migrant reception centres in Albania. The centres will process migrants rescued in the Mediterranean Sea but will not receive those who make it to Italy’s shores on their own, nor minors, pregnant women or those in fragile health.

The financial aspects of the five-year agreement were not immediately available.

Albania and Italy are separated by around 100 km of sea at their closest points. But Albania is not a member of the EU, which means that — unlike Italy — it can set its own policies on migration.

Last year, Meloni lobbied for the EU member states to develop a more collaborative policy on migration. So far, those efforts have centered on sharing the costs of migrant processing, helping to settle asylum seekers that have been processed, patrolling the seas to curb the number of arrivals, and sponsoring economic development initiatives in Africa and beyond to make it more attractive for potential refugees to stay at their homes.

The European Commission has backed Italy’s efforts to find a common European solution for migrant-related problems, but it stopped short on Tuesday of endorsing the deal between Italy and Albania.

“We are in contact with the Italian authorities,” Commission spokeswoman Anitta Hipper said. 

“We have asked Italy for details of the migration agreement with Albania. Before commenting further, we need to understand what the exact intention of the agreement is.”

In Italy, the deal elicited mixed reviews. 

Elly Schlein, Leader of the Opposition center-left Democratic Party, argued that the plan “seems in open breach of international and European law”. 

ALSO READ-Norway Temporarily Withdraws from CFE in Response to Russia

Categories
-Top News Europe UK News

Tory MP facing suspension after bullying probe

Parliament’s Independent Expert Panel (IEP) found Mr Bone broke Parliament’s sexual misconduct rules by indecently exposing himself to the staffer during an overseas trip…reports Asian Lite News

Parliament’s behaviour watchdog has recommended Conservative MP Peter Bone be suspended for six weeks for bullying and sexual misconduct. It follows a complaint made to the body by a former member of staff, over alleged behaviour which took place over 10 years ago. The suspension will have to be voted on by the House of Commons to be approved. It would trigger a recall petition that could potentially lead to a by-election in Mr Bone’s Wellingborough seat. In a statement, the former staff member said he felt “a sense of relief and vindication” at the watchdog’s findings, adding that his experience “continues to affect my life to this day”. Bone has denied the allegations, calling them “without foundation”.

Parliament’s Independent Expert Panel (IEP) found Mr Bone broke Parliament’s sexual misconduct rules by indecently exposing himself to the staffer during an overseas trip. It also upheld five allegations of bullying, including “instructing, or physically forcing, the complainant to put his hands in his lap when Mr Bone was unhappy with him or his work”. It also found he “verbally belittled, ridiculed, abused and humiliated” him, and “repeatedly physically struck and threw things” at him, including hitting him with his hand or an object such as a pencil or a rolled-up document. It also upheld an allegation Bone “repeatedly pressurised” the staffer to give him a massage in the office. It found this was bullying, but not sexual misconduct. Bone denied the accusations throughout and appealed against its findings, arguing the investigation had been flawed. However, his appeal was dismissed by a sub-panel, which said the investigation had been carried out correctly.

According to the report, the complainant had kept a detailed log of Mr Bone’s behaviour at the time, and had submitted “compelling, nuanced and plausible” evidence. It also found his account of events was backed up by witnesses at work, and family members with whom he had spoken about his experiences. In a statement released on Monday after the watchdog released its final report, Mr Bone said the allegations were “false and untrue”. He added that the probe by the IEP – the body set up in June 2020 to examine bullying and sexual misconduct complaints against MPs – was “flawed” and “procedurally unfair”. The investigation was triggered following a complaint made in October 2021 with a prior complaint to the Conservative Party – made in 2017 – unresolved. According to its report, the IEP found that at this stage, the Tory party investigation had “apparently not progressed very far”.

The panel formally began a full investigation in August 2022, with the staffer withdrawing the complaint to the party to stop the two inquiries running in parallel. The Conservative Party said it had opened an investigation into the complaint, but “the complainant withdrew from the process before the case was heard”. In his statement, the complainant called on the Conservatives and other parties to review their complaints procedures “with full independent oversight”. “It should not take five years for a complaint to be processed,” he added.

ALSO READ-Tory Conference Begins With Towns Funding Pledge

Categories
-Top News Europe UK News

UK to deploy troops, warships in Northern Europe

It said a carrier strike group led by warship HMS Queen Elizabeth would lead the UK’s contribution to Nato’s most ambitious drill since the Cold War, Exercise Steadfast Defender, which is planned for next year...reports Asian Lite News

Britain has pledged to send 20,000 troops to northern Europe next year in a drive to keep Russia at bay in the Baltic Sea and prevent sabotage of a “spaghetti” of undersea cables.Prime Minister Rishi Sunak made the commitment at a summit in Sweden of the 10-nation Joint Expeditionary Force, a group of Baltic and North Sea militaries that is stepping up drills to deter Russia.Ukraine was invited on Friday to observe the group’s exercises as President Volodymyr Zelenskyy urged its leaders to focus on hybrid threats from Russia this winter.The summit on the island of Gotland took place after a mysterious leak on a pipeline from Finland to Estonia that led to suggestions of sabotage.The Nord Stream gas pipelines were similarly damaged last year in a still-unexplained incident under the Baltic, raising alarms about the safety of key infrastructure.“There is a spaghetti of cables, pipelines and infrastructure on the seabed that is absolutely fundamental for data traffic … and everything that is controlled digitally,” said Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson.He said the 10 countries – the UK, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Iceland and the Netherlands – had assigned their defence ministers to discuss how to protect undersea infrastructure.Downing Street said the UK would send 20,000 troops, eight warships and a fleet of helicopters for exercises, air policing and cold weather training in the region as part of a drive to “help detect, deter and defuse traditional and hybrid threats”.It said a carrier strike group led by warship HMS Queen Elizabeth would lead the UK’s contribution to Nato’s most ambitious drill since the Cold War, Exercise Steadfast Defender, which is planned for next year.

“Northern Europe is vital to our national security, which is why it’s more important than ever that we work with our Joint Expeditionary Force neighbours to protect our backyard and deter damaging hybrid threats,” Mr Sunak said. He said the conflict between Israel and Hamas showed “yet again that our security cannot be taken for granted … it is vital that we stand united against those with malign intent”.The Joint Expeditionary Force is planning an exercise of its own called Joint Protector next year.

The group’s leaders said it “must be ready to respond” in scenarios that could fall below the threshold of Nato’s Article 5 mutual defence guarantee.What is known as hybrid warfare includes acts of sabotage, cyber attacks and economic threats that have all been linked to Russia. Moscow’s forces repeatedly pounded Ukraine’s energy grid in a drone and missile barrage last winter.“Before winter comes, we should all focus firstly on hybrid terrorist threats from Russia,” Mr Zelenskyy told the summit by video link.“We saw last year what the Kremlin was betting on, namely strikes on the energy infrastructure to destroy the basis of modern life. We predict that this winter Russia will try to repeat its terror tactics, only on a larger scale.”Sweden is still waiting for Turkey and Hungary to approve its Nato membership application, more than a year after it asked to join. It signed a separate declaration with the UK on Friday committing to a “regular drumbeat” of exercises with its military partners and to use the JEF as an “additional tier of security” for northern Europe.Finnish President Sauli Niinisto, whose country joined Nato in April, said Sweden should join “as soon as possible” but said Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was “the only one who has, in his head, the solution”.

ALSO READ-Thousands join pro-Palestine rally in London, Europe