President Reportedly Consulted AI Before Attacking Another Country
Jakarta, CNBC Indonesia — Oversight of the use of artificial intelligence within the United States government has come under intense scrutiny. Reports say US President Donald Trump sought advice from Elon Musk’s Grok AI system before deciding to send troops to Venezuela to capture Nicolás Maduro.
Democratic lawmakers have raised serious concerns about the practice. They have asked whether the AI system’s advice can be trusted, whether it is biased, and whether decisions of such importance for a country of this size are being made on the basis of input from technology that has not been fully tested.
In a letter to Trump cited by Politico, two US House members, Jamie Raskin and Robert Garcia, asked him to preserve “all prompts” he sent to AI chatbots — including Grok, OpenAI, ChatGPT and Claude — while carrying out his constitutional duties, along with each chatbot’s responses.
The request follows reports that Trump asked Grok for advice on his presidential duties, including its opinion on how Venezuelans might respond if Nicolás Maduro were captured. Several weeks later, Trump sent US troops to attack Venezuela and capture Maduro, without authorisation from the US Congress.
Garcia and Raskin said the reports were deeply troubling because Trump chose to consult Grok rather than US lawmakers in Congress. Congress, however, has the constitutional authority to declare war.
Grok was also developed by a private company owned by Elon Musk, who is known to have a close personal relationship with Trump. This has prompted questions about whether personal or business interests could have influenced the advice, and whether others were involved in the government’s decision-making process.
The lawmakers are seeking clarity on several key issues: whether the AI’s advice was the main basis for the decision or merely an additional reference; whether official records exist of the system’s recommendations and the president’s responses; whether the AI system had access to classified information; and who would be held responsible if incorrect advice caused harm to national security.