In recent years, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has been signalling its intent to become a major player in artificial intelligence, but now other Gulf countries are also getting serious about the technology.

“Here in the region, people were much more prepared to experiment and get involved with AI than maybe some other parts of the world,” he added.

One issue around the rapid growth of AI is that it can be hugely energy intensive, and it is increasingly becoming a major source of greenhouse gas emissions. Google reported that its 2023 emissions were nearly 50% more than in 2019, which it partly attributed to the energy demands of AI. Energy demand from AI, data centers and cryptocurrencies could double by 2026, according to the International Energy Agency.

But Anderson believes that Gulf countries, whose economies are heavily dependent on fossil fuels, are well placed to become “major players” in the technology, and have the potential to make it greener.

“We’re at the center of the world when it comes to energy – not just old energy, but particularly new energy,” he said. “This is the lowest-cost place anywhere in the world to produce solar energy. So the opportunity to combine sustainability and energy with the computer power that’s required from an AI perspective is really important.”

Anderson pointed to the UAE, Qatar and Saudi Arabia as the region’s leading investors in AI.

As Saudi Arabia looks to cut its economy’s reliance on oil and gas, it has invested heavily in AI, which it says will help to realize the objectives outlined in its “Vision 2030” strategy, a government program to diversify the economy. According to a recent projection from the Saudi Data and AI Authority (SDAIA), which hosted the GAIN summit, AI will contribute 12% of its GDP by 2030, with the sector growing at an annual rate of 29%.

There have been significant efforts across the region to develop Arabic-language models trained on local datasets that capture the nuances of the language in a way that has been lacking on platforms like ChatGPT. Last year, the UAE unveiled a tool called Jais and Saudi Arabia has developed the Arabic chatbot ALLaM.

Last week, it was announced that ALLaM will be hosted on Azure, Microsoft’s cloud computing platform. This follows the news from earlier this year that it would also be accessible through IBM’s watsonx platform.

Nick Studer, CEO at management consulting firm Oliver Wyman Group, who attended the GAIN summit, said that the focus on Arabic language models could help Saudi Arabia compete with English-speaking markets that have an “underlying advantage” in the space because of the many large language models available

According to Studer, there are over half a dozen Arabic-based large language models in development in the country, focusing on a range of uses cases, from chat to governmental and corporate applications. “That combination of governmental and private sector entrepreneurialism may well lead to the development of an AI hub, particularly as the kingdom and the wider region seek to diversify their economies,” he said.

Challenge of governance

One of the major hurdles with the development of AI is public perception and governance: how should AI and data be regulated safely, securely, ethically and fairly?

During the summit, various policies were announced, including the launch of guidelines from the SDAIA addressing the responsible use of deep fakes, the unveiling of the Riyadh Charter for AI in the Islamic World, which establishes a framework for developing AI technologies in line with Islamic values and principles, and a global framework for AI readiness, led by the International Telecommunication Union.

Studer says a solid regulatory framework is essential for the future of AI.

“There are many concerns that go with the development of AI – not just privacy concerns, not just the risks of losing jobs, but also all the way up to national sovereignty if your economy starts to rely on a set of tools which are built outside of your control,” he said. “It is critical that we have sensible regulation in place.”

A mayoral debate in the Brazilian city of São Paulo turned ugly when one of the candidates attacked a rival with a chair.

Video from the debate, broadcast live on Sunday by TV Cultura, shows a tense exchange between José Luiz Datena and Pablo Marçal before Datena swings the chair at his counterpart.

Datena later told TV Cultura that he had attacked Marçal – who required hospital treatment for his injuries – because he had brought up old sexual harassment allegations against Datena that were dismissed several years ago.

“He came with a case that was archived, that was not even investigated by the police because there was no evidence. Something from 11 years ago that caused a very serious situation within my family,” Datena said.

Datena was expelled from the debate but insisted in a statement Monday that while he had made a mistake he did not regret his actions.

Marçal was treated at Sírio Libanês Hospital before being released. His team said he was treated for a possible fracture in the chest region and had difficulty breathing. The hospital said he had suffered trauma to his chest and wrist, but without any major complications.

Marçal compared the chair attack to the July assassination attempt against former US President Donald Trump and the stabbing of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro during the 2018 election, posting an image of all three attacks on Instagram with the caption: “Why all this hate?”

The remaining candidates Guilherme Boulos, Marina Helena, Ricardo Nunes and Tabata Amaral continued the debate following the attack. TV Cultura said it regretted the incident and had pressed ahead with the discussion in accordance with the rules after the other candidates agreed.

Marçal’s team has vowed to take legal action.

“Pablo Marçal was cowardly attacked by José Luiz Datena, who hit him in the ribs with an iron chair,” Marçal’s team said, adding that it was unfortunate the debate had continued without him.

It is exactly the kind of attention Ukraine did not need. Since the start of clashes with Russia over its future in 2003, Ukraine has carefully avoided the sort of political violence Ryan Wesley Routh is accused of.

Yet now, at arguably the most crucial point of the conflict, Routh’s vocal support for Kyiv has somehow been seized upon by Russian echo chambers after he was detained Sunday in connection with an apparent assassination attempt on former US President Donald Trump.

Someone like Routh was quite easy to meet in Ukraine in the opening months of Russia’s full-scale war in 2022. Border crossings and railway stations were often haunted by whispering, unshaven expatriates of questionable military provenance, trying to conjure the idea that the very real and painful struggle of Ukraine was something they had a pivotal role in. As the conflict has dragged on, the fantasists have faded, and the resumes of dozens of Western volunteers been vetted, or become less relevant as their alleged experience has been tested in combat. The most brutal fighting Europe has seen since the 1940s, the Ukrainian front line has never been less of a place for amateur thrill-seekers.

Yet Routh tried his best to associate himself with the fight against Russia, expressing support for Ukraine in dozens of X posts that year, saying he was willing to die in the fight and that “we need to burn the Kremlin to the ground.”

Kyiv has enough on its plate now, other than explaining how little it had to do with the author of “Ukraine’s Unwinnable War: The Fatal Flaw of Democracy, World Abandonment and the Global Citizen – Taiwan, Afghanistan, North Korea and the end of Humanity.” This – Routh’s title for his self-published book – does not demand its author’s ideas are taken too seriously.

But already, Moscow’s prolific echo chambers have begun to fashion a narrative in which US support for Ukraine is somehow extremist. Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov, asked what he thought about the assassination bid, said, according to Reuters: “It is not us who should be thinking, it is the US intelligence services who should be thinking. In any case, playing with fire has its consequences.”

RT.com, a Kremlin-run English news outlet, also highlighted Routh’s interest in Ukraine, writing that “Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene stated that if the suspect’s identity is confirmed, it is clear he is ‘obsessed with the Ukraine war, which is funded by the US.’”

Do not expect any majorly new or intelligent arguments to surface about the war in Ukraine in the weeks ahead. But instead, anticipate a slow drip of some new voices, and some of the usual, suggesting the war in Ukraine cannot be won, that Putin must be given a chance to negotiate a deal (even one that lets him keep the chunk of Ukraine he has stolen), and that there is an unhealthy infection of extremists in the ranks of those who feel they must – as Routh once said – “fight and die” for Ukraine.

None of this helps Ukrainians who genuinely must fight and die to protect their homes and families. It particularly hampers Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, days before he is set to present a victory plan to the Biden administration. The clamor of support for Ukraine to receive US permission to fire longer-range US-supplied missiles at targets deeper inside Russian territory had been growing. It seemed likely last week that President Joe Biden would follow the course he’s taken when past decisions on arming Ukraine were presented to him, and consent – albeit very, very late – after public pressure from allies.

But now Zelensky’s press appearances may be dogged by questions about Routh, however absurdly distant from Kyiv’s agenda his apparent attack on a Florida golf course was. It will feed into the ultimate paranoia of US isolationists: that actions overseas which appear to benefit America’s global interests carry with them the risk of fomenting violence back home.

Routh’s political leanings and worldview were far from consistent, if not delusional. But in the breathy forum of random gibberish that is social media, they contribute to a narrative, for those who seek it, of support for Ukraine causing chaos in America. That the United States should just stay out of Putin’s war.

None of it connects with the savage reality Ukrainians face every night, shaken awake by Russian missiles, or losing loved ones to the ghastly attrition of the front lines.

Washington’s support for Kyiv is weighty and consequential when it lumbers into play, yet horrifyingly fragile when subjected to US electoral politics and the Republican party’s fickle grip on geopolitics. The sudden insertion of a wayward extremist like Routh is a loud, confusing wild card, at a time when support for Ukraine urgently needed a calm and balanced voice.