A US proposal would replace "artificial intelligence" with "super intelligence" in ITU Resolution 214, remove references to shared concerns and prohibit ITU work supporting AI governance, regulation and ethics.
ITU Plenipotentiary Conference (PP-26) and Resolution 214 The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is set to hold its Plenipotentiary Conference (PP-26) in Doha, Qatar, where nations will convene as a treaty-making body. A primary focus of PP-26 involves electing key officials, establishing the agenda, and revising a series of resolutions that encapsulate shared global values. Among the numerous contributions from member states, a significant proposal from the United States (MOD USA/23A10/1) seeks to modify Resolution 214, which was initially adopted at the 2022 Bucharest Plenipotentiary Conference. Resolution 214 is titled 'Artificial intelligence technologies and telecommunications/information and communication technologies' and was originally a consensus document representing global collaboration on AI-related activities and concerns. Several other countries and regional unions have also submitted more modest proposals regarding Resolution 214. The Established Definition of Artificial Intelligence The concept of 'artificial intelligence' is widely understood and has a well-documented history. Its origins can be broadly traced back to Alan Turing's seminal paper in 1950, which laid foundational ideas. The term gained further prominence and was amplified by leading researchers during the 1956 Dartmouth Conference, a pivotal event in the field's development. Since then, 'artificial intelligence' has become a universally recognized and utilized term across a multitude of domains, including technological advancements, scientific research, and legal frameworks worldwide. This widespread acceptance and clear understanding are notably reflected in its consistent use within international documents such as ITU Resolution 214. The Contentious US Proposal: 'Super Intelligence' The US proposal presents a radical overhaul of Resolution 214. Its most prominent change is to substitute 'Artificial Intelligence' with 'Super Intelligence' (SI) throughout the entire resolution. Beyond this terminology shift, the proposal also aims to eliminate a substantial number of provisions related to global institutional recognitions, various references to shared concerns, and important cautions. Furthermore, it seeks to impose strict limitations on the ITU's activities, confining them exclusively to national, regional, and international areas of SI pertaining to telecommunications and ICTs. Critically, the proposal explicitly states that the ITU 'shall not engage in activities supporting development of policy or legal frameworks, governance, regulation or ethics' concerning SI. It would also mandate annual reporting from all ITU activity sectors to their respective advisory groups on SI-related activities, requiring approval for any secretariat-led initiatives outside of ITU study groups to increase transparency and Member State oversight. Ancillary Proposal to Modify Resolution 71 In addition to the primary modifications proposed for Resolution 214, the USA has put forward an ancillary document suggesting a 'backdoor' introduction of the term 'super intelligence' into the ITU's official treaty lexicon. This is attempted through a proposed alteration to Resolution 71, which outlines the strategic plan for the Union for the years 2024-2027. The US proposal inserts the term 'super intelligence' into an otherwise minor and obscure clause within Resolution 71, specifically under the provision dealing with the operational efficiency of the ITU, within the phrase 'Excellence in human resources and organizational innovation.' This approach suggests an attempt to integrate the new terminology into broader ITU policy without direct debate on its merits within the context of AI governance. Critique of the US Proposal's Justification and Impact The justification for the US proposal is not immediately clear, as the proposed term 'super intelligence' does not appear to reflect broad consensus or established scientific/technological understanding. Instead, it seems to align with specific political expressions that emerged recently, affecting some US federal agencies. Attempting to introduce such terms as the basis for changes in a global treaty instrument is highly inappropriate and counterproductive, potentially causing significant confusion among member states and diminishing the long-standing respect for international law and institutional collaboration cultivated over 175 years. Moreover, this proposal risks masking the widespread and collective concerns and threats related to AI, which have been expressed globally and were acknowledged by the USA itself just four years prior. If the current US Administration holds particular views on this matter, expressing them through a signing declaration accompanying the Final Acts would be a more suitable and respectful diplomatic approach than fundamentally altering a globally agreed-upon resolution.
ITU Plenipotentiary Conference (PP-26) and Resolution 214
The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is set to hold its Plenipotentiary Conference (PP-26) in Doha, Qatar, where nations will convene as a treaty-making body. A primary focus of PP-26 involves electing key officials, establishing the agenda, and revising a series of resolutions that encapsulate shared global values. Among the numerous contributions from member states, a significant proposal from the United States (MOD USA/23A10/1) seeks to modify Resolution 214, which was initially adopted at the 2022 Bucharest Plenipotentiary Conference. Resolution 214 is titled 'Artificial intelligence technologies and telecommunications/information and communication technologies' and was originally a consensus document representing global collaboration on AI-related activities and concerns. Several other countries and regional unions have also submitted more modest proposals regarding Resolution 214.
The Established Definition of Artificial Intelligence
The concept of 'artificial intelligence' is widely understood and has a well-documented history. Its origins can be broadly traced back to Alan Turing's seminal paper in 1950, which laid foundational ideas. The term gained further prominence and was amplified by leading researchers during the 1956 Dartmouth Conference, a pivotal event in the field's development. Since then, 'artificial intelligence' has become a universally recognized and utilized term across a multitude of domains, including technological advancements, scientific research, and legal frameworks worldwide. This widespread acceptance and clear understanding are notably reflected in its consistent use within international documents such as ITU Resolution 214.
The Contentious US Proposal: 'Super Intelligence'
The US proposal presents a radical overhaul of Resolution 214. Its most prominent change is to substitute 'Artificial Intelligence' with 'Super Intelligence' (SI) throughout the entire resolution. Beyond this terminology shift, the proposal also aims to eliminate a substantial number of provisions related to global institutional recognitions, various references to shared concerns, and important cautions. Furthermore, it seeks to impose strict limitations on the ITU's activities, confining them exclusively to national, regional, and international areas of SI pertaining to telecommunications and ICTs. Critically, the proposal explicitly states that the ITU 'shall not engage in activities supporting development of policy or legal frameworks, governance, regulation or ethics' concerning SI. It would also mandate annual reporting from all ITU activity sectors to their respective advisory groups on SI-related activities, requiring approval for any secretariat-led initiatives outside of ITU study groups to increase transparency and Member State oversight.
Ancillary Proposal to Modify Resolution 71
In addition to the primary modifications proposed for Resolution 214, the USA has put forward an ancillary document suggesting a 'backdoor' introduction of the term 'super intelligence' into the ITU's official treaty lexicon. This is attempted through a proposed alteration to Resolution 71, which outlines the strategic plan for the Union for the years 2024-2027. The US proposal inserts the term 'super intelligence' into an otherwise minor and obscure clause within Resolution 71, specifically under the provision dealing with the operational efficiency of the ITU, within the phrase 'Excellence in human resources and organizational innovation.' This approach suggests an attempt to integrate the new terminology into broader ITU policy without direct debate on its merits within the context of AI governance.
Critique of the US Proposal's Justification and Impact
The justification for the US proposal is not immediately clear, as the proposed term 'super intelligence' does not appear to reflect broad consensus or established scientific/technological understanding. Instead, it seems to align with specific political expressions that emerged recently, affecting some US federal agencies. Attempting to introduce such terms as the basis for changes in a global treaty instrument is highly inappropriate and counterproductive, potentially causing significant confusion among member states and diminishing the long-standing respect for international law and institutional collaboration cultivated over 175 years. Moreover, this proposal risks masking the widespread and collective concerns and threats related to AI, which have been expressed globally and were acknowledged by the USA itself just four years prior. If the current US Administration holds particular views on this matter, expressing them through a signing declaration accompanying the Final Acts would be a more suitable and respectful diplomatic approach than fundamentally altering a globally agreed-upon resolution.
