Last week, a Model United Nations conference about AI took place at the Lycée where 1ère and Terminale students following the HGGSP speciality course (History, Geography, Geopolitics & Political Science) with Mrs Poggi and Mrs Samson represented the interests of nearly 20 countries.
Rémi M. (1°4) reports:
John McCarthy, an American computer and cognitive scientist, defines Artificial Intelligence (AI) as “the science and engineering of making intelligent machines, especially intelligent computer programs.” Certainly, the prosaic use of computer gadgets in the 21st century raises numerous alarms for different parties, as well as the impact it has on international interests. In fact, the students of the Lycée Français Charles de Gaulle organising the Model United Nations (MUN: a simulation of real life UN conferences where international matters are discussed between delegates who try to find solutions and agreements between countries) Elynne L. N. (T°2), Héloïse A. (T°4) and Amélie D.-F. (T°1) have chosen Artificial Intelligence as the topic of discourse: how to characterise and define the development of Artificial Intelligence in an ethical and correct manner. “Artificial Intelligence has always existed, however this year (2023), it’s experiencing a much greater acceleration […] especially with Chat GPT and Elon Musk.” [Amélie D.-F.'s quote translated from French]
Students taking the speciality HGGSP from the classes of 1ère to Terminale volunteered to be delegates for 19 different countries, each country represented by 2 students.
United Nations (UN) conferences are divided into different “Phases” which include a range of duties such as the presentation of the problematic, lobbying (a process of oral and written exchanges during which delegates attempt to gain signatures and popularity for their legislational propositions and policies), and finally a conclusion where the delegates each vote in favour, or in opposition, of the final written resolution.
During the lobbying process, different delegates representing their country shared their ideas and interests with each other. Some countries took an economical approach to the subject, for example Japan and South Korea, who wanted to ensure the prosperity of their transnational corporations. “We are taking into account the interests of our companies Sony and NEC,” stated the two delegates of Japan. In addition, countries such as India envisioned a more inclusive economical solution. “We are going to defend the interests of our country but also those of the least developed countries by putting everything related to inclusion, the economy and social emancipation at the heart of our policies.” Other countries saw the conference as an opportunity to gain power. “Anyone who becomes the leader in the sphere of artificial intelligence will become the master of the world.” (Russian Delegate). Finally, more conservative and religious countries, such as Iran, expressed a great concern with the rise of AI and how its international and accessible nature could affect their religious values and influence their culture.
Numerous problems had been raised in the original 28 clauses presented by the delegates after the Lobbying process which sparked fierce rivalry.
Most importantly, the delegates debated how to properly ensure the safety of AI usage around the world. Iran and Russia expressed a mistrust in the principles of the UN and how these principles wouldn't align with their own countries' values and demanded more freedom on the notion of morality in regards to AI usage and censorship. Furthermore, India expressed the incompetence of a policy which opposes discrimination, as this broad term was “relative according to each country.” Western countries such as the UK, United States, as well as Israel, stated that to be part of the UN, countries have to follow international human rights defended by the UN and therefore defined discrimination by the UN’s definition. They also criticised Iran’s radical hate speech towards Homosexuality and Sex workers. Also, the delegates of France and Japan expressed their concern for the limitation of people’s freedom of speech.
Moreover, countries such as China, Russia, Iran, India and Venezuela demanded a more collaborative economic distribution in order to favour smaller Tech Companies instead of the more powerful ones in East Asia and North America. Faced with opposition from mainly the United States, United Kingdom and Israel, the Indian delegate denounced Israel’s hypocrisy, as the country rose to power thanks to economical aid, and then proceeded to vote in opposition of this aid for other developing countries. In addition, after being criticised for not following the UN’s values, the delegates of Iran, as well as other allied countries, denounced the allies of the United States (developed countries) for not cooperating with other UN countries. Furthermore, the US and its allies also wanted to ensure the freedom of their Tech Companies and opposed strict regulation of these companies.
However, the countries did not dispute their concern for the risks of Cyber Terrorism. Although the definition of “a terrorist organisation” was disputed between Israel and Iran, each country expressed a need to ensure technological safety worldwide.
Finally, Japan encouraged the development of AI within UN countries, whilst also ensuring that the country's individual interests were protected. For example, the countries agreed that the education around the usage of AI would be controlled only by the government of each UN member and not by UN policy. As well as this, there was a unanimous agreement on the protection of human workers, and a limitation to the usage of AI in the workforce: AI can only improve work conditions and research and not replace workers.
At the end of the debate, 17/20 countries voted in favour of the final resolution and the edits made during the recent exchanges with only Iran, China and the United Arab Emirates who abstained their vote. Students such as the delegates of the UK, Russia and Turkey were proud to have participated in the LonMUN and expressed a positive attitude towards the final resolution with Turkey stating that the “proposition represented both minority and majority countries.”
Last week, a Model United Nations conference about AI took place at the Lycée where 1ère and Terminale students following the HGGSP speciality course (History, Geography, Geopolitics & Political Science) with Mrs Poggi and Mrs Samson represented the interests of nearly 20 countries.
Rémi M. (1°4) reports:
John McCarthy, an American computer and cognitive scientist, defines Artificial Intelligence (AI) as “the science and engineering of making intelligent machines, especially intelligent computer programs.” Certainly, the prosaic use of computer gadgets in the 21st century raises numerous alarms for different parties, as well as the impact it has on international interests. In fact, the students of the Lycée Français Charles de Gaulle organising the Model United Nations (MUN: a simulation of real life UN conferences where international matters are discussed between delegates who try to find solutions and agreements between countries) Elynne L. N. (T°2), Héloïse A. (T°4) and Amélie D.-F. (T°1) have chosen Artificial Intelligence as the topic of discourse: how to characterise and define the development of Artificial Intelligence in an ethical and correct manner. “Artificial Intelligence has always existed, however this year (2023), it’s experiencing a much greater acceleration […] especially with Chat GPT and Elon Musk.” [Amélie D.-F.'s quote translated from French]
Students taking the speciality HGGSP from the classes of 1ère to Terminale volunteered to be delegates for 19 different countries, each country represented by 2 students.
United Nations (UN) conferences are divided into different “Phases” which include a range of duties such as the presentation of the problematic, lobbying (a process of oral and written exchanges during which delegates attempt to gain signatures and popularity for their legislational propositions and policies), and finally a conclusion where the delegates each vote in favour, or in opposition, of the final written resolution.
During the lobbying process, different delegates representing their country shared their ideas and interests with each other. Some countries took an economical approach to the subject, for example Japan and South Korea, who wanted to ensure the prosperity of their transnational corporations. “We are taking into account the interests of our companies Sony and NEC,” stated the two delegates of Japan. In addition, countries such as India envisioned a more inclusive economical solution. “We are going to defend the interests of our country but also those of the least developed countries by putting everything related to inclusion, the economy and social emancipation at the heart of our policies.” Other countries saw the conference as an opportunity to gain power. “Anyone who becomes the leader in the sphere of artificial intelligence will become the master of the world.” (Russian Delegate). Finally, more conservative and religious countries, such as Iran, expressed a great concern with the rise of AI and how its international and accessible nature could affect their religious values and influence their culture.
Numerous problems had been raised in the original 28 clauses presented by the delegates after the Lobbying process which sparked fierce rivalry.
Most importantly, the delegates debated how to properly ensure the safety of AI usage around the world. Iran and Russia expressed a mistrust in the principles of the UN and how these principles wouldn't align with their own countries' values and demanded more freedom on the notion of morality in regards to AI usage and censorship. Furthermore, India expressed the incompetence of a policy which opposes discrimination, as this broad term was “relative according to each country.” Western countries such as the UK, United States, as well as Israel, stated that to be part of the UN, countries have to follow international human rights defended by the UN and therefore defined discrimination by the UN’s definition. They also criticised Iran’s radical hate speech towards Homosexuality and Sex workers. Also, the delegates of France and Japan expressed their concern for the limitation of people’s freedom of speech.
Moreover, countries such as China, Russia, Iran, India and Venezuela demanded a more collaborative economic distribution in order to favour smaller Tech Companies instead of the more powerful ones in East Asia and North America. Faced with opposition from mainly the United States, United Kingdom and Israel, the Indian delegate denounced Israel’s hypocrisy, as the country rose to power thanks to economical aid, and then proceeded to vote in opposition of this aid for other developing countries. In addition, after being criticised for not following the UN’s values, the delegates of Iran, as well as other allied countries, denounced the allies of the United States (developed countries) for not cooperating with other UN countries. Furthermore, the US and its allies also wanted to ensure the freedom of their Tech Companies and opposed strict regulation of these companies.
However, the countries did not dispute their concern for the risks of Cyber Terrorism. Although the definition of “a terrorist organisation” was disputed between Israel and Iran, each country expressed a need to ensure technological safety worldwide.
Finally, Japan encouraged the development of AI within UN countries, whilst also ensuring that the country's individual interests were protected. For example, the countries agreed that the education around the usage of AI would be controlled only by the government of each UN member and not by UN policy. As well as this, there was a unanimous agreement on the protection of human workers, and a limitation to the usage of AI in the workforce: AI can only improve work conditions and research and not replace workers.
At the end of the debate, 17/20 countries voted in favour of the final resolution and the edits made during the recent exchanges with only Iran, China and the United Arab Emirates who abstained their vote. Students such as the delegates of the UK, Russia and Turkey were proud to have participated in the LonMUN and expressed a positive attitude towards the final resolution with Turkey stating that the “proposition represented both minority and majority countries.”