Abstract
This paper presents a continuation of the issue of Gaza and what’s next to rebuild Gaza after the debacle which has happened. The paper starts off with the issue of how to help Gaza become the Singapore of the Middle East. The paper continues by asking Artificial Intelligence to provide it with questions, provide it with a general summary, then provide it with questions, and then answer those questions. The result suggests that Artificial Intelligence can act as an aid to thinking and to springboard creative analysis and ideas for the future. The notion of having Artificial Intelligence assume that what is going to be done has already been done allows us to ask questions such as the specifics of what was done. In this respect, positioning Artificial Intelligence as a looking back of that which has not happened yet provides a new level of specificity to help the decision maker.
Artificial Intelligence as a Coach
The objective of this paper is to show what might happen when artificial intelligence is provided with a scenario and asked to specify what would happen, as well as what might be the reactions. In this respect, AI can become a colleague and a trusted advisor of a person who has to make decisions. By using different prompts for different aspects of the situation, it’s quite possible in a matter of an hour or two to get a sense of the different ramifications of a situation, what to do to ‘repair,’ and how people might react. We’re not saying of course that this is correct, but we’re simply saying that this is in the category of a best guess by AI. And if that is accepted, then we have a tool now to help understand policy. Furthermore, AI offers superior predictions over experts due to its ability to process vast data at a faster pace. AI can provide objective insights, identify unusual patterns, and mitigate human biases, resulting in more accurate and reliable predictions for future events [1-3].
The strategy used here is letting AI forecast the future by asking it to report on ‘what occurred’ in the future. By believing that artificial intelligence is looking back from the future, policymakers might acquire a unique perspective on the prospective implications of their actions and change their plans appropriately [4-6]. Predicting the future by asking artificial intelligence to describe it as the past provides a unique perspective that can uncover hidden patterns and trends. By modeling the future after the past, AI algorithms can identify connections and relationships that may not be immediately apparent to human experts. This approach can also help to eliminate bias and preconceived notions that experts may bring to the table, allowing for a more objective analysis of potential scenarios. AI’s ability to process vast amounts of data and make accurate predictions based on historical patterns makes it a valuable tool for forecasting future events.
A continuing issue in the adoption of artificial intelligence to help decision-making is the belief or the aversion to mechanical methods for creative thinking. Whenever artificial intelligence is brought up, almost always there are people who talk about the fact that artificial intelligence cannot create anything new. To them, artificial intelligence is not really new thinking, but simply going through lots of data and looking for patterns. And in fact, that is quite correct, but not relevant. To the degree that artificial intelligence can present us with ordinary, typical types of scenes, questions, and even synthesize the responses of Gazans is itself remarkable and should be used. If artificial intelligence were simply doing this randomly, we might not be able to interpret the data. But the data, the language, the meanings of that which we are reading seem to be real. All things considered, it is probably productive for society to use artificial intelligence as a coach, to suggest ideas, to be springboards to thinking. In other words, to be a coach, a consultant. Artificial intelligence need not provide the answer, as much as it gives us a sense of the alternative ideas from which to choose.
Edward Bellamy, Visioning the Future, and Its Application to Today’s Gaza
Edward Bellamy wrote about the future through Looking Backward by creating a utopian society set in the year 2000, where all resources are shared equally, work is replaced by leisure, and everyone lives in harmony. Bellamy’s style was descriptive and detailed, painting a vivid picture of this ideal society. But more than that. Bellamy’s style suggests the possibility of predicting the future but positioning it as a historical exercise of ‘looking backward’ at that which has not happened [7]. The style of ‘looking back’, attributed to Edward Bellamy, is quite similar to what we are doing here by analyzing a month of Israel trying to transform Gaza into the Singapore of the Middle East. Bellamy’s approach involved reflecting on past events and envisioning potential future scenarios, which is exactly what we are doing as we look back on Israel’s efforts and speculate on the outcome of their actions in Gaza. By examining this one month of work, we are essentially anticipating the potential consequences and impact it may have on the region, much like Bellamy did in his literary works.
One similarity between the two is the concept of idealistic visions for the future. Bellamy’s writings often portrayed a utopian society, while Israel’s goal of turning Gaza into a thriving economic hub reminiscent of Singapore also embodies a vision for a better future. Both involve the imagining of a better world based on certain actions and decisions taken in the present. However, a key difference lies in the context and the means by which these visions are pursued – Bellamy’s works were fictional narratives, whereas Israel’s efforts in Gaza are very much real and come with their own set of challenges and complexities. The act of looking back to a month of work yet to come in Today’s Israel hearkens back to Bellamy’s style as it requires a blend of reflection on past actions and anticipation of future outcomes. By analyzing the progress and developments in Israel’s project to transform Gaza, we are essentially engaging in a form of speculative thinking that mirrors Bellamy’s approach in envisioning alternative societal structures. Both involve a form of projection into the future based on current events and decisions, highlighting the interconnectedness of past, present, and future in shaping our understanding of the world around us.
Visioning the Future of a Gaza Becoming a New Singapore
In a previous paper we looked at what Israel might do to help Gaza become a Singapore [8]. Singapore of course is a remarkably successful city-nation in Asia, carved out of Malaysia. Singapore was not always well-off, Singapore was once poor, it was subject to the Japanese occupation and the damage that the Japanese did to Singapore. With a wise government, Singapore began to modernize, until today it’s held up as one of the most successful countries or really city-states in the world. With that in mind, we wanted to look at what would happen if in fact Israel had unilaterally begun work on creating or recreating Gaza as a Singapore of the Middle East. On our first work, we looked at what it should do. In this work, we are assuming that Gaza is now, we are assuming now, again, stop. In this work, we are now assuming that during the month of June, Israel unilaterally took action to do non-harmful reconstruction and restructuring of Gaza to begin its path to become Singapore. It is now August, or it is now July, and the question is, what can we report, and what do the Gazans say? The strategy here is to envision the future, not in general terms, but in specific terms, and see whether it would be possible, using artificial intelligence, to get a sense of what would be the things that one would be most proud of, and therefore this paper. The approach follows the use of Mind Genomics embedded in the platform BimiLeap.com. The AI in BimiLeap is SCAS, Socrates as a Service, based in part on ChatGPT. With SCAS, we are able to phrase a request, and many times with the proper phrasing, we’re able to get at a series of answers appropriate to the question. The objective here was to figure out what would be reported if, after the fact, people were to know that Israel did this. What exactly would have happened, and what would have been the responses of Gazans who were asked to comment on the results? Keep in mind that the Artificial Intelligence, SCAS, was never told precisely what happened, but only that which Israel was doing was unilaterally able to do.
What AI Produces When Asked to ‘Look Backward’
Table 1 shows the request to AI about what Israel did. The assumption here is that we are reporting after the fact, and we want a more or less factual report.
Table 1: Instructions to the AI (SCAS) to imagine looking background a day after Israel unilaterally began to recreate Gaza as a Singapore of the Middle East.
Note: We requested six paragraphs, but we may not get them. One could request from SCAS a certain number of paragraphs and a certain number of sentences but that will not always be delivered. It’s a matter of repeating the questions iteration after iteration. Each iteration takes about 15 seconds. At some point, the artificial intelligence returns with what is desired.
Table 2 the result from one iteration which satisfied the request in Table 1. The important thing to look at is the fact that artificial intelligence can return with a variety of reports of what it thinks Israel did, and these in turn can be specific suggestions about what might be the obvious things to do in the future. Of course, we have to take into account the fact that this is the point of view of artificial intelligence and not necessarily representing the reality what’s possible, what’s straightforward to do. Nonetheless, by using artificial intelligence, it becomes much more possible to get a sense of what the accomplishments will look like. It is straightforward to run tens or iterations on the platform, changing the instructions to the AI until the appropriate type of information emerges. The platform, BimiLeap.com, was constructed to make the iterations sufficiently rapid (about 15 seconds per iteration), allowing the user to satisfy the objective simply through trial and error.
Table 2: The results from one iteration (of several) which produced answers from AI in the format presented in Table 1. The was generated by SCAS (Socrates as a Service).
Continuing this approach, Table 3 shows hypothetical interviews and points of view of random Palestinians who are assumed to have seen what was going on and are asked to comment. Not all the comments are positive. There is no request on the part of the artificial intelligence, no prompt at all, to be positive but just to say what happened based upon these things. One could of course change the nature of the prompts, put in various types of information about what happened and see the results in terms of the phrasing and tonality of the ‘synthesized interview comments.’ Artificial intelligence now serves up new ‘information’, a synthesized retrospective of something that has not yet happened, among a population that will be the best ones to give the content to that respective.
Table 3: Background to the interview, request to AI, and 15 synthesized reactions to having experienced Israel’s effort
Our final analysis looks at specific things that were done, asking for the reaction of Palestinians to those, by a quote, and then creating three slogans. It is this kind of specificity which allows artificial intelligence to become more of an aid in decision making. Table 4 presents the request to SCAS and the AI synthesis of ‘what happened.’
Table 4: Twelve questions about what was done, and for each question, respectively, the answer to that question, opinion of a local Gazan, and three slogans emblemizing the effort. All the text was synthesize by SCAS, and slightly edited for clarity.
Discussion and Conclusions
Artificial intelligence analyzing the hypothetical scenarios regarding what ‘Israel did in June 2024 unilaterally to help Gaza evolve into the Singapore of the Middle East’ can reveal surprising insights into potential strategies for economic development and peace-building in the region. By examining Israel’s actions through the lens of AI, we may uncover innovative approaches and solutions that traditional experts may not have considered. AI can also identify potential pitfalls and challenges that Israel may face in its efforts to transform Gaza into a prosperous and thriving area. This analysis can inform policymakers and stakeholders about the possible outcomes of different decisions and help to guide future actions.
Using artificial intelligence to synthesize comments and interviews about the development of Gaza into the Singapore of the Middle East can offer a comprehensive and objective overview of the public sentiment. AI can analyze a large volume of data quickly and identify common themes or concerns among the population. However, there are risks of bias or misinterpretation in AI-generated content because AI may not fully grasp the nuances of human emotions and experiences. Ultimately, the synthesized comments can provide valuable insights into the diverse perspectives and reactions towards the proposed transformation of Gaza.
Creating slogans to symbolize ideas helps to distill complex emotions and concepts into a simple and memorable phrase. These slogans can serve as a rallying cry or a unifying message for a community. Witness, for example, the power of slogans like “Free Palestine” and “End the Occupation” which reflect the deep-seated resentment and anger towards Israel. Positive slogans can be developed for Israel’s unilateral efforts to transform Gaza into a Singapore of the Middle East.
Artificial intelligence to shape a future by simulating a ‘looking back’ perspective can help countries anticipate and prepare for potential challenges and opportunities. By analyzing possible future scenarios, policymakers can develop proactive strategies to address emerging issues before they escalate, minimizing the impact on the country’s stability and prosperity. This forward-thinking approach enables countries make informed decisions which align with their long-term goals. By harnessing the power of artificial intelligence in the mode of ‘Looking Backwards’ there is the definite potential of better navigating the complex seas of geopolitics, where storms are the rule, and calm the blessed exception.
References
- Davis PK, Bracken P (2022) Artificial intelligence for wargaming and modeling. The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation.
- Goldfarb A, Lindsay JR (2021) Prediction and judgment: Why artificial intelligence increases the importance of humans in war. International Security 46: 7-50.
- Ransbotham S, Khodabandeh S, Fehling R, LaFountain B, Kiron D (2019) Winning With AI, MIT Sloan Management Review and Boston Consulting Group, October.
- Brunn SD, Malecki EJ (2004) Looking backwards into the future with Brian Berry. The Professional Geographer 56: 76-80.
- Rollier B, Turner S (1994) Planning forward by looking backward: Retrospective thinking in strategic decision making. Decision Sciences 25: 169-188.
- Yankoski M, Theisen W, Verdeja E, Scheirer WJ (2021) Artificial intelligence for peace: An early warning system for mass violence. In Towards an International Political Economy of Artificial Intelligence pp. 147-175.
- Levi AW (1945) Edward Bellamy: Utopian. Ethics 55: 131-144.
- Moskowitz HR, Rappaport SD, Wingert S, Moskowitz D, Braun M (2024) Gaza as a Middle East Singapore – Enhanced Visioning of Opportunities Suggested by AI.