Latest news with #FletcherSchool
New Indian Express
4 days ago
- Business
- New Indian Express
Borne identity: Looming AI threat
This erasure will be deepened if AI culls jobs on a scale not seen for decades―and across the rank and file this time. AI was supposed to take over basic and repetitive tasks, leaving workers free to supervise machines or turn to higher things. Exactly the opposite is happening. AIs can write words and code, create images from words, analyse gigantic datasets and work in mathematics, science and music. Because they learn by mimicry, they can even write poetry and literary fiction in the manner of acclaimed writers. But for want of manual dexterity, AIs are no good for everyday work. They can make fast food because it's standardised, but they can't make a home-cooked meal. Disappointingly, while the household robot has been a stock character in science fiction, intelligent machines can't perform any household function reliably, except for keeping floors somewhat clean. Jobs deemed to be low-quality may prove to be durable while a lot of white-collar roles go to machines. Even industries like the press, which depend heavily on human instincts and originality, are being affected. The buzz is about 'liquid content'―text, graphics and other components formatted to be widely shared, which can be decanted into various formats and channels. Until fairly recently in India, there were curbs on cross-media holdings for fear that media houses would do precisely this, narrowing the variety of news sources and opinion. Besides, it was assumed that the 'nose for news' on which the whole business runs is a uniquely human attribute. But some Nordic media houses are training their own AIs by a simple process: their desk staff give a thumbs up or thumbs down to incoming news to teach the AI to be a news editor. The most persuasive evidence that AIs could take white-collar jobs comes from changing attitudes to universal basic income. The idea dates back to Thomas Paine in the late 18th century and enjoys some popularity in times of economic uncertainty. At other times, it has been dismissed as a handout. But over the last decade, as AI has surged, it is again being talked up. Elites drive policy everywhere, including in technology, and the change could suggest that they know that their own AIs could make them redundant. Speakeasy Pratik Kanjilal | Fellow, Henry J Leir Institute of Migration and Human Security, Fletcher School, Tufts University (Views are personal) (Tweets @pratik_k)
Boston Globe
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Trump's vision: One world, three powers?
'We all want to make deals,' Trump said in a recent interview with Time magazine. 'But I am this giant store. It's a giant, beautiful store, and everybody wants to go shopping there.' Trump may have something even bigger in mind involving Russia and China, and it would be the ultimate deal. His actions and statements suggest he might be envisioning a world in which each of the three so-called great powers — the United States, China, and Russia — dominates its part of the globe, some foreign policy analysts say. It would be a throwback to a 19th-century style of imperial rule. Advertisement Trump has said he wants to take Greenland from Denmark, annex Canada, and reestablish US control of the Panama Canal. Those bids to extend US dominance in the Western Hemisphere are the clearest signs yet of his desire to create a sphere of influence in the nation's backyard. He has criticized allies and talked about withdrawing US troops from around the globe. That could benefit Russia and China, which seek to diminish the US security presence in Europe and Asia. Trump often praises President Vladimir Putin of Russia and Xi Jinping, China's leader, as strong and smart men who are his close friends. Advertisement To that end, Trump has been trying to formalize Russian control of some Ukrainian territory — and US access to Ukraine's minerals — as part of a potential peace deal that critics say would effectively carve up Ukraine, similar to what great powers did in the age of empires. Trump and Putin spoke about Ukraine in a two-hour phone call last week. 'The tone and spirit of the conversation were excellent,' Trump wrote on social media. Monica Duffy Toft, a professor of international politics at Tufts University's Fletcher School, said that the leaders of the United States, Russia, and China are all striving for 'an imaginary past that was freer and more glorious.' 'Commanding and extending spheres of influence appears to restore a fading sense of grandeur,' she wrote in a new essay in Foreign Affairs magazine. The term 'spheres of influence' originated at the Berlin Conference of 1884-85, in which European powers adopted a formal plan to carve up Africa. Some close observers of Trump, including officials from his first administration, caution against thinking his actions and statements are strategic. While Trump might have strong, long-held attitudes about a handful of issues, notably immigration and trade, he does not have a vision of a world order, they argue. Yet there are signs that Trump and perhaps some of his aides are thinking in the manner that emperors once did when they conceived of spheres of influence. 'The best evidence is Trump's desire to expand America's overt sphere of influence in the Western Hemisphere,' said Stephen Wertheim, a historian of US foreign policy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Advertisement But setting up a sphere of influence in the post-imperial age is not easy, even for a superpower. Last month, Canadians elected an anti-Trump prime minister, Mark Carney, whose Liberal Party appeared destined to lose the election until Trump talked aggressively about Canada. Leaders of Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark, have rejected the idea of US control. Chinese officials are threatening to stop a Hong Kong company from selling its business running two ports in the Panama Canal to US investors. 'China will not give up its stakes in the Western Hemisphere so easily without a fight,' said Yun Sun, a China analyst at the Stimson Center in Washington. Even so, Trump and his aides persist in trying to exert greater US influence from the Arctic Circle to South America's Patagonia region. When Carney told Trump this month in the Oval Office that Canada was 'not for sale,' Trump replied: 'Never say never.' In March, Vice President JD Vance visited a US military base in Greenland to reiterate Trump's desire to take the territory. And it is no coincidence that Secretary of State Marco Rubio's two most substantial trips since taking office have been to Latin America and the Caribbean. In El Salvador, Rubio negotiated with Nayib Bukele, the strongman leader, to have the nation imprison immigrants deported by the US government, setting up what is effectively a US penal colony. Rubio also pressed Panama on its ports. On a late March visit to Suriname, Rubio was asked by a reporter whether administration officials had discussed setting up spheres of influence, which would entail negotiating limits on each superpower's footprint, including in Asia. Advertisement Rubio, who has more conventional foreign policy views than Trump, asserted that the United States would maintain its military alliances in Asia. Those alliances allow it to base troops across the region. 'We don't talk about spheres of influence,' he said. 'The United States is an Indo-Pacific nation. We have relationships with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines. We're going to continue those relationships.' Some analysts say Trump's approach to the war in Ukraine is consistent with the concept of spheres of influence. The United States is talking to another large power — Russia — about how to define the borders of a smaller country and is itself trying to control natural resources. Trump has proposed terms of a settlement that would mostly benefit Russia, including US recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea and acknowledgment of Russian occupation of large swaths of eastern Ukraine. Last week, Trump even seemed to back off his demand that Russia agree to an immediate cease-fire with Ukraine. Earlier, he got Ukraine to sign an agreement to give US companies access to the country's minerals. Supporters of Trump's settlement proposal say it reflects the reality on the ground, as Ukraine struggles to oust the Russian occupiers. But Trump's praise of Putin and of Russia, and his persistent skepticism of America's role in NATO, has inflamed anxieties among European nations over a potentially waning US presence in their geographic sphere. The same is true of Taiwan and Asian security. Trump has voiced enough criticism of the island over the years, and showered enough accolades on Xi, that Taiwanese and US officials wonder whether he would waver on US arms support for Taiwan, which is mandated by a congressional act. Advertisement Trump says he wants to reach a deal with China. Whether that would go beyond tariffs to address issues such as Taiwan and the US military presence in Asia is an open question. 'Beijing would love to have a grand bargain with the US on spheres of influence,' said Sun, the China analyst, and 'its first and foremost focus will be on Taiwan.' This article originally appeared in
The Guardian
11-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Finding a way forward in the India-Pakistan conflict
Your editorial (The Guardian view on India and Pakistan: a newly dangerous moment in an old dispute, 7 May) underscores the alarming escalation between India and Pakistan, but the suspension of the Indus waters treaty and the missile strikes are more than just a return to familiar hostility. They reflect a deeper pattern that I call the urgency-actionability trap: the impulse to respond to provocation, even when those responses, whether symbolic or military, offer little durable benefit and risk spiralling escalation. India's suspension of the Indus treaty is technically limited – it cannot 'turn off the tap' overnight – but it sets a dangerous precedent in normalising water as a weapon. Pakistan's retaliatory posture, similarly, satisfies domestic politics while weakening regional water security. Neither action advances stability; both reinforce distrust. There is a narrow but actionable path forward. Engineering diplomacy, rooted in scientific realism, suggests small, verifiable steps – reinstate real-time data sharing; deploy neutral monitoring; and rebuild the habits of cooperation that long kept this basin out of the fire. Principled pragmatism – the ability to act in ways that are both realistic and values-based – is urgently needed. When symbolism overtakes strategy, rivers become battlegrounds. But they don't have to be. The time to restore channels of communications, however modest, is Shafiqul Islam Director, water diplomacy programme, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, US Mirza Waheed's poignant article underscores a critical oversight in the discourse surrounding the Kashmir conflict: the persistent marginalisation of Kashmiris (A massacre has reignited the forever war between India and Pakistan – once more, Kashmiri voices are missing, 29 April). As a resident of Shopian, I have witnessed first-hand the cyclical nature of violence that has plagued our region. The recent escalation following the tragic attack in Pahalgam has once again thrust Kashmir into the spotlight, yet the narratives predominantly focus on the geopolitical tensions between India and Pakistan, sidelining the lived experiences of Kashmiris. India's revocation of Article 370 in 2019, as highlighted by Waheed, marked a significant shift in India's approach to Kashmir, leading to increased militarisation and a sense of disfranchisement among locals. This move, done without consultation with Kashmiris, has deepened the chasm between the region and the central government. For any lasting resolution, it is imperative that the voices of Kashmiris are not only heard but are central to the dialogue. The international community, media and policymakers must prioritise inclusive conversations that address the aspirations and grievances of the Kashmiri Mushtaq TeliShopian, Jammu and Kashmir, India Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
African Manager
08-05-2025
- Business
- African Manager
Tunisia ranks 4th in Africa on Digital Evolution Index 2025
Tunisia has secured the 79th global position (4th in Africa) in the newly released Digital Evolution Index 2025 by the Fletcher School's Institute for Business in the Global Context. The study evaluates 125 countries (covering 92% of the world population) across four key pillars: institutional environment, demand conditions, supply conditions, and innovation/adaptation capacity. In Africa, Mauritius leads the way with a score of 52.31 points and is ranked 62nd in the world. It is followed by South Africa (66th) with 50.11 points, then Botswana (76th) with 45.33 points. After Tunisia, Kenya completes the African top 5 with a score of 41.48 (84th in the world). Other African countries in the top 10 include Morocco (87th) with 40.64, Egypt (91st) with 38.38, Namibia (94th) with 37.55, followed by Algeria (96th) with 34.84 and Senegal (97th) with 34.70. Despite this progress, the report highlights a wide digital divide between the world's major regions. North America and Europe continue to dominate the top of the rankings, while Africa and the Middle East are still struggling to keep up. The United States dominates the ranking with a perfect score of 100, followed by Singapore (96.72), Finland (89.20), Denmark (88.55) and Sweden (88.24), all praised for the maturity of their digital ecosystem and their capacity to innovate. The overall score is based on 184 indicators grouped into four main pillars: the institutional environment, demand conditions, supply conditions and the ability to innovate and adapt to change. Each indicator is rated on a scale from 0 to 10 and then aggregated in equal parts to give a final score from 0 to 100.
Yahoo
14-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Tariff odds, TSMC's foundry goals, new Intel CEO: Top Chip Stories
Investors weigh the US position in the AI chip landscape after President Donald Trump took aim at the CHIPS & Science Act, a Biden-era policy that invested billions into the sector and domestic semiconductor manufacturing. Tufts University international history professor at the Fletcher School Christopher Miller examines the future of the CHIPS Act, as well as other top themes and stories in the chip space, like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company's (TSM) reported talks to run Intel's foundry business (INTC), Intel's new CEO, and more. Miller is also the author of Chip War: The Fight for the World's Most Critical Technology. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination here. Sign in to access your portfolio
