The International Governance of Artificial Intelligence:A Brief Analysis of the Moroccan Interne Situation

Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly transitioned from a supportive tool designed to enhance daily tasks to a transformative force with the potential to reshape societies on a global scale. While AI continues to offer unprecedented benefits in areas such as healthcare, education, and economic development, its misuse has exposed humanity to significant risks, including cyber-attacks, disinformation campaigns, and social instability. This duality underscores the urgency of developing effective governance frameworks to maximize AI’s benefits while mitigating its harms.

The generative power of AI is increasingly being exploited for malicious purposes, amplifying societal vulnerabilities. Hackers leverage AI to carry out sophisticated cyberattacks that undermine the economic stability of states, private entities, and individuals alike (Oberhaus, 2023). Similarly, ill-intentioned actors use AI tools to infiltrate financial markets, steal trade secrets, and manipulate stock information (Wain, 2023). Beyond economic threats, AI poses challenges to societal cohesion by enabling the spread of misinformation and destabilizing public trust through manipulated communication networks (Mosley, 2023).

These challenges are compounded by the absence of a unified international governance framework capable of addressing the transnational nature of AI’s risks. Without a concerted effort to regulate AI’s development and deployment, the technology could exacerbate linguistic inequalities, disrupt financial systems, and deepen social divides. Addressing these issues requires proactive engagement from all stakeholders, including governments, international organizations, private sector actors, and civil society, to ensure that AI development aligns with the broader interests of humanity.

This article focuses on the unique position of Morocco within the global AI landscape and explores the opportunities for international cooperation in shaping effective AI governance strategies. By examining the limitations of the current international system and identifying alternative governance models, we propose a multifaceted approach to mitigate AI-related risks. This includes fostering collaboration among diverse stakeholders and establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework tailored to Morocco’s needs and aspirations.

The urgency of this endeavor cannot be overstated. As AI continues to advance at an unprecedented pace, it is imperative to anticipate its impacts and develop robust mechanisms to safeguard societal interests. This article aims to contribute to the growing discourse on AI governance by offering actionable insights and recommendations to guide Morocco’s engagement in international cooperation for AI governance.

I. Background of the Literature Review

In light of this worrying situation, studies on the potentially disastrous effects of AI, especially those used against official institutions such as states and their affiliated organizations, have not yet taken seriously the impacts that AI can provoke against the overall security of a state or the existence and continuity of a vital public or private entity. At the moment, studies on the potential disadvantages of AI are not yet widespread research, as they remain the privilege of a few key organizations and international institutions.

These studies suffer, in addition to their rarity, from the lack of the power to compel international system actors to adopt their guidelines and instructions for the ethical use of AI. In addition, this new system of AI governance currently risks being at odds over several issues surrounding this new technology, and the fragmentation of agendas, especially in the private sector, as well as the clash of visions regarding the regulation of internal laws, complicate the situation instead of providing a solid foundation to unify the debate, limiting the potential disadvantages of this emerging technology (Dafoe, 2018).

This situation fosters the flourishing of new pragmatic governance paradigms in the absence of a unifying inter-state system that aligns ethics and the uses of AI while ensuring the rights of the international community (Taeihagh, 2021). On this subject, we have noted the growth of studies encouraging actors in the international system not to wait for the international maturity of the debate on the requirements and obligations for AI systems, and to adopt specific scenarios of regional or even local or private governance when disagreement continues to characterize the situation. The European Union is taking into account these regional attempts to regulate AI, driven by the innovative demands and sovereignty principles of its members (Janssen et al., 2020). The Union believes that through these regulations and legislations, it can strengthen security and consolidate fundamental rights before building the future of AI at the continental level (European Commission, 2024).

The EU believes that, more than the requirements for use, the commitments imposed on suppliers of this technology for vital services, the compliance of AI services with the EU’s sovereignty requirements, etc., it is necessary to establish a European AI governance body, supported by dedicated national entities for managing and administering the relevant issues (European Commission, 2024).

The challenges of AI governance at the international level encourage states to adopt much more pragmatic processes instead of waiting for international consensus on practices and the unacceptable risks of AI usage. At this level, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is pushing China to develop its own doctrine and specific approach regarding the regulation and governance of AI technology. In this regard, China expresses its concerns about the drawbacks of advanced AI systems and at-tempts to address these issues through its vision for AI, (overlooking the European perspective on AI and fundamental rights) in alignment with its own particular interests, especially internal control and surveillance, as well as the stability and security of the political system (Sheehan, 2024).

We note that the Chinese paradigm, by neglecting the primacy of individual freedoms, bases its particularity in AI governance on security requirements, which are all geopolitical and strategic fears of China towards its competitors and rivals, primarily the United States. The latter, which also engages in specific processes for regulating the use of AI technologies, based on market principles and the free flow of knowledge and investments, risks paralyzing the international cooperation system around AI due to the pace of technological innovation they adopt, imposing a very high geopolitical and technological rhythm compared to competitors and all other users of AI worldwide. The American model recommends consolidating individual achievements by limiting the drawbacks of AI, such as the protection and respect for privacy, the cybersecurity of AI systems, the prohibition of unacceptable uses, and finally, the effective promotion and support of AI governance initiatives and the promotion of international cooperation in this field (Szczepański, 2024).

These multiple appeals for the development of AI governance frameworks en-courage several other entities and actors to follow processes that serve particular interests rather than those that enforce respect for the law and fundamental rights. However, this pragmatism surrounding AI governance seems to be flexible for these actors and provides preliminary answers to several challenges and issues of this emerging technology, rather than waiting for consent at the level of international bodies that are still unable to impose their visions and directions regarding older social phenomena.

From here, Morocco, as a country whose indicators show a growing openness to AI applications and their infiltration into all areas of life, is a country with a legal system that has yet to successfully regulate the potential advancements of AI and its unforeseen impacts on security, stability, freedoms, justice, the economy, etc. How should it define this phenomenon, and on what epistemological basis should Moroccan authorities start and act to make decisions that are fully aligned with the accumulations of AI governance at the international level, while also respecting the particularities of Moroccan society? Also, how will the decision-makers for this project benefit from the lessons learned from individual attempts to create an adaptable and flexible framework for AI governance?

II. A Brief Analysis of the Moroccan Interne Situation

In recent years, Morocco has been making notable strides in the development of AI technology, positioning itself as a regional leader in AI ethics and governance. The government has actively worked to establish frameworks for the responsible use of AI, aligning with global standards set by organizations like UNESCO. In fact, Morocco was one of the first countries to adopt UNESCO’s recommendations on AI ethics, which focus on transparency, fairness, and human rights in the development and deployment of AI systems​ (Benabbou, 2024). The Ministry Delegate in charge of Digital Transition and Administrative Reform, under Ghita Mezzour, has led various initiatives to foster innovation and economic growth through AI. This includes the creation of research and development centers in cities like Oujda, Rabat, and Fez, which focus on AI advancements and their practical applications. Additionally, the country is also working on building an ethical AI system that would guide its development across various sectors, ensuring the integration of AI into Moroccan society remains beneficial, inclusive, and transparent​ (Map, 2023).

To further strengthen its AI infrastructure, Morocco is considering the establishment of a National Agency for AI Governance, which would serve as a key institution for coordinating and overseeing AI policies and ensuring they align with both national priorities and international standard. This ongoing development in AI regulation signals Morocco’s commitment to not only integrating AI technologies but also ensuring they are deployed responsibly, with a focus on ethics and the protection of fundamental rights.

III. Why Should Morocco Name its Own AI Governance System?

The development of AI is part of the overall advancement of technologies world-wide; we are actually facing a technological revolution where creativity and innovation have reached an exceptional level. From now on, in terms of creativity and production in law, regulations, frameworks, governance, and procedures, we are still far from catching up in this race (Medias24, 2024). This delay is no longer the case for Morocco; on the contrary, most countries around the globe suffer from these shortcomings and the inadequacy of social sciences to frame, define, and predict the societal impacts of these innovations. However, this should serve as motivation for the country to equip itself with the necessary skills to oversee AI activities and prohibit related illegal practices.

The process of establishing a plan or strategy for regulating the use, exploitation, and development of AI applications is not just a matter of analysis and debate. On the contrary, it is a national project that requires the integration of several aspects and the coordination of various policies and planning, as well as the unification of efforts and multisectorial capacities. The financial aspect, for example, is a major element in this process, because updating institutions and establishments so that they can sustain such a phenomenon is incredibly colossal compared to their still modest budgets. The budget of the federal government of the United States alone, not counting the tens of billions of dollars from the private sector for this national project, exceeds four billion dollars between 2023 and 2024 (The White House, 2024).

China, in turn, has spent over seventy billion dollars since 2017 to achieve its goals in the development and governance of AI technologies (Center for Security and Emerging Technologies, 2024). The EU also has its vision for the appropriation of the keys to this emerging technology and has established an AI strategy for its objectives, accompanied by a colossal budget that exceeds one hundred billion dollars (European Commission, 2020). Iran and Israel, as nations seeking to harness the potential of this technology, are investing colossal budgets and view the potentials of AI as a critical and strategic field (Microsoft Report, 2024).

This is in terms of financing, and it demonstrates that we are facing a situation where AI represents a strategic and vital challenge for the development and growth of states and modern societies. And so, prove to us that we are facing a field that re-quires specific considerations from decision-makers and all other stakeholders. Moreover, the idea reinforces the obligation to invest in this area and to understand how much it costs us if we choose to ignore investment in this emerging field. However, the lesson for Morocco is that the field of AI is very important for the state due to the development and growth potentials it offers, and on the other hand, it shows that even those states that invest colossal budgets do so not only with the idea of harnessing the potentials of AI but also to benefit from its advantages. However, participating and competing in this field is for them an obligation and a strategic necessity.

In Morocco, the debate around the potentials of AI is still in its infancy, which should now steer the discussion towards the optimal exploitation of national capabilities to achieve the objectives that serve the strategic ambitions of the nation in this field. On this subject, we believe that, due to our inability to keep up with this high pace and the competition that has turned the field of AI into a theater of rivalries and political and strategic confrontations, it negatively impacts the processes of regulation and governance (Schmidt, 2022).

We should start from the available capabilities as well as the local specifics when developing an AI development and governance plan in Morocco. So, if in terms of funding, we do not have the same capabilities as the States we mentioned as examples to prelaunch in the field of AI, we also cannot achieve the same objectives. At the organizational and institutional level, we also noted that Morocco holds a specific negative status at the regional and international levels; however, it can leverage this to improve its positioning in the field of AI. We are far from sharing our ambitions and objectives in our region and with our neighbors due to the fact that the Arab Maghreb Organization is still paralyzed and cannot discuss such issues or find common collective responses or reorganize the dynamics according to the profiles of its members (Gomart, 2015).

We know that this situation fosters in Moroccan decision-makers and the elite a desire for alignment primarily with pragmatic and individual orientations that have long preferred the management and administration of the nation’s strategic issues away from the arenas of regional international organizations. This concept among the decision-making elite in Morocco takes advantage of the opportunities provided by these individual processes that invest in bilateral and trilateral relations to achieve notable diplomatic objectives, far removed from traditional negotiation frameworks and discussions. That is why we believe that Morocco should follow the same paths of current diplomacy and try to invest the will to participate in the international debate on AI governance, rather than waiting for the revival of regional organizations and, at the same time, avoiding the slowness and delays of international organizations (Morocco World News, 2024). As in certain fields, cooperation and collaboration must take different and intercontinental paths, benefiting from the differences among AI stakeholders at the international level in order to draw advantages for the country.

1. 1 – Diplomatic opportunism, in the service of cooperation and collaboration in AI governance.

We have seen that the colossal budgets allocated to development programs and the advancement of AI technologies have significantly improved the positioning of states and private entities interested in this field, as well as strengthened the monopoly of these players over their competitors. However, this has not helped the international community make progress in the areas of governance, regulation, and accountability regarding AI as a technology that, through certain applications, serves criminal intentions. AI is currently playing a significant role in the execution of harmful strategies and criminal activities. Criminals in the digital space are leveraging the generative potentials of AI to enhance their phishing activities. AI is also increasingly demonstrating unprecedented capabilities in accelerating cyber-attacks against individuals’ assets, manipulating financial markets, etc.  (Brundage et al., 2018). Disinformation, deep fakes, and manipulation for political and strategic reasons, among others, are also predominant activities currently used to destabilize entire societies. This goes beyond the theft of credit cards for online purchases or the diversion of personal information for traditional criminal purposes (Nørskov & Jensen, 2021).

The fact that these practices continue to exist is because the regulatory and governance frameworks have not yet developed deterrent characteristics in the face of the rapid evolution of technologies in general and AI technologies specifically, which innovation continually distances from legal frameworks. The rise of autonomous AI applications and systems, which claim to use methods of response free from the constraints and obligations of the law, the competition between states and private actors that undermines trust among stakeholders in accountability processes, etc., makes it difficult to predict all the consequences and effects and raises several other questions about the effectiveness of discussions and debates, particularly inter-state ones, regarding the global governance of AI technologies (Zaidan & Ibrahim, 2024).

For this, we are trying to encourage other processes of cooperation and to invent new paths of collaboration. These paths stipulate the multiplication of diplomatic partners that are not of the same nature, a paradigm that prioritizes only those who will add value to the negotiated file or cause. For further clarification, Morocco should not only strengthen its relations with the states or groups of which it is traditionally a named actor, but also invite leading companies, think tanks, non-state organizations, and all other groups related to the cause under negotiation to collaborate on an internal Moroccan framework for AI. 

It is crucial to add that the states of the Arab League or the Arab Maghreb Union are not yet concerned with this type of issue, and therefore it is essential for us to seize the opportunities offered by other states, even if they are no longer our neighbors or historical partners. There are as many examples where Morocco has effectively managed its response to international strategic issues, without basing its decisions on the expectations of international organizations (Smith & Doe, 2023).

REFERENCES

Aldoseri, A., Al-Khalifa, K. N., & Hamouda, A. M. (2023). AI-Powered Innovation in Digital Transformation: Key Pillars and Industry Impact. Sustainability, 15(18), 2-25. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16051790

Bahoo, S., Cucculelli, M., Qamar, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence and corporate innovation: A re-view and research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 188, 222-264. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122264

Benabbou, Z. (2024). Artificial Intelligence in Morocco: Current Situation and

Beth Kerley.: Setting Democratic Ground Rules for AI: Civil Society Strategies. National Endowment for Democracy, (2023). Available at: https://www.ned.org/setting-democratic-ground-rules-for-ai-civil-society-strategies/. (Accessed: September 5, 2024.).

Bremmer, I.: How Big Tech Will Reshape the Global Order. Foreign Affairs. (2023). Avail-able at: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/world/ian-bremmer-big-tech-global-order. (Accessed: September 5, 2024.).

Brundage, M., Avin, S., Clark, J., et al. (2018). The Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence: Forecasting, Prevention, and Mitigation. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, and Society (AIES), pp. 1-99. ACM, New York.

Center for Security and Emerging Technologies. Chinese Public AI R&D Spending: Provisional Findings. Available at: https://cset.georgetown.edu/ publication/chinese-public-ai-rd-spending-provisional-findings/ (Accessed: September 5, 2024).

Dafoe, A.: AI Governance: A Research Agenda. Oxford University Press, England. (2018).

Domin, H.: AI governance trends: How regulation, collaboration, and skills demand are shaping the industry. World Economic Forum (2024). Available at: https://www.weforum .org/agenda/2024/09/ai-governance-trends-to-watch/. (Accessed: September 5, 2024.).

European Commission: Regulatory Framework for AI. (2024). [Online]. Available:https://digitalstrategy.ec.europa.eu/fr/policies/regulatoryframeworkai#:~:text=La%20l%C3%A9gislation%20sur%20l’IA%20%5Br%C3%A8glement(UE)%202024,utilisations%20sp%C3%A9cifiques%20de%20l’IA .  (Accessed: September 5, 2024).

European Commission: AI Office. [Online]. Available at: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/ai-office. (Accessed: September 5, 2024).

European Commission. Horizon (2020). Available online: https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-2020_en (Accessed: September 5, 2024).

Gomart, T. (2015). The Maghreb: Regional Disintegration and the Risks of the Zero-Sum Logic. ISPI. Available at: https://www.ispionline.it/en/publication/the-maghreb-regional-disintegration-and-the-risks-of-the-zero-sum-logic-132041. (Accessed: September 5, 2024).

Janssen, M., Brous, P., Estevez, E., Barbosa, L. S., & Janowski, T. (2020). Data governance: Or-ganising data for trustworthy artificial intelligence. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3), 101-493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101493

Jungherr, Andreas. “Artificial Intelligence and Democracy: A Conceptual Framework.” Social Media + Society 9, no. 3 (July 1, 2023). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231186353.

Kort, S.R., Porcedda, G., Slabbekoorn, H., Mossman, H.L., Sierro, J., Hartley, I.R. (2016). Noise impairs the perception of song performance in blue tits and increases territorial response. Animal Behaviour 115, 59-68. https://awspntest.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.anbehav.2024.07.011

Kreps, S., Kriner, D.L. (2023). The potential impact of emerging technologies on democratic repre-sentation: Evidence from a field experiment. New Media & Society. 1(1), 1-40. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4358982

Lina Srivastava.: Building Community Governance for AI. Stanford Social Innovation Re-view, (2024). Available at: https://ssir.org/articles/entry/ai-building-community-governance/. (Accessed: September 5, 2024.).