A Comprehensive Vision for Decision-Making and Power

in the Post-Human-Centric Era

"Sovereignty is not granted; it is built with political, legislative, and institutional awareness—or it is gradually lost in silence."

Artificial Intelligence is more than a technology… it is a sovereignty shift

I perceive artificial intelligence (AI) as one of the most profound structural transformations the contemporary world has witnessed—not merely because it is an advanced technology, but because it redefines concepts of sovereignty, decision-making, and the distribution of power and knowledge. The critical error in public discourse lies in reducing AI to technical or economic dimensions, while its core is fundamentally political, economic, and sovereign, forming a central axis for any future national strategy.

AI is neither inherently evil nor an inevitable savior; it is a multiplier of human capabilities. In an unequal world, this amplification does not operate in a vacuum; it reinforces existing power relations unless managed within clear sovereign frameworks. Ignoring this dimension places nations in the position of passive technology consumers rather than active decision-makers both domestically and internationally.

________________________________________

The Impact of AI on Sovereign Domains

AI’s influence has moved far beyond efficiency and operational speed; it now affects multiple interconnected domains critical to national sovereignty. The first of these is the economy, where productivity, labor markets, and value chains are being reshaped, potentially dismantling the middle class and widening social disparities if these transformations are not matched by clear economic policies and national strategies.

The second domain is governance, as increasing portions of decision-making processes are transferred from humans to algorithmic systems, often without sufficient transparency or accountability, undermining public trust in institutions and threatening social and political stability.

The third domain concerns knowledge and reality, where the line between the real and the artificial blurs, complicating societies’ ability to distinguish facts from AI-generated outputs and jeopardizing public trust—a cornerstone of political and social stability.

In the legal domain, the challenge of algorithmic accountability becomes apparent when intelligent systems make decisions affecting individuals’ lives without clear legal responsibility, presenting new challenges to justice and rights protection.

Power, as the fourth domain, is increasingly concentrated in the hands of those who own the data, computing infrastructure, and the capability to design models and algorithms, reshaping influence and shifting the balance of power nationally and globally.

Freedom, the fifth domain, is gradually transitioning from a purely legal concept into a measurable technical variable, prompting a rethink of fundamental rights and liberties.

Ethics, the sixth domain, requires a realistic understanding of what machines can comprehend or emulate in terms of human values. AI does not “understand” ethics—it optimizes predefined objectives mathematically. Any flaws in defining these objectives, the datasets feeding them, or the institutional incentives governing their use, may produce harmful outcomes even without malicious intent. Therefore, AI ethics is not a theoretical discussion; it is a matter of design, governance, and legislation.

________________________________________

The Arab and Jordanian Gap: Between Influence and Sovereignty Deficit

Examining the Arab and Jordanian context reveals a significant gap between global developments and local realities. Most countries in the region are technology consumers rather than producers, with weak advanced applied research, limited computing infrastructure, scarce national data ownership, and insufficient legislative frameworks regulating AI. While we are not participants in the global AI development race, we are nonetheless within its sphere of influence, facing a strategic challenge: being affected without the ability to shape the rules and make independent decisions.

The real threat for developing nations does not lie in hypothetical scenarios of autonomous AI, but in tangible paths already emerging: dismantling the middle-skilled labor market, deepening digital dependency, importing decision models and values incompatible with local context, and eroding knowledge sovereignty and state capacity for strategic planning. The danger is not being governed by machines, but by algorithmic logic designed externally that reflects priorities detached from national interests.

________________________________________

Redefining Sovereignty in the Age of AI

Sovereignty today is no longer confined to land, borders, or political decision-making. It now encompasses data sovereignty, algorithmic sovereignty, digital infrastructure sovereignty, and the sovereignty to define national objectives, ensuring a state’s capacity for independent planning and decision-making. States lacking these dimensions gradually lose effective governance capability and become reliant on external agendas, even if they appear independent on paper.

________________________________________

Practical Vision and Strategic Recommendations

AI must be treated not as a mere technical file but as a strategic sovereign matter, managed at the highest levels of national decision-making, integrated into national security and long-term economic policies rather than dispersed technical initiatives.

National data sovereignty is the foundation of any forward-looking strategy, necessitating clear legal frameworks for data ownership, storage, and usage, particularly in critical and sensitive sectors.

Legislation must also ensure algorithmic accountability, so intelligent systems are not left as unaccountable decision references, thereby safeguarding both citizens and the state from potential repercussions.

AI should be directed toward sovereign sectors with direct impact on economic and social security, such as water, energy, agriculture, transport, and government services, rather than limited consumer-oriented applications.

Furthermore, the transition from mere digitization to comprehensive digital sovereignty is essential, preserving the nation’s capacity for planning, forecasting, and independent decision-making, thus ensuring long-term protection of both the state and society.

________________________________________

Conclusion and Future Outlook

The critical question is no longer what AI will do to humanity, but who determines its objectives, who holds it accountable, and who bears responsibility for its decisions. In the age of AI, sovereignty is not granted; it is consciously built through political, legislative, and institutional awareness—or it is gradually lost in silence.

Closing line (unique and strategic):

"Sovereignty in the age of artificial intelligence is built through awareness, governed by law, and preserved by independent national decision-making."

Dr. Abdullah Alawneh -Entrepreneurship and Youth Empowerment Adviso