AI and the Geopolitical Chessboard
Countering AI-Driven Information Warfare in the Indo-Pacific and developing an AI framework for International Relations
Welcome back, hearty readers.
This week, I have two compelling reports to share with you all. The topics include:
How does AI transform information warfare and how can the US counter China’s AI-driven disinformation campaigns in the Indo-Pacific?
How should we analyze AI in the context of international relations?
Quick Tanks is a weekly collection and summary of the latest long-form analytic content on the topics of US defense, force structure, innovation, and policy considerations. We strive to aggregate all of the key sources of analysis and present brief, neutral summaries to help keep you informed. Should you feel inclined to learn more about any study, please reference the full report via the links provided.
The sponsor of the newsletter is the Hudson Institute’s Center for Defense Concepts + Technology.
Tank you for sharing and subscribing, and happy reading.
The Future of Indo-Pacific Information Warfare
Challenges and Prospects from the Rise of AI
By Russell Hanson, Adam R. Grissom, and Christopher A. Mouton
RAND Corporation
Link to PDF; Link to Report Page
Focus: The report addresses the transformative impact of AI in the domain of information warfare, particularly in the context of the PRC's ambitions in the Indo-Pacific. It focuses on understanding the implications of AI-driven disinformation campaigns and devising strategies for effective mitigation to safeguard national security and regional stability.Analysis: Utilizing a mix of case studies, the report analyzes instances of PRC's opportunistic subversion and its long-term strategic investment in AI to dominate the information sphere. The authors also analyze the cognitive factors at play between Large Language Models (LLMs) and disinformation.Argument: The advent of AI technologies, especially LLMs, has exponentially expanded the capabilities for conducting sophisticated disinformation campaigns, significantly impacting the strategic information warfare landscape. The PRC's concerted efforts in this domain aim to weaken US alliances, expand its influence, and integrate the region into a China-centric order. This evolving battleground necessitates urgent and adaptive countermeasures by the US and its allies to protect the integrity of information and maintain strategic balance in the Indo-Pacific.Insights: The use of AI in crafting convincing narratives leverages cognitive biases, such as cognitive fluency bias — when individuals confuse refined presentation with genuine authenticity —, making disinformation more effective. However, AI technologies also hold the potential to automate the detection and counteraction of disinformation efforts.Recommendations: The authors recommend that the US enhance its counter-disinformation efforts through continuous monitoring of the information environment with advanced AI tools, the issuance of timely warnings to the public to foster resilience against misinformation, and bolstering international partnerships to share intelligence and strategies.In an era where AI and digital interconnectivity redefine global interactions, this RAND report underscores the transformative impact of AI on information warfare. Especially in the context of the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) ambitions in the Indo-Pacific region, the report highlights the urgent need for comprehensive strategies to navigate the evolving threats to national security.
China’s Pursuit of Information Dominance
The authors emphasize the PRC's strategic endeavors to achieve information dominance, framing it as a cornerstone of modern warfare alongside air and sea dominance. The report delineates how the PRC, through a blend of psychological warfare, public opinion manipulation, and legal warfare (collectively known as the Three Warfares), seeks to undermine US influence while expanding its own geopolitical reach. Particularly concerning is China’s manipulation of social media platforms, exemplified by covert operations to promote pro-PRC content through influencers and media outlets.
“There have been numerous recent examples that highlight China’s application of opportunistic subversion in the information environment. The Chinese consulate in New York is accused of discretely paying influencers on social media to promote the Beijing Winter Olympics. Similarly, Chinese state-run news and media companies have paid influencers and creators—both monetarily and with lucrative views—to run pro-PRC stories on their channels. The blurred lines between the PRC and Chinese social media companies potentially gives China access to troves of data on the U.S. public as well as influences what content the U.S. public does and does not see. Members of the PRC Ministry of Public Security were recently charged with operating troll farms to target and attack dissidents whose views were unfavorable to the PRC. In 2020, Twitter disclosed ‘23,750 accounts that comprise . . . [a] highly engaged core network’ and ‘approximately 150,000 accounts that were designed to boost this content, e.g. the amplifiers.”
Such operations not only exploit digital ecosystems for narrative control but also signal a sophisticated approach to information warfare aimed at weakening US alliances and embedding a Chinese-centric world order. The PRC's tactical opportunism, as evidenced by its activities in Southeast Asia and beyond, represents a concerted effort to disrupt and dislocate the US-led coalition in the Indo-Pacific, posing a formidable challenge to maintaining regional stability and balance.
AI-Driven Disinformation Leverages Cognitive Biases
From a psychological perspective, the report explains how certain cognitive biases make AI-driven disinformation particularly dangerous. Specifically, cognitive fluency bias is when people mistakenly attribute authenticity to content that is presented articulately. In other words, the mere existence of statistics, visuals, or a well-organized format — a simple task for generative AI — can make completely fabricated content appear compelling. Moreover, the “illusory-truth effect” occurs when the repetition of information makes the information appear genuine. In this way, a state-run botnet along with AI-generated content on social media platforms is especially threatening.
A Three-Pronged Strategy to Counter Disinformation Warfare
Continuous Monitoring of the Information Environment
The authors advocate for a three-pronged strategy to combat AI-driven disinformation, beginning with persistent supervision of the information environment. This strategy emphasizes the critical importance of early detection and analysis of disinformation campaigns, leveraging the Observe-Orient-Decide-Act (OODA) loop for strategic advantage. However, the effectiveness of existing disinformation detection mechanisms, like Europe’s Rapid Alert System and the US State Department’s Global Engagement Center, are hampered by challenges such as a lack of trust and inadequate political support.
“The advent of new AI and machine learning technologies offer an opportunity to enhance observation capabilities by monitoring and analyzing vast amounts of data to help detect patterns and anomalies that could signal a subversion attempt or disinformation campaign. In practice, the development of specialized units within the military or intelligence communities dedicated to information warfare can also provide the expertise needed to interpret and act on this data.
The existing network of joint, intergovernmental, and interagency relationships supporting information operations in the Indo-Pacific region is a product of past strategic priorities, which significantly differ from current needs. The authorities and permissions governing these relationships—including Title 10 and Title 50, along with the support systems that sustain them—are not fully aligned in the region. This misalignment creates operational challenges and underscores the necessity for new types of collaborations with interagency partners. Recognizing this, the National Security Strategy specifically calls for an integrated approach and a pivot from the existing structures to those that can effectively synchronize the myriad tools at the nation’s disposal.”
Issuance of Warnings
The second strategic pillar, "Issuance of Advanced Warnings," focuses on the preemptive debunking of false narratives and the promotion of factual information. This pillar aims to build societal resilience against disinformation, mitigating the influence of malign operations by fostering a skeptical and discerning public. The authors emphasize that the issuance of warnings necessitates not only the refutation of misinformation but also the affirmation of credible narratives. Moreover, a warning’s effectiveness depends on the credibility of the entity issuing it. Thus, the report emphasizes that fostering public trust and maintaining the issuing authorities’ integrity are paramount. As with monitoring, the dynamic nature of the information environment demands agility and the integration of AI tools to enhance the timely dissemination of warnings.
Partner Information Operations
The third component of the strategy highlights the indispensability of international cooperation and capacity-building among allies to fortify defenses against information warfare. The strategy advocates for empowering partner nations to independently counter disinformation, equipping these forces with the knowledge, strategies, and tools to operate effectively. More concretely, the report recommends the creation of a shared database to document and analyze the PRC’s information manipulation efforts. Such a resource would serve as a foundation for developing targeted and effective countermeasures. In this way, a collaborative approach can leverage local insights and collective expertise to thwart disinformation in the Indo-Pacific.
I highly recommend reading the full report to better understand how AI is transforming the scope of information warfare and the best ways to counter disinformation.
AI, Geopolitics and the Need for a New Analytical Framework?
RUSI Disruptive Technologies Workshop Report
By Dr. Pia Hüsch
Royal United Services Institute
Link to PDF; Link to Report Page
This RUSI report encapsulates the collective insights from a 10-person workshop, aimed at discussing the major questions that AI poses to the international community and the analysis thereof within the context of international relations (IR). The report underscores the importance of developing a nuanced understanding of AI's implications for geopolitics, highlighting that despite the rapid advancements in technology, significant ambiguities regarding its impact and the methodologies for its analysis within the IR paradigm persist.
AI's Impact on Geopolitics and International Relations
The report discusses the spectrum of perspectives regarding AI's potential to reshape global dynamics. Specifically, the discourse highlights a pivotal contention: whether AI will merely augment the existing power structures, bolstering the capabilities of current geopolitical actors, or whether it will act as a revolutionary force, fundamentally altering the balance of power and introducing novel paradigms of dominance and dependency.
The workshop participants also emphasized the importance of analyzing AI not only in the short term but in the long term as well. Indeed, much AI discourse is often tied to narratives on US-China competition and other major contemporary trends that can hamper forward-looking perspectives. This section robustly argues for a recalibration of IR analytical lenses, advocating for a more nuanced and forward-thinking engagement with AI, mindful of its capacity to both reinforce and disrupt traditional geopolitical hierarchies.
Learning from Other Technologies
The second chapter of the report delves into the comparative analysis between AI and historical technological innovations, illuminating the debate over AI's distinctiveness and disruptive potential. This nuanced discussion reveals a dichotomy of opinions: while some participants lean on historical analogies to predict AI's trajectory, positing that lessons from past technological upheavals can inform our understanding of AI's future impact, others assert the unparalleled nature of AI.
“Some participants found that the impact of AI is already groundbreaking. They stressed its ability to replace human factors as - unlike other technologies - it is a decision-making technology with a 'degree of agency’. AI's ability to not just replace motor skills - as was the case with previous technologies - but also 'chiefly cognitive skills' was perceived as a decisive difference. As such, AI has the ability to change the quality of decision-making, with implications for the nature of international society and relations.”
This section adeptly contrasts AI with transformative technologies in the nuclear and space contexts, drawing parallels and distinctions that enrich the discourse on AI's potential to reshape societal, economic, and geopolitical fabrics. A noteworthy distinction from nuclear technology is that instead of states owning the emerging technology, private corporations hold the reins in the case of AI. Furthermore, a participant noted that in space technology, a lesson learned is to ignore the hype of advanced, futuristic applications and instead focus on areas with significant investments and adoption, suggesting a similar approach could help navigate practical AI policymaking.
Applying Existing Theories and Frameworks to AI and the Need for a New Concept
The third chapter of the report presents a spectrum of views on the suitability of current IR theories to encompass the complexities introduced by AI. There was agreement among the participants that traditional IR theories—Realism, Constructivism, and Institutionalism— are not completely sufficient in the age of AI, such that either the existing theories needed updates or a new analytical framework is necessitated entirely. However, there remains little clarity as to what that framework or theory should be.
“One scholar argued that 'no single theory, concept or framework can comprehensively and adequately describe, analyze and reflect on the various impacts of AI. Each theory in International Relations can, however, illuminate certain aspects, risks and opportunities of AI, but none can on its own discuss, analyze and reflect on it in a comprehensive manner'. Others agreed, stating that they did not think 'that one single theory, concept or framework can fully capture the impact of Al technologies as they all have their own comparative strengths and weaknesses. For this reason, a multiple theory, concept or framework is the most analytically productive.”
Ultimately, the report encourages a forward-thinking approach to the development of analytical frameworks that can adeptly address the emerging challenges and opportunities posed by AI in the international arena.
To better learn the perspectives and insights shared in the workshop, I urge you to read the full report.