Security

Did You Ever Come Across A Female Dictator?

by dieringerblog
Advertisements

By Jürgen Dieringer

When I asked my students this question, they became quiet for quite a while. Then, they came up with Margaret Thatcher and Imelda Marcos. The problem is that Thatcher was not a dictator, and Marcos was a desperate attachment to the dictator, her husband Ferdinand, infamous for her collection of shoes. Take the timeframe of 1990-2024, and you do not find any relevant female dictator globally. Dictators are male! What do we take from that? Maybe we need a feminist foreign policy to tackle the problem.

Dictators are Male!

Suppose we select important leaders of major countries or organizations that served approximately the same time, categorizing liberal-democratic on the one and authoritarian-dictatorial-populist governments on the other side. In that case, we find a 50:50 ratio among the male populace (if we put Modi into the liberal camp, which is pretty questionable). Biden, Macron, Scholz, Trudeau, and Modi (liberal-democratic) face Xi, Putin, Erdogan, Bolsonaro, and Bin Salman, a group of leaders who govern in dictatorial, authoritarian, or populist fashion. And this list does not even include Trump, Orbán, or Milei.

On the female side, there is harmony. Only liberal democrats, without any doubt. What do we take from this?

The Absence of Female Dictators

Some may say that women are more peaceful and balanced in general. But actually, we don’t need this psychological-biological explanation. Our argument should be a structural one. Women often do not even make it into power because the sticky patriarchy prevents them so far, as the UN shows in the “Women in Politics” map of the UN.

Women in Politics: 2023. Source: United Nations

According to this data, women in politics is “normal” only in Western-type democracies. Another area with promising numbers is the southern part of Africa, where countries like Namibia, Botswana and Zambia show positive development towards sustained democratic patterns and good governance, as the qualitative data of the new Bertelsmann study (Bertelsmann Transformation Index 2024) shows. There is a clear upward trend. On the other side of the scale, in states governed by leaders with great “machismo”, women’s rights in particular and the inclusiveness of administrations in general is fairly low; take Erdogan’s Turkiye or Orbán’s Hungary, countries that under-perform in their cohort. Orbán explained the temporary absence of female ministers in his government by mentioning the need to “protect” women from the muddy waters of politics. The “myth of protection” is one big brick in the wall of the patriarchy erected against the empowerment of women. It serves only the strive of the male gatekeepers to stay in power.

Liberal-democratic systems, with their high-quality participatory governance models and inclusive policies, allow upward mobility for women. Once in power, they can balance the system even further. And yes, they are much less vulnerable to autocratic, populist temptation than men. Trump, Orbán, Erdogan: Their voters are often male.

Gender and war: Foreign policies are all but female

Many (male) political leaders who take their armies to war without the presence of an objective threat often justify this breach of international law via “protection.” They promise to protect minorities, the vulnerable, or the nation. The narrative “protecting women and children” is quite common throughout international conflicts, too. The myth of protection seems to work. How surprising, then, that women and children often make up the majority of casualties in conflicts? The duality of “protector” and “raper” is less visible in the narratives asking for military intervention.

“Conflicts of interest between men and women are unlike other conflicts. A worker and a capitalist do not typically live together under the same roof or sharing concerns and experiences and acting jointly. This aspect of ‘togetherness’ gives the gender conflict some very special characteristics”

Amartya Sen, 1990

Against this background, a redefinition of security in international politics is essential. The subordinate role of women in international relations has to be overcome. To do that, all forms of challenges women face must be tackled: exploitation through a division of labor with asymmetrically distributed benefits, for example, the gender pay gap, the control of the exploited by the exploiters, and marginalization of women in all spheres of societies.

Feminist Foreign Policies are Needed

Feminist foreign policy, rooted in the advocacy for equality of the sexes and dismantling systemic injustices against women and marginalized groups, extends these concerns to foreign affairs. It emphasizes gender equality, human rights, and social justice in diplomatic actions, development aid, trade agreements, and security measures. The policy’s inception is credited to Sweden, the first nation to officially adopt a feminist foreign policy in 2014, inspired by then-foreign minister Margot Wallström. This innovative step was based on the understanding that gender equality is not just a human rights matter but also essential for peace, security, and sustainable development. Inspired by the Swedish model, other countries have since implemented their versions of the policy, tailored to their specific national contexts and international objectives. Similarly, German foreign minister Annalena Baerbock‘s commitment to feminist foreign policy underscores Germany’s dedication to promoting gender equality internationally. By integrating feminist principles into its foreign policy, Germany aims to challenge the existing gender imbalances and advocate for a more inclusive and equitable global order.

Theoretical Foundations and Core Principles

The theoretical underpinnings of feminist foreign policy lie in feminist theory, which examines the gendered dimensions of power and systemic barriers to equality. This policy paradigm challenges traditional, state-centric, and militaristic approaches to international relations, promoting a different perspective on security, development, and diplomacy through a gender lens.

The core principles of feminist foreign policy include gender equality and the importance of inclusivity and participation of women and marginalized groups in governance. It advocates for a comprehensive security framework beyond military might, focusing instead on addressing economic, environmental, and social factors contributing to insecurity and conflict. Transparency and accountability are also crucial, requiring governments to be open about their foreign policy decisions and commitments to gender equality and human rights.

Beyond the Patriarchy: Towards a more balanced foreign policy

Obviously, the world needs more female politicians and leaders, especially when populist narratives dominate the discourse. How can we achieve this? The foreign policies of our Western, liberal-democratic governments, which oversee huge budgets in their foreign- and developmental policies, will have to mainstream gender issues. Applying gender-inclusive diplomacy means financing education for girls, scholarships for young women, and micro-credits for female entrepreneurs.

By the way, Philippine Dictator Ferdinand Marcos was replaced by Corazon Aquino, the female president who restored democracy in 1986.

Leveraging Sentiment Analysis in Diplomatic Communications: AI and LLMs as New and Powerful Tools for Opinion Mining

by dieringerblog
Advertisements
Photo by Savvas Stavrinos on Pexels.com

Unlocking Diplomatic Potential with AI

Diplomacy, the practice of managing international relations by states, has witnessed various changes in the use of instruments over time, especially in communication. Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration is presently introduced into the diplomatic arsenal of tools. Sentiment analysis or opinion mining, a crucial branch of AI, is gaining prominence. By employing Natural Language Processing (NLP), sentiment analysis deciphers emotions and attitudes within text, which proves indispensable in diplomatic exchanges where nuances can be game-changing. This is especially helpful when relations between two countries are dire and communication is rare.

Decoding Emotions: Sentiment Analysis in Diplomatic Communications

Sentiment analysis using product review data targets the costumer. Sentiment analysis in International relations targets the politician. Using AI here involves algorithmically identifying and categorizing opinions within text. Through NLP, the relevant program classifies sentiments as positive, negative, or neutral and identifies specific emotions such as joy, frustration, or anger. Opinion mining techniques encompass everything from lexical approaches, which utilize word lists and scoring systems, to advanced machine learning models that learn from annotated data.

It is a principle of diplomacy that one must know something of the truth in order to lie convincingly. It was one thing to use computers as a tool, quite another to let them do your thinking for you (Tom Clancy, The Hunt for Red October)

Integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) into the loop has further empowered sentiment analysis. With their extensive training on varied textual data, LLMs are adept at extracting contextual meaning, thereby providing nuanced insights that are invaluable in diplomacy. The essence of diplomacy lies in understanding and conveying intentions through communication. A slight misinterpretation of diplomatic communication can have extensive ramifications. Sentiment analysis is a powerful ally for diplomats, as it deciphers the underlying emotions in communications and provides richer insights into international affairs and diplomacy.

For example, sentiment analysis of preceding communications in international negotiations can equip diplomats with insights into counterparty stances, aiding in predicting their responses. An informed understanding of sentiments in statements from global entities like the United Nations can shape national strategies harmoniously with international diplomatic trends. Take the Iran nuclear deal negotiations as an instance. By analyzing the tone and emotions in speeches and communications from the involved parties through sentiment analysis, diplomats can gain precious insights into the emotional landscape of actors involved. This understanding allows for crafting diplomatic strategies that align with these sentiments, potentially easing the path to consensus or compromise.

Generally, cultural understanding is integral to international relations and diplomacy. Sentiment analysis aids in discerning cultural nuances, which is critical to building and sustaining positive international relations. For example, appreciating and acknowledging cultural diversities and sensitivities in diplomatic dialogues can foster stronger alliances. How vast the range is, is documented by the communicative style of two recent US presidents (Barack Obama, Donald Trump): this is more than nuances, though.

Steering Through Diplomatic Minefields: Opinion Mining Hurdles

However, sentiment analysis in diplomatic communications is not without its challenges. The often-subtle language of diplomacy may contain nuances, sarcasm, or veiled meanings that may elude or mislead AI algorithms. Additionally, ensuring ethical practices regarding data protection and confidentiality is paramount. There is also the issue of potential biases within algorithms, which necessitates a cautious and responsible approach to AI deployment in international affairs. These issues are of general nature and affect all forms of communication, including diplomacy. The point is that in fields other than diplomacy, someone may be offended, but this person does maybe not use lethal weapons (of mass destruction) to punish the offender like states have done many times in history. The margin for error is indeed narrow in diplomacy.

The ever-evolving geopolitical landscape demands that AI-powered sentiment analysis tools continually adapt and improve while avoiding the perpetuation of biases and the predominance of subjectivity. Additionally, given the global nature of diplomacy, it is essential for opinion mining tools to efficiently handle a multitude of languages.

Plotting the Course: The Future of Sentiment Analysis in Diplomacy

Looking ahead, the use of AI in international relations is poised to reshape the diplomatic landscape. The future promises sentiment analysis tools with even greater capabilities for discerning linguistic and cultural subtleties. Collaboration between AI experts and diplomats, with an emphasis on ethical considerations, is vital. It is also essential that these tools be used responsibly, ensuring that AI practices align with ethical standards. The synergy of sentiment analysis and diplomatic expertise can be quite fruitful.

Human-AI diplomatic interaction: How to analyze the sentiments of a robot?

In conclusion: Whether you use sentiment analysis using product review data or speeches of politicians does not make a big difference. Sentiment analysis, leveraging AI and LLMs, is set to become a transformative force in diplomatic communications and the conduct of international affairs. While challenges remain, diligent development and integration can herald an era of enriched and adaptive diplomacy, where it is less easy to hide intentions. Sentiment analysis and opinion mining hold the potential to propel diplomacy into an era where augmented insights lead to more fruitful international relations, contributing significantly to global cooperation and mutual understanding – or the use of lethal weapons.

Some readings:

Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2008). Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval, 2(1–2), 1-135.

Medhat, W., Hassan, A., & Korashy, H. (2014). Sentiment analysis algorithms and applications: A survey. Ain Shams engineering journal, 5(4), 1093-1113.

Fisher, S., Klein, G. R., & Codjo, J. (2022). Focusdata: Foreign policy through language and sentiment. Foreign Policy Analysis, 18(2)