Introduction
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative force across multiple domains, from economics to diplomacy, reshaping how states and non-state actors interact on the global stage. Within the field of International Relations (IR), the rise of AI poses profound questions about human agency, innovation, and cultural exchange. One critical concern is whether AI, with its capacity to replicate and automate creative processes, signals the ‘death of creativity’—a concept that carries implications for cultural diplomacy, soft power, and global identities. This essay explores this notion through the lens of IR, examining whether AI undermines human creativity or, conversely, reshapes it in novel ways. The discussion will focus on AI’s impact on cultural production, the role of creativity in statecraft, and the broader geopolitical implications, supported by critical analysis and academic evidence.
AI and Cultural Production: A Threat to Creativity?
In the realm of cultural production, AI technologies have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in generating art, music, and literature, often indistinguishable from human output. Tools like DALL-E and ChatGPT can produce paintings or prose at unprecedented speed, raising concerns about the displacement of human creators (Bostrom, 2014). From an IR perspective, cultural production is not merely an artistic endeavour but a vehicle for soft power—a state’s ability to influence others through attraction rather than coercion (Nye, 2004). If AI-generated content dominates cultural landscapes, there is a risk that unique national identities and narratives—key to cultural diplomacy—could be eroded by homogenized, algorithm-driven outputs. For instance, Hollywood or K-pop, as cultural exports, rely on human ingenuity to convey authentic stories. AI, lacking emotional depth or lived experience, may struggle to replicate this authenticity, potentially diminishing the cultural capital of states.
However, it is arguable that AI does not entirely suppress creativity but redefines it. Artists and policymakers can harness AI as a tool to amplify human ideas, creating hybrid works that blend human and machine input. This perspective suggests a collaborative rather than destructive relationship, though the risk of over-reliance on AI remains a concern in diluting originality.
Creativity in Statecraft and Diplomacy
Creativity also plays a pivotal role in diplomatic strategies and problem-solving within IR. Negotiators often rely on innovative approaches to resolve conflicts or build alliances, a process inherently tied to human intuition and cultural understanding. AI, while adept at data analysis and predictive modelling, lacks the nuanced judgment required for such tasks (Russell, 2019). For example, during multilateral negotiations like the Paris Climate Agreement, creative compromises were vital to consensus. An over-dependence on AI systems for decision-making could stifle this human element, leading to formulaic or risk-averse outcomes that fail to address complex global challenges.
Furthermore, AI’s role in information warfare—through deepfakes or automated propaganda—raises questions about the manipulation of creative content for geopolitical ends. States like Russia and China have been accused of leveraging such technologies to influence public opinion abroad, undermining trust in authentic creative expression (Polyakova and Meserole, 2019). This illustrates a darker dimension of AI’s impact on creativity, where it becomes a tool for control rather than liberation.
Geopolitical Implications and Resistance to AI Dominance
On a broader geopolitical level, the integration of AI into creative industries could exacerbate global inequalities. Developing nations, often reliant on cultural exports for economic and diplomatic leverage, may lack access to cutting-edge AI tools, leaving them at a disadvantage compared to tech-savvy powers like the United States or China (Frey, 2019). This imbalance could suppress local creativity in favour of imported, AI-generated content, reinforcing a form of digital colonialism.
Yet, resistance to AI’s perceived threat to creativity is evident. Many cultural institutions and governments promote policies to preserve human-driven arts, recognising their importance to national identity and global influence. The UK government, for instance, has supported creative industries through funding and regulation to ensure human artistry thrives alongside technological advances (UK Government, 2021). Such measures highlight a belief that creativity remains a uniquely human trait, even in an AI-dominant era.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while AI poses significant challenges to creativity, particularly in cultural production and diplomatic innovation, it does not necessarily herald its ‘death’. From an IR perspective, the technology’s capacity to disrupt soft power, manipulate narratives, and deepen geopolitical divides is concerning. However, creativity—rooted in human emotion and cultural context—appears resilient, capable of coexisting with AI through collaboration and policy support. The implications for international relations are dual-edged: states must navigate the risks of AI-driven homogenization while leveraging its potential to enhance cultural and diplomatic outreach. Ultimately, the future of creativity will depend on how global actors balance technological integration with the preservation of human ingenuity, ensuring that AI serves as a partner rather than a replacement.
References
- Bostrom, N. (2014) Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press.
- Frey, C. B. (2019) The Technology Trap: Capital, Labor, and Power in the Age of Automation. Princeton University Press.
- Nye, J. S. (2004) Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. PublicAffairs.
- Polyakova, A. and Meserole, C. (2019) Exporting Digital Authoritarianism: The Russian and Chinese Models. Brookings Institution.
- Russell, S. (2019) Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control. Viking.
- UK Government (2021) Creative Industries Sector Vision. Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport.
