Yapay Zekâ Rekabeti Bağlamında Çin’in Ontolojik Güvenlik Algısı

Abstract

Tarihsel olarak yaşadığı elim olaylar, Batı’nın tahayyülü ve geç modernleşme sürecinin de etkileri birlikte değerlendirildiğinde Çin’in kimlik algısında önemli izler bırakmıştır. Bu makale, ontolojik güvenlik arayışında olan Çin’in devlet rolüne odaklanmaktadır. Araştırmada ilk olarak, Çin’in, yapay zekâ teknolojisinde lider olma hedefine ulaşmak için gerçekleştirdiği eylemlerle, teknolojik üstünlük faktörüne dayalı olarak ABD’ye (Batı’ya) karşı ‘meydan okuyucu’ ve ‘büyük bir ticaret ulusu’ kimliğini güçlendirdiği ve başta ABD olmak üzere diğer devletlerle ilişki kurma rutinlerini geliştirerek ontolojik güvenlik arayışı davranışı sergilediği savunulmaktadır. Araştırmada ayrıca, Komünist Devrimle birlikte içeride başlatılan kalkınma hamlesi ve dışarıda yaşanan değişimleri takiben, Çin’in teknolojik gelişmeye dayanan büyük bir ticaret ulusu olarak nasıl ontolojik güvenlik arama çabasına giriştiği ortaya koyulmaktadır. Ontolojik güvenlik arayışı sürecini göstermek için yalnızca Çin’in yapay zekâ stratejisine odaklanılırken, Çin’in başka alanlardaki ontolojik güvenlik arayışlarını farklı şekillerde yönlendirdiği savlanmaktadır. Bu makalenin konusunu oluşturan küresel yapay zekâ rekabetinde Çin’in yerine ilişkin olarak, bu sürecin Çin’in başta ABD olmak üzere uluslararası ortamdaki diğer devletlere göre sahip olduğu konumu algılamasını güvence altına almak için hareket ettiği görülebilir.

Keywords

• Ontolojik Güvenlik
• Ulusal Kimlik
• Yapay Zekâ
• Çin-ABD Rekabeti

China's Ontological Security Perception in the Context of Artificial Intelligence Competition

Abstract

When the sad events that it has experienced historically, the imagination of the West and the effects of the late modernization process are evaluated together, they have left important traces in China's identity perception. This article focuses on the state role of China, which seeks ontological security. In the research, firstly, with the actions taken by China to achieve its goal of being a leader in artificial intelligence technology, it has strengthened its identity as a 'challenger' and 'great trading nation' against the USA (West) based on the factor of technological superiority, and the USA in particular It is argued that it exhibits ontological security-seeking behavior by developing routines to establish relations with other states, such as The research also reveals how China, as a major trading nation based on technological development, has attempted to seek ontological security, following the development move initiated inside with the Communist Revolution and the changes experienced abroad. While focusing only on China's artificial intelligence strategy to show the process of seeking ontological security, it is argued that China directs the search for ontological security in other areas in different ways. Regarding the place of China in the global artificial intelligence competition, which is the subject of this article, it can be seen that this process acts to ensure that China perceives its position relative to other states in the international environment, especially the USA.

Keywords

• Ontologial Security
• National Identity
• Artificial Intelligence
• Sino-US Competition

References

1. Blasko, D. J. (2011). “ ‘Technology Determines Tactics’: the relationship between technology and doctrine in Chinese military thinking“. J Strat Stud, 34(3), 355–381.
2. Borowiec, S. (2016). “Google’s AI machine v world champion of ‘Go’: everything you need to know”. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/09/googles-ai-machine-v-world-champion-of-go-everything-you-need-to-know (28.06.2021).
3. Browning, C. ve P. Joenniemi. (2016). “Ontological Security”. Self-articulation and the Securitization of Identity, Conflict and Cooperation, 52 (1), 31-47.
4. Bukh, A. (2015). “Shimane Prefecture, Tokyo and the territorial dispute over Dokdo/Takeshima: regional and national identities in Japan”. The Pacific Review, 28(1), 47–70.
5. Callahan, W. A. (2012). “Sino-speak: Chinese Exceptionalism and the Politics of History”. The Journal of Asian Studies, 71(1), 33–55.
6. Ermağan, İ. (2021). Worldwide Artificial Intelligence Studies with a Comparative Perspective: How Ready is Turkey for This Revolution? Artificial Intelligence Systems and the Internet of Things in the Digital Era, Proceedings of EAMMIS 2021. (Ed. Abdalmuttaleb M. A. Musleh Al-Sartawi, Anjum Razzaque ve Muhammad Mustafa Kamal). s. 500-512. Springer.
7. Feng, C. (2021). “Chinese President Xi Jinping seeks to rally country’s scientists for ‘unprecedented’ contest”. South China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3135328/chinese-president-xi-jinping-seeks-rally-countrys-scientists (29.06.2021).
8. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford University Press.

9. Houweling, E. (2021). “Xi Jinping orders China to become more self-reliant in technology”. Verdıct. https://www.verdict.co.uk/xi-jinping-orders-china-to-become-more-self-reliant-in-technology/ (29.06.2021).
10. Hu, A. G. ve G. H. Jefferson. (2008). Science and technology in China. China’s great economic transformation. (Ed. L. Brandt ve T. Rawski). s. 286-336. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Kaja, A., S. Stein ve T. Xiang. (2021). “China’s 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025): Signposts for Doing Business in China”. Global Policy Watch. https://www.globalpolicywatch.com/2021/04/chinas-14th-five-year-plan-2021-2025-signposts-for-doing-business-in-china/ (30.06.2021).
12. Kinnvall, C. (2007). Globalization and religious nationalism in India: The search for ontological security. Routledge.
13. Laing, R. (2010). The divided self: An existential study in sanity and madness. Penguin UK.
14. Lee K. F. (2018). AI superpowers: China, Silicon Valley, and the new world order. Boston: Houghton Mifin Harcourt.
15. Mitzen, J. (2006). “Ontological security in world politics: state identity and the security dilemma”. European Journal of International Relations, 12(3), 341-370.
16. Mitzen, J. ve K. Larson (2017). Ontological security and foreign policy. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. https://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-458 (28.06.2021).
17. Peng G. ve Y. Yao (Eds). (2005). The science of military strategy. Beijing: Military Science Publishing House.
18. Rozman, G. (2011). “Chinese national identity and its implications for international relations in East Asia”. Asia-Pacific Review, 18(1), 84-97.
19. Rumelili, B. (2013). Identity and desecuritization: The pitfalls of conflating ontological and physical security. Journal of International Relations and Development, 18(1), 52–74.
20. State Council. (2017). “Notice of the New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan.” http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2017-07/20/content_5211996.htm. (30.06.2021).
21. Steele, B. J. (2007). “Making words matter: The Asian tsunami, Darfur, and “reflexive discourse” in international politics”. International Studies Quarterly, 51(4), 901–925.
22. Steele, Brent J. (2008). Ontological Security in International Relations: Self-identity and the IR State. Oxford: Routledge
23. Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425.
24. Wu, B. (2001). The Chinese Security Concept and its Historical Evolution. Journal of Contemporary China, 10(27), 275–283.
25. Xin, Z ve C. Chi-yuk. (2018). “Develop and control: Xi Jinping urges China to use artificial intelligence in race for tech future”. South China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/2171102/develop-and-control-xi-jinping-urges-china-use-artificial (1.07.2021).
26. Zarakol, A. (2010). Ontological (in) security and state denial of historical crimes: Turkey and Japan. International relations, 24(1), 3-23.
27. Zhang, F. (2011). The Rise of Chinese Exceptionalism in International Relations. European Journal of International Relations, 19(2), 305–28.