19 December 2024
Mr. President,
We thank Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and the briefers for their contributions to the discussion.
The Russian Federation attaches great importance to the development of advanced technologies designed to serve the good of humankind, including Artificial Intelligence (AI). At the same time, we are invited today to discuss AI in the context of threats to international peace and security. Recalling the previous discussion, I’m sure we can agree on one thing – we must not allow AI to dominate human beings and human values. But when it comes to the threats, we may face on the path towards this, the Council is far from being unanimous.
I would like to begin by saying that it was quite entertaining to read the Presidency’s concept note. The focus is precisely what we expected to see. The authors are trying to figure out how they can develop an international system of AI regulation, while at the same time making sure that certain industries or States do not fall under this regulation. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? In this context, I would like to remind you of similar approaches to addressing other topics, as the same things showed up today on full display.
If we talk about the international trade system, for example, we can recall the Atlantic Charter of August 1941, which contained a reference to the principles of non-discrimination and market efficiency, which then formed the premise for the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, and then the WTO. And what do we see today? The US that was at the origin of this process – having secured its leadership in world trade and being unwilling to put up with its waning dominance – is now blocking the work of the WTO, expanding practices of using illegitimate sanctions and other unlawful means to deal with its competitors.
Another example: the fight against climate change. American scientists and politicians have indeed made a significant contribution to developing a sort of religion of climate alarmism. And what do we see today? Washington is not hesitating to disrupt the long and hard-won global climate cooperation in those areas where it contradicts the US interests. And one more interesting fact – in recent years, the United States has only increased the extraction of hydrocarbons in its territory and expanded the export thereof, which was done, of course, with resort to instruments of unfair competition.
Let’s take a broader example – for many years we have been assured that the process of globalization will bring the benefit of development to peoples if this process is governed by the principles of democracy, and the laws of the free market and inviolability of private property. Thus, so-called “Summits for Democracy” were held. However, today there is no hiding from anyone that the USA is trampling on the principles and foundations of sovereign equality, as well as on the inviolability of public property, which became clear after Washington together with London and Brussels had unabashedly plundered other countries’ gold and foreign exchange reserves. As a result – as President Vladimir Putin said – in the existing American-style world order there is only one rule left, which is “there are no rules at all.”
Mr. President,
Of course, we understand what the US is guided by when reflecting on the fate of the entire humanity in the era of rapidly developing AI. However, it is now important for the country that initiated today’s discussion to clearly realize that if they continue with approaches of the past – imposing rules on others while simultaneously freeing themselves from these rules – they will repeat their historical mistakes made on the path to the development of global cooperation. If we look at the US initiative on AI at the General Assembly, we will see that it is weighed down with the same old mistakes. We are referring to US-sponsored UNGA resolution 78/265 on AI. It talks very eloquently about providing “a fair, open, inclusive and non-discriminatory business environment, economic and commercial activities.”
Unfortunately, in practice, the authors of the resolution continue to unscrupulously get rid of competitors. Thus, on December 11, the American Bureau of Industry and Security decided to blacklist another four Russian IT companies. One of them is NtechLab, which specializes in facial recognition. The company is known for the fact that its team was one of the five finalists in the Megaface competition organized by the University of Washington, having beaten the team of developers from Google. How do you like that kind of “fair and inclusive environment”? No colleagues, if such things go on, progress – as was the case after the agrarian and then the industrial revolutions – will again be achieved only in the “flourishing garden” that will only care about how to extinguish the flames “in the jungle”.
Mr. President,
We have an opportunity to pull our efforts together and prevent the Global South from falling behind, which will help us avoid new forms of colonialism and discrimination. It is precisely the aggravation of existing technological inequalities that constitutes one of the main threats to the development of AI, including threats to international peace and security.
The transition to AI-based innovations requires bridging the so-called “digital divide” in order to reduce poverty and facilitate sustainable development. And this divide is indeed large. After all, according to forecasts, global public investment in AI could reach $632 billion by 2028. And the undisputed leaders in this area are the US, the countries Western Europe, Japan and South Korea. I don’t even mention the private sector, primarily major tech companies, such as Microsoft, Meta, Alphabet and Amazon, which are planning to allocate about a quarter of a trillion dollars to creating AI infrastructure by 2025. Of course, the countries of the Global South have their own leaders in this area as well – namely, our BRICS partners China and India. But the majority of developing countries do not have the necessary resources for such acceleration.
This acceleration requires international cooperation aimed at transferring technologies, developing human capital, building the necessary infrastructure and improving the quality of jobs.
In this regard, the Russian Federation, as part of the group of like-minded organizations established upon the initiative of China, participated in drafting UNGA resolution 78/311 on “Enhancing international cooperation on capacity-building of artificial intelligence.”
This is in line with the priorities of our National AI Strategy. We intend to provide the countries of the Global South and the Global East with technical assistance, and are planning to carry out joint projects based on equal access to knowledge and technologies. It is on the basis of these approaches that Moscow held the “AI Journey” conference last week. After all, having our own latest generation AI developments is one of the key conditions for scientific and technological sovereignty of our countries. In addition, we would like to announce the launch of the AI Alliance Network that will include national associations and development institutions in the field of AI from BRICS countries and other interested states. At the same time, we are convinced that the algorithms of AI systems must be trustworthy, i.e. they must be understandable, open and unbiased; and they must be developed with account of the cultural and national peculiarities of countries and each civilization, and in accordance with their history, identity and traditions.
As for the coordinating role of the United Nations in AI development, we support it, which is in line with the provisions of the Kazan Declaration of the XVI BRICS Summit of October 23. We regard such a role as a counterweight to various non-inclusive formats with politicized agendas and ad-hoc coalitions. At the same time, the key thing for us is reaching universal agreements, with the leading role of States therein and on the basis of an equal dialogue between them, as well as with due account of all legitimate interests of the participants in the negotiation process.
As is understandable from our previous arguments, we do not regard the Security Council as the appropriate platform for addressing AI as an individual subject. It is a global issue, and it would be wrong to limit the discussion to the UNSC. The Summit for the Future has already outlined the contours of the emerging “infrastructure” for addressing this subject in the UN system, and the Security Council is not part of that infrastructure.
Mr. President,
Given that some colleagues insist on the need to discuss the military aspects of the use of AI in the UNSC, we would like to recall that there are also inclusive specialized platforms for this purpose – first and foremost, the Group of Governmental Experts on lethal autonomous weapons systems, which operates within the framework of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). By the way, this group is yet to come up with a common understanding of the most basic issues, even terminology. We welcome the consideration of this topic also within the United Nations Disarmament Commission, but hope there will be no duplication of the efforts of other mechanisms. We believe that time is still unripe to discuss the development of rules for responsible behavior with regard to weapons systems using AI. Against this background, it is at least premature to bring discussions on such sensitive topics – I’m not even mentioning the issue of the impact of AI technologies on other non-proliferation and disarmament aspects – into other formats. Attempts to impose on the Security Council approaches and attitudes of certain States, as well as attempts to substitute international legal instruments with them, will hardly bring us closer to developing common approaches to addressing the military aspects of AI.
Thank you.