“(he was) pouring gasoline on a smoldering fire.”, that’s how the New York Times reacted to Winston Churchill’s famous Iron Curtain Speech.
It wasn’t just another speech by Mr. Churchill.
There were a lot of things – time, day, place – abnormally special on that day.
The day was March 5, 1946.
The time was post-World War 2.
And place, well, it was the most unusual place to say something that started the 4-decade long cold war between the USA and the Soviets, influencing conflicts like the Korean War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the Vietnam War. (It was a liberal arts college in New Wilmington named Westminster College!)
Ironically, the invitation penned by President Harry Truman said, ‘This is a wonderful school in my home state. If you come, I will introduce you. Hope you can do it.’
Churchill, unaware of the impact his words would have that day, delivered one of the most iconic speeches in history, with open arms, ‘From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent.’
He used human intelligence and experience to foresee a major global shift – a new ideological divide—between Western democracies and the Soviet-led communist bloc.
AI could do the same thing today – but on a much larger scale. It has the power to analyse the sentiment of speech, and audience personas, predict geopolitical tensions, align national interests with decision-making at national & international levels, and avoid several conflicts from blasting off.
Treaty of Versailles – Fair or Wise? (And What Could Have Been Done Better with New-World AI Diplomacy)
The Treaty of Versailles was a peace treaty – signed to end World War 1 by imposing sanctions on Germany which was accused of starting the war.
Though no one at first place questioned whether it was a fair Treaty, it ended up being a prominent reason behind much more horrific war than World War One, World War Two! And everyone started questioning – whether it was doomed or not.
If we reconsider its fairness today, more than a century later, the question extends beyond its aftermath to what could have been done better—this is where the wisdom of AI-driven diplomacy comes into play.
- Instead of imposing entire war guilt on Germany, the treaty could have acknowledged that multiple nations played a role in escalating WWI.
- Instead of leaving Germany in a great depression with all possible sanctions, the treaty could have thought of the wellness of innocent German people who became brutal victims of hyperinflation and resentment.
- A gradual military reduction instead of an outright ban on essential forces could have prevented Germany from feeling completely defenseless and avoided revolt.
AI-driven diplomacy offers exactly that—a way to simulate multiple outcomes, predict long-term consequences, and craft balanced agreements that prevent future conflicts. AI has the potential to guide diplomacy toward not just fairness, but true wisdom.
Cuban Missile Crisis (The Penny Cost of Escalation Instead of De-escalation)
The Cuban Missile Crisis was a near miss—one wrong move could have led to nuclear war between the USA and the Soviet Union.
The series of events is interesting.
- October 14, 1962 – U.S. spy planes discovered Soviet nuclear missile sites being built in Cuba.
- President John F. Kennedy ordered a naval blockade.
- The world held its breath as U.S. and Soviet leaders, Kennedy and Khrushchev, exchanged threats and diplomatic messages.
- The crisis ended when the Soviet Union agreed to remove its missiles from Cuba.
This is worth studying what led two superpowers to pay just as little as a penny toward Escalation – rather than De-escalation and what could have gone wrong.
- The U.S. Navy dropped warning depth charges near a Soviet submarine. The submarine captain almost launched a nuclear torpedo, thinking war had begun.
- If Kennedy had opted in for military action, rather than naval blockade, the USSR might have retaliated immediately.
- The US was not aware of the Soviet’s tactical nuclear weapons in Cuba. If the U.S. invaded, those weapons might have been used.
- Many U.S. military leaders, including General Curtis LeMay, wanted to bomb Cuba immediately. But Kennedy did not go aggressive.
Today, AI can prevent two nations from coming close to war with better communication channels, more accurate intelligence, and outcome-based diplomatic strategy instead of immediate threats.
Shakedown Diplomacy of Trump Era: Trade War is Two-Sided Sword & Neither Side is Sugar-Coated! (The question is, can we make it AI-coated?)
Historically, Negotiation, communication, building relationships, and promoting interests are the 4 stages of any good diplomacy practice. But things have changed pretty fast in the last 3 weeks – or more specifically – ever since Trump joined the Whitehouse back.
Many senior economists and journalists are referring to this new diplomacy strategy of the USA as Shakedown Diplomacy which is replacing 4 old stages of good diplomacy practice with Power Play, Threats & Ultimatums, Extraction, and Reinforcement & Dependency.
In response to the current economic war, French president, Emmanuel Macron, has said: “If our commercial interests are attacked, Europe, as a true power, will have to make itself respected and therefore react.”
The whole ongoing conflict clearly depicts that it is a two-sided sword and neither side is sugar-coated. No one is the clear winner here. The few already anticipated aftermaths of Shakedown Diplomacy are Loss of Trust and Credibility, Retaliation & Countermeasures, Weakening of Long-Term Alliances, and Encouragement of Alternative Economic Systems.
In this all chaos, AI can prove itself a game-changer defining modern trade strategy.
- It can run millions of simulations, predicting how tariffs, sanctions, and trade wars will play out.
- It can help policymakers tap into data in the most realistic way and keep them out of blind spots.
- AI-powered economic models can calculate the short-term and long-term effect of tariff policies.
- AI can track political speeches, media coverage, and social sentiment across multiple languages,
- AI can monitor global trade data, identifying sudden shifts in exports, imports, and policy changes.
- AI-powered diplomatic assistants can process decades of trade agreements in seconds.
Nearing The Essence (should we introduce AI in diplomacy or let’s just keep it the way it is happening now?)
There are two great things about history:
First, everything eventually becomes part of it.
And second, there’s always a better way to remember it.
But be it Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech, Treaty of Versailles, Cuban Missile Crisis, and Shakedown Diplomacy, we are not making 100% sense here.
A lot has been ignored. A lot new has been introduced. A lot has been changed. And a lot could have been done in a nicer way. This simply means that – we as humans somewhere falling short of being just simple humans.
But that’s not the case with AI development services. They do their job they are trained for. They work on maths and not emotions. They work on data and not on interests. They work on predictability and not on pressure.
So, to answer the question – should we introduce AI in diplomacy or not – yes, we should. But keeping the human element still alive in it, well, I am putting it on the shoulders of policymakers!
Modern AI Was First Formally Introduced in 1956 and Adopted at Mass Just Recently. In This Gap, We Lost More than 20 Countries and Tens of Millions of Lives.
Indeed, we as humans have miserably failed. In fact, we never even attempted to let something better than us win. Even today – with all the clarity of how AI can change the course of today’s divided world, we simply do not let AI unleash its full potential.
Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland was a country many of us heard the name for the first time. Yugoslavia was a country broke apart into at least 7 countries. There are at least 18 similar examples.
What’s more brutal is – Vietnam War (1955–1975) – ~3 million deaths, Korean War (1950–1953, but ongoing tensions) – ~2.5 million total, Soviet-Afghan War (1979–1989) – ~1–2 million, Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988) – ~500,000–1 million, Bangladesh Liberation War (1971) – ~300,000 to 3 million, Afghanistan War (2001–2021) – ~200,000+, Iraq War (2003–2011) & Aftermath – ~500,000 to 1 million.
Yes, technology alone could not have saved the world from disaster. But isn’t it worth asking—what if we had tried? What if, instead of fueling conflicts, we had invested the same energy into intelligence, not just artificial but collective? AI was never meant to be a mere tool; it was—and still is—a chance to redefine decision-making, to replace chaos with clarity, and to predict crises before they spiral into war.
The Essence (You Would Never Hate AI if You’ve Already Accepted the Fate of us Humans and Loved Maths!)
We’re at the crucial intersection of humanity.
While one corner of the world is talking about the race to Mars, another corner of the same world is striving for hunger. While one side is celebrating virtual reality and digital immortality, another side is battling poverty and disease without the most basic healthcare.
At Azilen, we acknowledge this disparity, this poor fate of us humans, and engage with AI with the sole purpose of creating a safer and more joyful world for every one of us.
Be it reducing food waste, ensuring clean drinking water, fighting wildfires, optimizing renewable energy, and improving healthcare diagnostics, we never feel AI is taking over humans. We in fact make it part of our solution approach and let it do wonders for us, with simple maths which we humans have mastered but AI has literary been living with!
Because at the end of the day, maths is everywhere – in the world’s natural patterns, in diplomacy, the economy, the structure of societies, and the choices shaping our world.
Also Read: Middle East AI Chip Deals Sprinting Amid Trump’s Visit: Real Plan in Action?
