Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Master Student, International Relations, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, International Relations, Department of Political Sciences and International Relations, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Artificial intelligence (AI) can be considered one of the key indicators and outcomes of the Fifth Industrial Revolution. This transformation has led many countries to consider adopting appropriate strategies to manage its consequences. The present study aimed to answer the following question: Why has the European Union (EU) pursued policymaking in the field of artificial intelligence? The study is based on the hypothesis that the EU seeks to establish appropriate and sustainable laws and policies for AI in order to manage its consequences, while also creating conditions to achieve reliable and trustworthy AI in line with its strategic autonomy.
Literature Review
Previous studies have addressed various aspects of AI and its impact on security and governance. For example, in the report titled Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030, Stone et al. (2016) emphasized the role of artificial intelligence in enhancing strategic autonomy and its applications across sectors such as defense, agriculture, and healthcare. Furthermore, the 2022 report by the Centre for European Economic Policy (CEEP) analyzed the EU’s strategies in the field of AI and its impact on global competitiveness. Building on these studies, the present research employed existing theoretical frameworks and new data to provide a more detailed examination of the topic.
Materials and Methods
The current study focused on analyzing and identifying the main themes within relevant texts. The data was collected through both library and online sources, including official European Union documents, research papers, and reports related to AI and public policy. The method of thematic analysis method was used to analyze the data.
Results and Discussion
The thematic analysis was applied to examine European Union documents, policies, and regulations related to AI. This resulted in the identification of key themes that reflect the EU’s strategy toward achieving strategic autonomy and developing trustworthy AI. The findings indicate that the EU aims to strengthen its digital sovereignty by emphasizing factors such as reducing dependency on global actors, ensuring independent decision-making in critical areas, implementing comprehensive regulations, and protecting citizens’ data and privacy. The identified themes were organized into seven major categories: 1) strategic autonomy, 2) AI governance, 3) data transparency and security, 4) risk management and technological ethics, 5) public trust, 6) human oversight, and 7) security and military applications of AI. Each of theme was supported by various open codes, reflecting the EU’s focus on balancing technological innovation with human rights principles. Moreover, the EU tends to classify AI systems according to risk levels and impose strict requirements on high-risk technologies, thus seeking to establish a legal, ethical, and accountable framework that ensures both societal security and public acceptance of AI. In addition, relying on comprehensive policies on transparency, accountability, and system explainability, the EU is actively working to strengthen public trust in this technology. According to the findings, in response to technological transformations and the rise of AI, the EU has assumed a proactive role in regulation and policymaking. Leveraging its legal and institutional capacities, the EU seeks to establish a framework for the safe, ethical, and trustworthy use of AI—one that addresses internal concerns related to human rights, security, and public trust, while also serving as a viable model for other countries. The analysis also focused on the concept of good AI, which translates the EU’s core values into the digital domain. By emphasizing principles such as transparency, human oversight, privacy, and accountability, the EU seeks to align technological development with human dignity and democratic values. This approach, in contrast to purely technocratic views, demonstrates that the future of AI depends not only on technical progress but also heavily on governance and policy choices. Moreover, the thematic analysis indicated that the EU, as a normative power, seeks to extend its influence in the global technology market by implementing strict regulations, thereby encouraging other international actors to align with these standards. This approach strengthens the EU’s regulatory power on the global stage and gradually positions it as a global authority in the governance of emerging technologies such as AI. Overall, the current analysis demonstrated that the EU’s AI policy is not only designed to prevent potential threats but also to embody a forward-looking and normative approach that integrates innovation with ethics, and security with fundamental human freedoms. While this path comes with challenges, it can serve as a model for responsible governance in the digital transformation era.
Conclusion
The results underscored the EU’s commitment to establishing a regulatory framework that balances technological advancement with ethical considerations and public safety. By focusing on transparency, data protection, and human oversight, the EU is setting a global example for AI governance that aligns with democratic values and human rights. However, challenges remain, particularly in the rapid evolution of AI technologies, international competition, and the need for cross-border collaboration to address global AI challenges. Future research should explore the effectiveness of the EU’s regulatory policies in practice, assess their impact on innovation, and examine how these policies can adapt to emerging technological developments.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

- Baldwin, R., Cave, M., & Lodge, M, (2011), “Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy, and Practice”, Oxford University Press,‏ https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ acprof: osobl/ 9780199576081. 001.0001.
­- Brattberg, E., Rugova, V & Csernatoni, R, (2020), Europe and AI: Leading, lagging Behind, or Carving Its Own Way? (Vol. 9), Washington, DC, USA: Carnegie endowment for International Peace,‏ https:// carnegieendowment. org/ research/ 2020/ 07/europe-and-ai-leading-lagging-behind-or-carving-its-own-way?lang=en.
-­ Brown, M, (2019), “Statement by Michael Brown, Director of the Defense Innovation Unit”, before the Senate Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing On “Artificial Intelligence Initiatives within the Defense Innovation Unit”, National Security Archive, https:// nsarchive. gwu. edu/ document/ 20136-national-security-archive-170-statement
- Calderaro, A., (2021), Diplomacy and Responsibilities in the Transnational Governance of the Cyber Domain. In: H. Hansen-Magnusson, and A. Vetterlein, Eds. the Routledge Handbook of Responsibility in World Politics (Pp. 394–405). London: Routledge.
- Citi, M., (2014), “Revisiting Creeping Competences in the Eu: The Case of Security R&D Policy”, Journal of European Integration, Vol. 36, No. 2, (135–151).
- Com, E, (2021), “Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and Amending Certain Union Legislative Acts”, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council,‏ https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ EN/ TXT/ ?uri= celex %3 A52021 PC0206.
- Csernatoni, R., (2022), “The Eu’s Hegemonic Imaginaries: From European Strategic Autonomy in Defence to Technological Sovereignty”, European Security, Vol. 31, No. 3, 395–414.
- Dunlop, C., (2023), Policy Briefing - A Eu Ai Act That Works for People and Society, Ada Lovelace Institute, United­ Kingdom, available at: Hyperlink Reference not valid. On29may2024. Cid: 20. 500. 12592/ S4c5xj.
- Dunn, P., & De Gregorio, G, (2022), “The Ambiguous Risk-Based Approach of the Artificial Intelligence Act: Links and Discrepancies with Other Union Strategies”, In Iail@ Hhai.‏ https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3221/IAIL_paper7.pdf .
- Ebers, M., Hoch, V. R., Rosenkranz, F., Ruschemeier, H., & Steinrötter, B, (2021), The European Commission’s Proposal for an Artificial Intelligence Act—A Critical Assessment by Members of the Robotics and Ai Law Society (Rails). J, Vol. 4, No. 4, 589-603.‏
- Emily Binchy, (2022), “Advancement or Impediment? Ai and the Rule of Law”, The Institute of International and European Affairs, https:// www. iiea. com/ images/ uploads/ resources/ Advancement- or- Impediment-AI-and-the-Rule-of-Law.pdf.
- European Centre for International Political Economy (Ecipe), (2022), “Strategic Autonomy and Artificial Intelligence: European Union in the Global Race”, available at: Https:// Ecipe. Org/ Publications/ Strategic- Autonomy- And- Artificial-Intelligence- European-Union-In-The-Global-Race.
- European Commission, (2018b), “Artificial Intelligence for Europe”, European Commission, Brussels, https:// eur- lex. Europa, eu/ legal-content/ EN/ TXT/ ? uri= COM%3 A2018%3 A237%3AFIN.
- European Commission, (2022b), “Joint Statement: Eu and Singapore Agree to Accelerate Steps Towards a Comprehensive Digital Partnership”, European Commission, https:// ec. europa. eu/ commission/ presscorner/ detail/ en/ statement_ 22_ 1024.
- European Commission, (2017), “Attitudes towards the Impact of Digitisation and Automation on Daily Life”,‏ https:// Digital- Strategy, Ec. Europa. Eu/ En/ News/ Attitudes- Towards-Impact-Digitisation-And-Automation-Daily-Life.
- European Commission, (2019), “Artificial Intelligence”, 7 January 2019 (25 February 2019), https:// Digital- Strategy. Ec. Europa. Eu/ En/ Policies/ European- Approach- Artificial- Intelligence# %22.
- European Commission, (2021c), “Europe Fit for the Digital Age: Commission Proposes New Rules and Actionsfor Excellence and Trust in Artificial Intelligence”, Retrieved 11 January, 2022, available at: https:// Ec. Europa.Eu/ Commi Ssion/ Press Corner/ Detail/ En/ Ip_ 21_ 1682.
- European Commission, (2021d), “Eu and Brazil to Reinforce Cooperation Ahead of 12th Digital Economy Dialogue”, Shaping Europe’s Digital Future, available at: https:// digital- strategy. ec. europa. eu/ en/ news/ eu- and- brazil- strengthen- their-digital-cooperation.
- European Commission, (2022a), “Roadmap on Critical Technologies for Security and Defence”, Strasbourg, Text, available at: https:// Eurlex. Europa. Eu/ Legalcontent/ En/ Txt/ ?Uri= Celex%3a52022dc0061.
- European Commission, (2022c), “Eu-Japan Summit: Strengthening Our Partnership”, European Commission, available at: https:// Digital- Strategy. Ec. Europa. Eu/ En/ News/ Eu-Japan-Summit-Strengthening- Our- Partnership.
- European Commission, (2019), “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Building Trust in Human”, Com, 168, available at: https:// Digital- Strategy. Ec. Europa. Eu/ En/ Library/ Communication- Building- Trust- Human- Centric- Artificial-Intelligence.
- European Council, (2013), “Conclusions of the European Council of 19/20 December 2013”, Euco 217/13, https:// data. consilium. europa. eu/ doc/ document/ ST-217-2013-INIT/en/pdf.
- European External Action Service, (2022), “A Strategic Compass for Security and Defence: for a European Union That Protects Its Citizens, Values and Interests and Contributes to International Peace and Security”, Brussels: the European External Action Service, https:// data. consilium. europa. eu/ doc/ document/ST-7371-2022-INIT/en/pdf.
- European External Action Services. (2016). “Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe, A Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy”, https:// eeas. europa. eu/sites/eeas/files/eugs_review_web_0.pdf.
- European Parliament, (2021), “Guidelines for Military and Non-Military Use of Artificial Intelligence”, available at: https:// Www. Europarl. Europa. Eu/ News/ En/ Press- Room/ 20210114 ipr95627/ Guidelines- for- Military- and- Non- Military-Use-of-Artificial-Intelligence.
- European Parliament, (2022), “Artificial Intelligence: Meps Want the Eu to be a Global­ Standard-Setter”, available at: https:// Www. Europarl. Europa. Eu/ News/ En/ Press- Room/ 20220429 ipr 28228/ Artificial- Intelligence- Meps- Want- The- Eu-To-Be-A-Global-Standard-Setter.
- Farrand, B & Carrapico, H., (2022), “Digital Sovereignty and Taking Back Control: from Regulatory Capitalism to Regulatory Mercantilism in Eu Cybersecurity”, European Security, Vol. 31, No. 3, 435–453.
- Floridi, L et al., (2018), “Ai4people— an Ethical Framework for a Good Ai Society: Opportunities, Risks, Principles, and Recommendations”, Minds and Machines, Vol. 28, No. 4, 689–707. Doi: 10.1007/S11023-018-9482-5.
- Gellert, R. M, (2021), “The Role of the Risk-Based Approach in the General Data Protection Regulation and in the European Commission’s Proposed Artificial Intelligence Act, Business as Usual?”‏, available at: https:// repository. ubn. ru. nl/ bitstream/ handle/ 2066/ 241998/241998.pdf. 
- Haner, J., & Garcia, D., (2019). “The Artificial Intelligence Arms Race: Trends and World Leaders in Autonomous Weapons Development”, Global Policy, Vol. 10, No. 3, PP. 331–337.
- High Contracting Parties Ccw, (2019), “Meeting of the High Contracting Parties to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects ,United Nations, Geneva, 13-15, available at: https://unoda-documents-library. s3. amazonaws. com/ Convention_ on_ Certain_ Conventional_ Weapons_-_Fifth_ Review_ Conference_(2016)/Sri%2BLanka.pdf.
-­ Kirkos, E., Spathis, C & Manolopoulos, Y., (2007), “Data Mining Techniques for the Detection of Fraudulent Financial Statements”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 32, No. 4, PP. 995–1003.
- Lambach, D & Monsees, L., (2022), “Digital Sovereignty, Geopolitical Imaginaries, and the Reproduction of European Identity”, European Security, Vol. 31, No. 3, PP. 377–394.
- Laux, J., Wachter, S & Mittelstadt, B, (2024), “Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence and the European Union Ai Act: On the Conflation of Trustworthiness and Acceptability of Risk”, Regulation & Governance, Vol. 18, No. 1, PP. 3-32.‏
- Macovei, M., & Yiannaki, S. M, (2020), “Strategic Autonomy in the Eu’s Ai Policy”, European Papers. Retrieved From available at: https:// Www. Europeanpapers. Eu/ En/ Europeanforum/ Strategic- Autonomy-Eu%E2%80%99s-Ai-Policy.
- Manners, I, (2002), “Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?”, Jcms: Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 40, No. 2, PP. 235-258.‏
- Marsden, C., Meyer, T & Brown, I., (2020), “Platform Values and Democratic Elections: How Can the Law Regulate Digital Disinformation?”, Computer Law & Security Review, Vol. 36, 105373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2019.105373.
- Mckinsey Global Institute, (2017), “10 Imperatives for Europe in the Age of Ai and Automation”, Mckinsey Global Institute, available at: https:// Www. Mckinsey. Com/ Featured- Insights/ Europe/ ten- Imperatives- for- Europe- in- the- Age- of- Ai-and-Automation.
- Meltzer, J & Tielemans, A., (2022), The European Union AI Act: Next steps and issues for building international cooperation in AI, Brookings Institution. United States of America, available at: https://coilink.org/20.500.12592/tpb2j8
- Micklitz, H. W., et al., (2021), Constitutional Challenges in the Algorithmic Society, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, available at: https:// cadmus. eui. eu/ bitstream/ handle/ 1814/ 74296/ Constitutional_ Challenges_ in_ the_ Algorithmic_ Society. pdf.
- Now, A, (2020), Europe’s Approach to Artificial Intelligence: How Ai Strategy is Evolving. available at: ‏https:// www. accessnow. org/ wp- content/ uploads/ 2020/12/ Europes-approach- to-AI-strategy-is-evolving.pdf.
- Oecd.Ai, (2021), “Database of National Ai Policies”, available at: https://Www.Oecd.Ai/Dashboards.
- Pigou, A, (2002), The Economics of Welfare (1st ed.), Routledge, New York: Taylor and Francis. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4324/ 9781351304368.
- Posner, R. A, (1974), Theories of Economic Regulation (No. w0041). National Bureau of Economic Research”, New York: https:// www. nber. org/ system/ files/ working_ papers/ w0041/ w0041.pdf.
- Roberts, H et al., (2021), “Achieving a “Good Ai Society”: Comparing the Aims and Progress of the Eu and the Us”, Science and Engineering Ethics, Vol. 27, No. 6, PP. 1–25, Doi: 10.1007/S11948-021-00340-7.
- Robles, P & Mallinson, D. J, (2023), “Artificial Intelligence Technology, Public Trust, and Effective Governance”, Review of Policy Research, Vol. 42, No. 1, 11-28.‏ https:// Doi. Org/ 10.1111/Ropr.12555.
- Sovrano F et al., (2022), “Explainability and the European AI Act Proposal”, J — Multidisciplinary Scientific Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1, 126-138. https://doi.org/10.3390/j5010010.  
- Special Eurobarometer, (2017), “Attitudes towards the Impact of Digitization and Automation on Daily Life”, Special Eurobarometer 460 – Wave EB87.1 – TNS opinion & social. https:// europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2160.
- Stigler, G. J, (2021), “The Theory of Economic Regulation”, In the Political Economy: Readings in the Politics and Economics of American Public Policy, Chicago: Routledge, ‏PP. 67-81.
- Straus, J, (2021), “Artificial Intelligence–Challenges and Chances for Europe”, European Review, Vol. 29, No. 1, PP. 142-158.‏ doi: 10.1017/S1062798720001106.
- Stone, P et al., (2022), “Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030: the one Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence”, Cornell University, https:// doi. org/ 10.48550/arXiv.2211.06318
- Sun Tq & Medaglia R, (2019), “Mapping the Challenges of Artificial Intelligence in the Public Sector: Evidence from Public Healthcare”, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 2, PP. 368–383. Doi: 10.1016/J.Giq.2018.09.008.
- Russell, S. J & Norvig, P, (2016), “Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach”, Pearson, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458. ‏ https:// people. engr. tamu. edu/ guni/ csce642/ files/ AI_Russell_Norvig.pdf.
- Szczepanski, M., (2019), “Economic Impacts of Artificial Intelligence (Ai), Eprs: European Parliamentary Research Service Belgium”, availabled at: Https:// Policycommons. Net/ Artifacts/ 1334867/ Economic- Impacts- of- Artificial-Intelligence- Ai/1940719/ On 01 May 2024. Cid: 20.500.12592/0phht4.
- Taddeo, M., (2019), “Three Ethical Challenges of Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Cybersecurity”, Minds and Machines, Vol. 29, No. 2, PP. 187–191.
- Timmers, P., (2019), “Ethics of Ai and Cybersecurity When Sovereignty is at Stake”, Minds and Machines, Vol. 29, No. 4, PP. 635–645.
- Wachter, S, (2024), “Limitations and Loopholes in the EU AI Act and AI Liability Directives: What this Means for the European Union, the United States, and Beyond”, Yale Journal of Law & Technology, 26(3), 671–705. https:// law. yale. edu/ sites/ default/ files/ area/ center/ isp/ documents/ wachter_ 26yalejltech671.pdf
- Whyte, C., (2020), “Deepfake News: Ai-Enabled Disinformation as a Multi-Level Public Policy Challenge”, Journal of Cyber Policy, Vol. 5, No. 2, PP. 199–217.