The age of AI diplomacy 

We’ve long known that computers can beat us at chess, so does it matter if they have started to beat us at more verbal and collaborative games such as Diplomacy? It certainly does, and suggests a future in which artificial intelligence may begin to play a growing role in the whole spectrum of international affairs, from crafting communiqués to solving disputes and analysing intelligence briefings.

Diplomacy, a strategic board game that was a favourite of both Henry Kissinger and John F. Kennedy, is set in Europe before the first world war. The objective is to gain control of at least half the board by negotiating alliances via private one-to-one conversations. There are no binding agreements, so players can misrepresent their plans and double-deal. To play, let alone win, requires the capacity to understand the other players’ motivation, but also to be able to negotiate with them in a natural and flexible way, eliciting their trust, only to betray it at the right moment. It’s a game of guile, not mechanics.

So the development at Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta of Cicero, a computer able to play Diplomacy better than 90 per cent of human players, demonstrates that computers can learn how to talk, understand and scheme like the rest of us. Of course, Diplomacy is just a game, but it uses the core skills needed for real diplomacy, as well as its shadowy younger brother, intelligence. It suggests that AI, already being presented as the next big thing in war-fighting, may also play its part in peacemaking.

AI systems simulate learning, problem–solving and decision-making processes that have hitherto been the preserve of human intelligence. Already they are in widespread use, from high-frequency stock-trading platforms to the speech-recognition systems on our phones.