Squiz Series: AI, national security, and the shifting world order

Well, I think the technology sector more broadly is experiencing its own version of what I call the Wild West. Whether you're Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg, you have the same amount of influence in the international system which was previously only the domain of nation states and that is new. We've got all the ingredients we need, particularly in the global south, to develop data center and AI technology centers of excellence that could lead the world. So the world will not wait. There's no alternative. We have to do this and we've got to do it as a priority. We want to be the place to do business for the next hundred years when it comes to these emerging technologies. Good day. I'm Andrew Williams and this is part three of our special squeeze series on artificial intelligence. Menderoo Foundation is an Australian philanthropy driven by a commitment to create a future where people and the environment we depend on can thrive and they have a focus on AI particularly how we can find the right balance between protecting people and unlocking its benefits. Their own research shows that Aussies want to see the government take the lead on this to speak to how our government should respond. We've spoken with Professor Ian Langford. Ian is definitely a big picture thinker. He's a former Brigadier in the Australian Defence Force and he's since turned his attention to looking at how artificial intelligence plays out in national security. He talks about the link between energy and national security, how the global world order has changed and what we need to do to keep ourselves secure. He's Ian. So let me start with a very big question. What do you see as the number one security risk when it comes to AI for Australia specifically? Yeah, it's that convergence between the changing global landscape. So the Liberal International Order and Rules-Based System are gone effectively. Great power competition is back. Never really went away but we had this Cold War piece dividend in 91 which gave us a false sense of security that somehow we could use the United Nations to prevent conflict and war and sadly that's not the case and we're reminded because of the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, war in the Middle East and competition in East Asia that war is an instrument of the global system as an instrument of policy is predominant and recognising and understanding that's really important. When you converge that around the impact of technology and the pace and scale of change which are at the very front end of then you can see the kind of risk and uncertainty that it creates. So whether you're an individual experiencing the disruption through job losses as a result of AI or whether you're a Prime Minister trying to understand the new world order, assumptions around alliances, security guarantees and whether they are meaningful anymore, you can understand the level of uncertainty that we all experience today. Is there an accepted wisdom and I'm expecting the answer is probably no but in terms of how say Australia's Prime Minister should try and navigate this new order particularly from an AI perspective? Well his challenge is that he's leading a political system which is now in the minority worldwide. So we have democracy on the retreat across global systems. We've seen the return of the strong man and sadly it is gender specific right now when you think about people like Putin and Xi and so forth. And so how do we protect our democracy and our political system in a world that is under threat and when you add on AI which is all pervasive and effectively gives certain individuals the same power and influence in the international system that was previously only the domain of nation states. You can understand how disruptive that is. So for good or for ill whether you're Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg or you are a state leader in old Europe or New Asia you have the same amount of influence in the international system which was previously only the domain of nation states and that is new and I think people like the Prime Minister and the government he leads are grappling with how to deal with these issues in ways that protect our values but also safeguard our interests. So that's where regulation would potentially come into play right so you've got these big tech companies like you mentioned leaders at big tech companies you now have an enormous global influence. What kind of regulation is potentially available to Australia to try and protect against you know an undue level of influence. Well I think the technology sector more broadly is experiencing its own version of what I call the Wild West. So regulation in this country obviously only has limits at the very edge of our sovereignty and doesn't mean anything internationally or in the international system. And so how do we harmonise our own legislation and regulation to take the best advantage of these technologies but also protect us from their threats is really the challenge of our time and the other thing sadly I think in the global system today is we've seen the loss of influence of global you know safeguards and systems that the UN has designed and other international bodies which really now are options for nations which were previously laws and conventions under international agreements and international law nations seem to either opt in or opt out of what were previously obligations and expectations in terms of their behaviour. So the system has become quite lawless we've got hyperscalers whose interests are commercial and based on a capitalist system that doesn't necessarily recognise or reconcile with our own national interest and yet we are dependent on them to make sure that we have the kind of economy and technology systems that can ensure productivity and keep Australia where it needs to be both in terms of its economic growth its capacity to safeguard its own interests and the contribution it makes to the global order. So stuck a little bit in the middle between wanting to harness the power of what these platforms and technologies can do and then also not be overrun by them essentially and give them too much power over how we behave as a country. I mean we're in a Thucydides defined world where the strong will do as they please and the weak will suffer as they must. And for a middle power that's relied so heavily on our Alliance Frameworks to guarantee our safety in the world that assumption is now under pressure and we should probably test whether that assumption still remains moving forward. So I'm certainly not consigning allies and treaties like answers to the dustbin of history because they're hugely important and I think the government is right to reinforce things like our security architectures and the notion of collective security which is US led under answers. It is answers for anyone who's unsure is that security treaty between Australia and New Zealand and the US that was signed back in 1951 as you said it's one of a number of security agreements and packs that we have with the US orcas is another one and that's been a case for a while now. Yep but at the same time the world is changing these relationships are becoming much more transactional and I think from Australia's point of view what does it mean to not be able to hyper scale a large language model and instead have to rely on a US company or a European company to do that on our behalf. How do we maintain sovereignty and absolute control over these systems that will influence decision making in all aspects of the lived experience of Australian citizens going forward and these challenges need to be dealt with one way or the other in the next two to three years or we will suffer as we must to use again that saying from the days of suitilities. You mentioned there's a lot of risks in there but you did mention as well that there are some opportunities where are the opportunities I guess particularly from an AI perspective in terms of what Australia could do to try and lift its influence in this area. Yeah well there's three dimensions I think around a first principles approach to these advanced technologies and when I say AI I also mean the system of systems around it to include everything from critical undersea infrastructure which connects our data pipes to the world all the way through to data centers which gives us the opportunity to warehouse ours and other information all the way through to incorporating a hyper scale technology such as a language model to inform future decision making. So it's the whole end to end system. If I think about data centers for example the three elements which we have in abundance we have good people we have plenty of geography to build and generate capacity to warehouse our own and other data across the region and the only thing we have is energy. Now our energy policy has all sorts of challenges whether it be aged and critical infrastructure and its upgrades or indeed the debate around nuclear power going forward or the challenge of an energy transition that's focused much more on renewables but the reality is we have plenty of sunshine we also got plenty of influence in the international energy sector which means when you combine geography and people and energy we've got all the ingredients we need particularly in the global south to develop the kind of hub and spoke data center and AI technology centers of excellence that could lead the world. I mean if a country like Singapore could do it which is different as a city state in the middle of southeast Asia that can more easily connect into that system that regional system we can absolutely do it when I think about the connection for example of undersea cables between Australia and Africa which is the first global south point to point undersea cable of its type we have the opportunity to lead with respect to those sorts of initiatives and set ourselves up going forward. And this has been a regular topic in the news as well a few weeks ago the business council of Australia called on the other and easy government to invest much more heavily in AI and as a West Australian I know that you've written about this before in terms of WA specifically because it's close to Africa can you explain that undersea cables point when it comes to WA how does that give us an advantage in terms of building that infrastructure here. More than 99% of all of our data traffic moves on our critical undersea infrastructure so we have the Australia Japan cable. we have the Australia Singapore Europe cable essentially, and increasingly through things like SAPCO, which is a Sydney Adelaide Perth connection, which is then plugging into that connection that's running along the floor of the Indian Ocean, which will open up Southern Africa and provide redundancy to markets like Europe. We're becoming a really important hub in the global spoke or the system that will effectively govern and distribute data traffic moving forward. So Australia's geography is exquisite in terms of connecting the Pacific and the Indian Ocean. We're also exquisite in connecting, you know, the most important economic region for the next 100 years, which will be East and Northern Asia, to, you know, the US and to Europe. So, you know, we're blessed with geography. And the three elements of any strategy, whether that be technology, national security, or what have you, are geography, the political system and the economy. Now, somewhat argue that we have what, you know, many have called a low complexity economy, which is to say that we dig stuff out of the ground and we sell it to others that are willing to then turn it into a high complexity technology. I think there's an element of that is true and there's a bit of cultural cringe around it. We shouldn't necessarily not be proud of what we've achieved in mining and engineering and other areas. But the fact is that can't be the only export commodity by which we measure value going forward. And we need to move from low complexity to high complexity, which is to say that not only do we provide those raw and critical minerals to the world, but we also move further up the value chain to do things like add a technology dimension so that it is an additive technology that gets exported. So, turning a critical mineral into a product or a service is part of the solution. Housing data and being able to distribute data, Australia's world place to do that and we should take full advantage of the opportunity. - Yeah, so let's expand on that idea. There may be people listening to this that have seen a data center pop up near them. I know it happened to me. What does that look like going forward? If you really harness that opportunity, what does that look like in terms of how many data centers we have in Australia or how prevalent they are? Do you think? - So the first element of a data center investment in Australia, I think is what many would call a social contract. In order to have a social license, you need a social contract, so said RISO. So, a data center isn't there to steal power it's not there to drive up energy prices and it's not there to announce a global company that is there intentionally to drive in value and extract profit without doing things like paying income tax and so on and so forth. And that tends to predominate the debate, which is an important element of, again, as I said, the social license that these technologies and these entities need to have if they're going to operate effectively in a democracy like ours. So how do we make a data center explainable in terms of its economic priority of significance in terms of how we improve things like efficiency and productivity in this country and how we bring wealth to Australia in the years ahead. So explaining that is really important. The next is critical infrastructure. So, energy policy is technology policy, is national security policy. So a data center going into a certain area needs to be complemented by sufficient government and private sector investment in things like energy to make that technology system work as a value add, as opposed to a value extraction exercised by the foreign entity that might own it. And then the other element, of course, is how do we as Australia build the kind of capacity and scale to be able to compete effectively to safeguard our national interests? So, you know, nationalising fuel supply chains, which we've seen since this current crisis in Iran sort of become a very much a focus of government. How do we bring the same level of conversation around what resilience looks like, which part of that system that we need to nationalise in order to own, to be able to gain, bring that technology front of mind into our version of ourselves in the future, that will be the best version of ourselves. And there's no healthy future of Australia that doesn't see us warehouse technology, that doesn't see us harness AI, and doesn't see us use the tremendous talent in our workforce to be able to build the kind of wealth creation that needs to happen through those technologies and additive elements of, you know, what would define us going forward. So, there's no alternative. We have to do this, and we've got to do it as a priority. And does that play into also our, I guess, if we have data stored, if we have that capacity on our shores, does that also help us with making sure that we're keeping it secure, that we're keeping not only, I guess, critical national data, but also individuals data secure on our shores, 'cause we're not handing over that power to, you know, foreign company. - Absolutely. So there's two elements to this, coming back to the social licence, social contract dimension. You know, we know Australians are concerned about privacy. We also, we know they're concerned around safeguards, as it relates to the, you know, the reuse and distribution of information for other purposes. And so being able to, onshore that, being able to effectively lock it down, gives the kind of assurance to our citizens that will make them more confident that when they share data, it's done so for the appropriate reasons. The other element of things like copyright, and how do we make sure our creative and arts sectors can maintain their livelihood, frankly, in the first instance, but also how we can, you know, enjoy the benefits of that work in the context of, you know, our nation's state, and what we own and what we have privileged to have sovereignty over both in the public and private sphere. So there's a social contract dimension. And then there's the reality of a changing global order where there are those in the system that seek to do us harm. We know every day there are denial of service and penetration activities on our critical systems in the hundreds, if not thousands, coming from nation states that, you know, say, they're going to do something on one hand but do something on the other. They wish to do us harm. So that's securitization of those systems, protecting that critical information. So others can't bring harm to us both now, or indeed if they can warehouse that information to weaponize it in the future, is it really important to mention of, you know, bringing data, bringing it on shore, making it sovereign, and then being able to have control over its distribution. So it's about privacy and social contract on one hand. It's about national security on the other. And the people responsible to do that is government. And it's partners that will deliver these services and maintain them over their life. So the government released an AI plan in December last year. It has sort of three main bits to it. One is keeping Australia safe, but harming the possible economic opportunities and ensuring as many people as possible benefit from AI or the others. It also decided to sort of spread regulation across different agencies and bring in an AI safety institute rather than bring in a new law that was specific to AI. With that beginning point, what do you think good leadership looks like from here? - So I think, you know, an expression of confidence that this technology is consistent with a future version of Australia where we are the best versions of ourselves. So this is undeniable in opportunity. We have the people and skills. We've got the research foundation, we've got the infrastructure, and we have the, you know, access to energy to be able to be a world leader on this. We've also got the kind of democratic and sort of capitalist based financial systems that allow hyper-scarters to invest here for the long haul with confidence that they will get a return on investment. We've also got, I think, you know, broadly agreement across all elements of politics that understand this opportunity is fleeting. There is a hub and spoke that will happen in the global south. We have providence and we have ownership on whether it will be in this country or not. So the opportunity is there, but it's about taking it now and not waiting. - Yeah, it's not about a version where we only wear house our own data and place sovereignty around the ability to lock it down. Okay, that's the dumb version of data and AI in execution. The smart version is that we do that, but we also provide the hub and spoke for, you know, the globe in Africa, in Southeast Asia, in the South West Pacific, and that we're able to provide the safeguards and systems that make AI and its distribution as well as management of data, you know, a natural place for all of those countries to dial into. We want to be the place to do business for the next 100 years when it comes to these emerging technologies. - Yeah. Ian, thank you very much for your time. Really appreciate you sharing all that with us. - Great, great privilege and again, all the best to you all. Thank you. - Thanks for listening and thanks to the Mindarrue Foundation for making that interview possible. For more on their research around AI, a link is in your show notes.