Artificial Intelligence: Between Global Supremacy and Ethical Responsibility
The long and winding road that artificial intelligence (AI) must travel to fully replace humans seems inevitable. The issue of replacement is not simply about AI being able to act identically to humans, but also about meeting ethical standards and not becoming a source of harm to civilization. Its relentless development is marked by the daily publication of its achievements. However, the reception it receives is not always enthusiastic.
When the combination of biotechnology and AI is used to detect various diseases – including degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, neoplastic diseases such as tumors and cancer, and metabolic diseases such as diabetes and thyroid disorders – excitement and hope arise. Human health is increasingly guaranteed, and premature death can be prevented through data-driven detection and treatment.
However, when AI is said to be able to formulate deepfakes – which increasingly resemble human behavior – more cheaply, easily, and with results that are difficult to distinguish from the original, a sense of unease arises. The increasing perfection of deepfakes, when used to create false realities, makes the uncertainty even more difficult to face. This is met with dismay.
The vision of AI development raises many questions. For example, what drives the pace of AI development? Why does human intelligence need to be matched by artificial systems or devices? And where is this development headed?
Maria Zaffaroni and Jerry Haar, in their 2025 book “The Global Competition for Dominance in Artificial Intelligence,” state that the global competition to achieve supremacy is the driving force behind AI development. To achieve this supremacy, it is necessary to have intelligence that is equal to leadership in terms of economic power, national security, and the power to shape international norms.
Therefore, when seeking supremacy and facing the intelligence and all its possibilities from around the world, relying solely on natural intelligence is not enough. Systems or devices that produce other types of intelligence are needed. This is the role of AI, and it answers the first and second questions.
The competition to achieve supremacy is real. This is indicated by the increase in market value, global investment, and the number of people whose jobs are being transformed by AI development.
Josh Howarth, in his 2026 article “45+ NEW Artificial Intelligence Statistics (January 2026),” states that the global AI market is currently worth about $391 billion; by the end of 2025, one in six people will be using generative AI devices; in 2033, the AI industry is projected to increase in value by about nine times; specifically, 1.8% of all new job openings are in the field of AI; and 90% of technology workers use AI in their jobs.
And by 2030, AI has the potential to replace 92 million jobs but create 170 million new jobs. The United States and China are the two countries that are vying for dominance in this field. And by achieving excellence in the field of AI, the competition also becomes a strategy to strengthen the geopolitical advantages of each country.
As for the third question, about the direction of AI development, it can be seen from the ability to build an AI ecosystem. This is formed by six elements: patents and intellectual property; commercialization and investment; infrastructure and computing power; education and talent; national strategy and long-term planning; and quantum readiness.
All of this requires a foundation of research to uncover reality and determine policy. Therefore, the intense research competition between countries also indicates the magnitude of the ambition.
Continuing the discussion by Zaffaroni and Haar, the research competition between the US and China on AI has increased since 2018 to 2024. In that period of six years, China’s research increased by more than 120%, with 23,000 publications and accounting for 27% of the most cited articles. The US achieved 24%. However, quantitative reality – research achievements alone – is not enough. To close the gap with the achievement of supremacy, other achievements are needed.
For example, the US has proven to be superior in the development of its applications. The country continues to produce innovations: transformer architecture, diffusion models, and reinforcement learning. All of this is the basis for the development of cutting-edge AI. In 2024, US development institutions produced 40 AI models that were accepted worldwide. This is compared to 15 models from China and only 3 models from Europe.
However, looking at the quantitative development of AI – based only on the number of models and the indication of global supremacy – does not reassure the heart. The ethical responsibility for its development for humanity is not guaranteed.
The ideology of developing AI based on economic values – health economics, transportation economics, production economics, and human resource economics – often clashes with human values. And to guard against the collision of human values, the Australian government, for example, provides guidance in its ethical study.
The guidance is contained in industry.gov.au, 2025, entitled “Guidance for AI Adoption.” It states that the harm of AI to humans is at least of three types. First, it harms humans. This includes violations of civil liberties, privacy, rights, and physical and psychological safety. The use of deepfakes using personal data for manipulation, for example, falls into this category. With deepfakes, a person’s physical and psychological safety can be threatened, and their personal data can be used without permission.
Former Finance Minister Sri Mulyani, Nagita Slavina, Taylor Swift, and Barack Obama have been victims of deepfakes. They were manipulated into doing things they never did. The harm caused by such manipulation ranges from property loss and reputational damage to loss of public trust. AI can also eliminate potential economic value.
This is…