• HOME
  • ABOUT US
  • CURRENT
  • COMMITTEES
    • NATIONAL BOARD
    • SCIENTIFIC BOARD – INTERNATIONAL
  • ARCHIVE GEOPOLITICA
    • 2026
      • Nr. 1 (110)/2026: ARHITECTURA GEOSTRATEGICĂ – tendințe globale (II)
    • 2025
      • nr.109 (4/2026): ARHITECTURA GEOSTRATEGICĂ – tendințe regionale (I)
      • nr.108 (3/2025): GEOPOLITICĂ ŞI RESURSE
      • Nr. 107 (2/2025): GEOSTRATEGIE ŞI INFRASTRUCTURI CRITICE
      • Nr. 1(106/2025): PRINCIPIUL DOMINOULUI – II –
    • 2024
      • Nr. 4 (105/2024): PRINCIPIUL DOMINOULUI – I –
      • Nr. 3 (104)/2024 Tectonica geopolitică a Mării Negre
      • Nr. 2 (103/2024) Marea Neagră – geopolitică și strategie
      • Nr. 1 (102)/2024 Translații geopolitice (II)
    • 2023
      • nr. 4 (101) Translatii geopolitice (I)
      • NR. 3 (100)/2023 20 DE ANI DE GEOPOLITICĂ ROMÂNEASCĂ
      • NR. 2 (99)/2023 PRESIUNI GEOPOLITICE (II)
      • NR. 1 (98)/2023 PRESIUNI GEOPOLITICE (I)
    • 2022
      • nr. 4 (96-97/2022): Centre de putere. Axe şi falii geopolitice
      • MAREA NEAGRĂ ÎN VORTEXUL GEOPOLITIC (II)
      • MAREA NEAGRĂ ÎN VORTEXUL GEOPOLITIC (I)
      • nr. 1 (92-93/202: Infrastructuri critice emergente II. – Riscuri geopolitice
    • 2021
      • nr. 4 (91/2021): Infrastructuri critice emergente I. – Geopolitică şi rezilienţă
      • nr. 3 (89-90/2021): Inteligenţa Artificială: a cincea dimensiune a geopoliticii
      • nr. 87-88/2021
      • nr. 1 (86/2021): Geopolitică şi (in)securitate (I) – Pandemie şi securitate
    • 2020
      • nr. 4 (85/2020): Amurgul democraţiei? Punct …şi de la capăt (II)
      • nr. 3 (84/2020): 2020: Lumea în schimbare. Punct …şi de la capăt (I)
      • nr. 2 (83/2020): Orientul Mijlociu Extins – între revoltă şi haos constructiv (II)
      • nr. 1 (82/2020): Orientul Mijlociu Extins – între revoltă şi haos constructiv (I)
    • 2019
      • nr. 4 (81/2019): Trianon: 1920-2020
      • nr. 3 (80/2019): Pakistan: a Rising Global Player
      • nr. 2 (78-79/2019): Marea Neagră – Strategii 2020
      • nr. 1 (77/2019): România2019.eu
    • 2018
      • nr. 4 (76/2018): România 1918-2018
      • nr. 3 (75/2018): Orientul Îndepărtat …de la Doctrina Monroe la America First
      • nr. 2 (74/2018): De la Conflictele îngheţate… la Războiul hibrid (II)
      • nr. 1 (73/2018): De la Conflictele îngheţate… la Războiul hibrid (I)
    • 2017
      • nr. 4 (72/2017): Africa „fluidă”
      • nr. 3 (71/2017): Orientul Mijlociu – diplomaţie, geopolitică, securitate
      • nr. 1 (70/2017): Proiecţii geopolitice pe Falia Eurasiatică
      • nr. 1 (68-69/2017): Caucaz – reconciliere şi reconstrucţie
    • 2016
      • nr. 4 (67/2016): Muntenegru – geopolitică şi securitate
      • nr. 3 (66/2016): Resetarea Uniunii Europene
      • nr. 2 (64-65/2016): Provocări geostrategice în estul Europei
      • nr. 1 (63/2016): MENA – între terorism şi securitate
    • 2015
      • nr. 4 (62/2015): Target: Europe!
      • nr. 3 (61/2015): Securitatea cibernetică: geopolitică, riscuri, strategii
      • nr. 2 (60/2015): Faţetele Democraţiei
      • nr. 1 (59/2015 EN): The rise of Saudi Arabia – from regional to international
      • nr. 1 (59/2015 RO): Ascensiunea Arabiei Saudite – de la regional la internaţional
    • 2014
      • nr. 4 (58/2014): GeoIntelligence: geopolitica informaţiilor
      • nr. 3 (57/2014): Gambitul Reginei: geopolitică la Marea Neagră
      • nr. 2 (56/2014: Noul Drum al Mătăsii – provocări şi certitudini
      • nr. 1 (54-55/2014): Lumea în mişcare (Redesenând harta lumii…?!)
    • 2013
      • nr. 4 (53/2013): Cyber Security – Informaţia este o armă!
      • nr. 3 (52/2013): Washington – Beijing – Moscova: Triunghiul geopolitic al viitorului
      • nr. 2 (51/2013): Strategii nucleare şi de securitate
      • nr. 4 (48/2012): Turcia – Diplomaţie şi putere
      • nr. 1 (49-50/2013): Europa la răscruce. De la Statul Naţional la federalizare
    • 2012
      • nr. 3 (47/2012): Irak – strategii energetice şi de securitate
      • nr. 2 (46/2012): Regiunea Golfului – o perspectivă geopolitică
      • nr. 1 (44-45/2012): Noua (dez)ordine mondială
    • 2011
      • nr. 4 (43/2011): Criza unui sistem? – de la „Primăvara Arabă” la „Occupy Wall Street”
      • nr. 3 (41-42/2011): Axa Ponto-Baltică
      • NR. 2 (40/2011): Azerbaidjan – actor geopolitic regional
      • nr. 1 (39/2011): Axa ponto-danubiană – axă strategică
    • 2010
      • nr. 4 (38/2010): Ucraina, între Est şi Vest
      • nr. 3 (36-37/2010): Geopolitica SUA
      • nr. 2 (35/2010): Africa necunoscuta
      • nr. 1 (33-34/2010): Orientul Mijlociu Extins
    • 2009
      • nr. 4 (32/2009): Axa Ponto-Caspică
      • nr. 3 (31/2009): România între Imperii
      • nr. 2 (30/2009): Marea Mediterană
      • nr. 1(29/2009): Criza mondială
    • 2008
      • nr. 4 (28/2008): Conflicte îngheţate în spaţiul Euro-Asiatic
      • nr. 3 (27/2008): Infrastructuri critice – Strategii Euro-Atlantice
      • nr. 2 (26/2008): Globalizarea relaţiilor intercivilizaţionale
      • nr. 1 (25/2008): Turcia: punte eurasiatică
    • 2007
      • nr. 4 (24/2007): Noua geopolitică a Rusiei
      • nr. 3 (23/2007): Asimetria resurselor energetice
      • nr. 2 (22/2007): The Iran Geopolitical Perspectives
      • nr. 1 (21/2007): Provocarea dragonilor – miracolul chinez
    • 2006
      • nr. 4 (20/2006): Regiuni de cooperare transfrontalieră – surse de conflict sau de stabilitate?
      • nr. 3 (19/2006): Falii şi axe geopolitice
      • nr. 2 (18/2006): România – Terra Daciae
      • nr. 1 (16-17/2006): Spaţiul ex-sovietic – provocări şi incertitudini
    • 2005
      • nr. 4 (14-15/2005): Marea Neagră – confluenţe geopolitice
      • nr. 3 (13/2005): Uniunea Europeană…, încotro?
      • nr. 2 (12/2005): Terorism şi mass-media
      • nr. 1 (11/2005): Tensiuni geopolitice induse de ţinuturile istorice
    • 2004
      • nr. 4 (9-10/2004: Incursiune în Islam
      • nr. 3 (7-8/2004): Geopolitica conflictelor sfârşitului de mileniu
      • nr. 2 (6/2004): Geopolitica spaţiului ponto-danubian
      • nr. 1 (04-05/2004): Geopolitica minorităţilor
    • 2003
      • nr. 2 (2-03/2003): Integrare Euro-Atlantică
      • nr. 1 (1/2003): Integrarea României în NATO
  • POLICIES
  • INSTRUCTIONS
  • ABONAMENTE
  • CONTACT
  • GDPR

GeoPolitica

Portal de analize geopolitice, strategice si economice

  • ION CONEA GEOPOLITICAL ASSOCIATION
  • GEOPOLITICS PROJECT
    • INTERNATIONAL SUMMER SCHOOL
      • Şcoala de Vară Geopolitica
      • Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolititica, ed a VII-a, p. II-a – 2014
      • 2. Scoala Internationala de Vara, editia V, 2014
      • Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica ed. a VII-a, Ploiesti 2
      • 1. Scoala Internationala de Vara “GeoPolitica”, editia V, 2014
      • 3. Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica, editia V, 2014
      • 4. Scoala Internationala de Vara “GeoPolitica”, editia V, 2014
      • 5. Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica, editia V, 2014
      • 6. Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica, ed. a V-a, 2014
      • 7. Scoala Internationala de Vara, ed aV-a, 2014
      • 8. Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica, ed a V-a, 2014
      • 9. Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica, ed a V-a, 2014
      • 10. Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica, ed a V-a, 2014
      • 11. Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica, ed a V-a, 2014
      • 12. Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica, ed aV-a, 2014
      • 13. Scoala Internationala de Vara GeoPolitica, ed a V-a, 2014
    • G-FOCUS
    • GEOPOLITICS CLUB
      • Club Geopolitica
      • Geopolitica Club România
      • Geopolitica Club Cafe
  • EDITURA TOP FORM
  • DONATIONS. SPONSORSHIPS. ADVERTISING
  • 19/04/2026
You are here: Home / TOPICS / GEOPOLITICS / WHY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MIGHT NOT WIN A WAR

WHY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MIGHT NOT WIN A WAR

by https://www.geopolitic.ro/author/

WHY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
MIGHT NOT WIN A WAR
1

 James Jay CARAFANO

Key takeaways

Machine learning, developing processes that mimic human brain functioning, is patterned on how brain cells work in a neural network.

Machine learning will no doubt be part of a family of technologies that delivers a next-generation of computer services.

If neural networks and machine learning remain the dominant AI guiding technologies, the operational usefulness of AI in battle will be rather limited.

It’s widely presumed that artificial intelligence (AI) will play a dominant role in future wars. Maybe not Skynet and Terminator-level stuff, but plenty of independent hunter-killer vehicles blasting each other and the rest of us.

However, the way the future unfolds might be nothing like that. AI developments increasingly led by machine learning–enabled technologies seem to be going in another direction.

THE HISTORY OF ARTIFICIAL THINKING

AI is a fairly plastic term. Its meaning has shifted over time, reflecting changes in both our understanding of what intelligence is and in the technology available to mimic this. Today, AI is mostly used to describe a broad range of technologies that allow computers to enhance, supplement or replace human decision-making. Machine learning is just one of this family of technologies.

 Yuichiro Chino / Getty Images

Since the adoption of modern computers, terms such as “artificial intelligence” have conjured-up images like those of the HAL 9000 computer from the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey. While computers that think and function with complete autonomy from human direction are still a ways off, machines with the capacity for a dramatically increased capacity to evaluate information, make choices and act on decisions have made remarkable progress over the last decade and established the foundation for the emerging technologies of machine learning. These technologies have broad applications in many fields, including defense and national security.

Shaping Our Technological Future

Machine learning, developing processes that mimic human brain functioning, is patterned on how brain cells work in a neural network. This approach could be described as “data-driven,” providing inputs that became the basis for establishing cause and effect relationships, in a similar manner to how human brains create knowledge and make judgments.

At the outset, the development of machine learning paralleled the evolution of modern computers. In 1943, Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts created the first mathematical model of a neural network. In 1949, Donald O. Hebb’s pioneering work on neuroscience, The Organization of Behavior advanced new concepts about the role of synaptic function in learning and memory. In 1952, IBM researcher Arthur Samuel introduced the term Machine Learning, applying the structure of neural networks to computer functioning.

Initial developments in AI found neural network research unpromising. In the late 1970s and 1980s, researchers looking to transform AI from science fiction into reality focused more on using logical, knowledge-based approaches to teach computers to “think.” Knowledge-based systems pair information with an “inference” engine (an if-then decision-making process) to create new knowledge and the capacity of machines to make independent choices. This method relied on algorithms, mathematical rules guide computers in calculations and problem-solving operations, and focused on algorithmic approaches to advanced computing. Machine learning split-off as a separate, struggling, ancillary field. It lagged in delivering breakthrough computer applications until the 1990s.

At the turn of the century, machine learning emerged as an important force in the evolution of computer technology. This resulted from a combination of develop-ments in computer science and statistics-in particular, the growing capacity to process “big data,” (large amounts of information). New systems provided “algorithm boosts” to help networks make sense of unprecedented volumes of structured (information provided in a standardized format) and unstructured data. This more data-driven approach supplanted the knowledge-based systems developed earlier in the race to build “smarter” computers.

Today, machine learning capabilities are already ubiquitous in many widely deployed technologies including speech and facial recognition. When the final numbers were tallied, one market research report estimated that Machine Learning sales worldwide, “including software, hardware, and services, are expected to total $156.5 billion in 2020.” This would represent a more than 12 percent increase from the previous year-remarkable growth, given the drag on the global economy from the coronavirus pandemic.

ASSESSING FUTURE APPLICATIONS

While machine learning may not be the technology that delivers the most advanced forms of AI in the future, its impact on contemporary developments in the field are unquestioned. And machine learning will no doubt be part of a family of technologies that delivers a next-generation of computer services. For example, pairing computers that can make better decisions with sensors that can collect more and better information will produce new capabilities, synchronizing the benefits of advancements in both technology fields. Machine learning will also accelerate the practical applications of new emerging technologies including quantum computing. In the next five years, machine learning-enabled technologies that can deliver reliable, scalable, cost-effective capabilities are going to tsunami the marketplace in many fields in the private and government sectors.

America’s Intelligence Needs in the Face of Great-Power Competition

Where will this lead? One clear option, of course, is computers replacing human decision-making, but there are others as well. Thomas Malone, director of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence, postulates that the governing work structure will be dominated by three types of human-machine collaboration.

All of these work structures might be employed in the national security and defense arena, but none would necessarily be dominant in warfighting. Here is why: machine learning technologies are more effective if they have a lot of data where they can learn well-established patterns, in bounded environments. A good example is traffic systems, where computers could learn from past commuter behavior to manage future traffic flows. However, the warfighting environment (as other national security areas of endeavor) tends to be highly complex and chaotic. Moreover, it can involve very big activities with very limited data sets – for example, the 9/11 attacks – a data set of one.

THE FUTURE OF THINKING

If neural networks and machine learning remain the dominant AI guiding technologies, the operational usefulness of AI in battle will be rather limited. If dramatic new AI ways of thinking emerge, that could well change, profoundly affecting future military competition. But if machine learning remains the guiding technology for the next quarter-century, AI won’t be universally applicable to all aspects of military and national security competition and it won’t fight our wars for us.

On the other hand, even if AI is not duking it out on the battlefield, there will no doubt be many military-related applications for AI. For example, machine learning tools can be used to create “deep fake” misinformation and propaganda materials, making the fog of war foggier than ever.

Other factors will also impact how AI is adapted to military purposes. Clearly, developments in the private sector will create hosts of new capabilities (like autonomous vehicles) that can be adapted to defense applications. On the other hand, ethical constraints and international agreements may well impose restrictions on AI-warfare. Great power competition will also shape the future of warfare, with both the United States and China striving to make new advances in the field. Still, the bottom line remains: You can’t just assume that wars in the foreseeable future will be run and fought by AI.

Mar 16th, 2021

1 This piece originally appeared in The National Interest https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/why-artificial-intelligence-might-not-win-war-180076

 Commentary by James Jay Carafano Vice President, Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute. James Jay Carafano is a leading expert in national security and foreign policy challenges.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Filed Under: GEOPOLITICS

About

ARTICOL INTEGRAL
Pe geopolitic.ro sunt publicate abstracte ale articolelor publicate în Revista GEOPOLITICA, care poate fi comandată pe www.geopoliticamagazine.com, în format tipărit sau electronic.

COLEGIUL DE REDACŢIE

DIRECTOR FONDATOR: Vasile SIMILEANU
Senior Editor: Vasile SIMILEANU
Secretar ştiinţific: Cristian BARNA
Secretar general de redacţie: Iulian IFTIMI
Secretar de redacţie: Monica TODORAN
Coperta şi grafica: Vasile SIMILEANU, Andrei MITUCĂ
Redactor Şef: Cristina GEORGESCU (SIMILEANU)
Redactori: Cosmin PĂCURARU, Adrian POPA, Mihaela RUSU
Webdisigner: Alexandru DINU
Website: Vasile SIMILEANU, Bogdan GHELMEGEANU, Cristian PETRICĂ

REFERENŢI ŞTIINŢIFICI

Constantin ANECHITOAE – Universitatea „Ovidius”, Constanţa
Maricel ANTIPA – Universitatea Naţională de Apărare „Carol I”, Bucureşti
Cristian BARNA – Universitatea Bucureşti
Adrian FILIP – Universitatea „Andrei Şaguna”, Constanţa
Constantin HLIHOR – Universitatea Bucureşti
Aliodor MANOLEA – Universitatea Hyperion, Bucureşti
Ioana RIEBER – Societatea de Ştiinţe Istorice din România
Radu SĂGEATĂ – Institutul de Geografie al Academiei Române

NOTES

Authors are directly responsible for the choice and presentation of data contained in the articles, of their authenticity and originality, as well as their own opinions. The wording and presentation of the text is not always the opinion of the GeoPolitica Magazine and are not binding in any way editorial responsibility.

Reproduction in whole or in part of any written or illustrative material in this publication is prohibited without a written permission from the publisher.

Editors assume no responsibility for the content of material submitted by sponsors.

EDITURA TOP FORM

Editură abilitată de către Consiliul Naţional de Atestare a Titlurilor, Diplomelor şi Certificatelor Universitare (CNATDCU): – Comisia pentru Ştiinţe Militare, Informaţii şi Ordine Publică, Categoria Edituri A2, poz. 16

– Comisia pentru Sociologie, Ştiinţe Politice şi Administrative, Categoria Edituri A2, poz. 17

Editură recunoscută de către Consiliul Naţional al Cercetării Ştiinţifice din Învăţământul Superior – cod CNCSIS 325

Comenzi şi abonamente la:

Tel: 0314 298 400; 0722 207 617; 0722 704 176

www.geopolitic.ro; www.edituratopform.com; www.geopoliticamagazine.com
editura.topform@yahoo.com; editura.topform@gmail.com; geopolitica.magazine@yahoo.com

Referenti stiintifici

Constantin ANECHITOAE – Universitatea „Ovidius”, Constanţa Maricel ANTIPA – Universitatea Naţională de Apărare „Carol I”, Bucureşti Cristian BARNA – Universitatea Bucureşti Adrian FILIP – Universitatea „Andrei Şaguna”, Constanţa Constantin HLIHOR – Universitatea Bucureşti Aliodor MANOLEA – Universitatea Hyperion, Bucureşti Ioana RIEBER – Societatea de Ştiinţe Istorice din România Radu SĂGEATĂ – Institutul de Geografie al Academiei Române

Geopolitica Magazine from Romanie in Top 15 Geopolitics Magazines in 2026, FeedSpot

The best Geopolitics magazines from thousands of magazines on the web ranked by traffic, social media followers & freshness.

Lear more….

Indexare Index COPERNICUS

Revista Geopolitica

Indexare MEDIOQ

Revista Geopolitica

ISSN: 3044-8484 ISSN-L: 1583-543X

AUTHORS

REFERENŢI ŞTIINŢIFICI

Constantin ANECHITOAE – Universitatea „Ovidius”, Constanţa Maricel ANTIPA – Universitatea Naţională de Apărare „Carol I”, Bucureşti Cristian BARNA – Universitatea Bucureşti Adrian FILIP – Universitatea „Andrei Şaguna”, Constanţa Constantin HLIHOR – Universitatea Bucureşti Aliodor MANOLEA – Universitatea Hyperion, Bucureşti Ioana RIEBER – Societatea de Ştiinţe Istorice din România Radu SĂGEATĂ – Institutul de Geografie al Academiei Romane

Pentru comenzi, click pe imagine!

PARTENERI

International Board

PHOTOSGALLERY

Carti Geopolitica

2023



2022



2021



2020



2019



2018



2017



2016



2015




2014



2013



2012



2011



2010



2009



2008



2007



2006



2005



2004



2003


Carti Geopolitica spatiului islamic

Proccedings