​As I traveled more than a dozen times through the Middle East in 2023, I became an avid observer of the region's unfolding narratives; I reflect on a conversation in April. A diplomat, with a mix of hope and certainty, had shared a vision of a year marked by diplomacy and de-escalation. It was a vision where the Middle East, exhausted from ongoing conflicts, would welcome peace. This is a moment of change for the entire region. However, the events that unfolded painted a dramatically different picture, one that not only questioned this optimism but also laid bare the region's deep-rooted complexities and perennial struggles.

The events of October 7th – a day now engraved in the collective memory of the region as a symbol of shattered peace – marked a turning point. Hamas's attack on Israel and the subsequent Israeli response in Gaza spiraled into the deadliest confrontation since 1948. This conflict, far from being a localized fight, threatens to unravel the entire region into a broader war, drawing in global powers like America and Iran and proxy groups from across the Arab world. It is a stark reminder of how quickly the flames of conflict in the Middle East can spread, destroying everything in their path.

Before this escalation, there was a sense of careful optimism. Israel could boast of improving relationships with its neighbors, a sign that perhaps the region was turning a new leaf. But this newfound harmony was fragile, quickly dissipating as Arab citizens' anger boiled over, and Israel found itself isolated once again.

The war's impact is profound and far-reaching. It threatens global shipping lanes, a lifeline for international trade, and even cast a shadow over Joe Biden's presidential ambitions. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which had seemed dormant, had now erupted with such intensity that it sent shockwaves around the world, challenging the notion of a transformed Middle East.

The period leading up to "Black Saturday" witnessed significant diplomatic strides. Notably, Saudi Arabia's reconciliation with Iran brokered in China, signaled a new era of diplomacy in a region traditionally dominated by Western influence. The Gulf states and Egypt's overtures towards Qatar and Turkey hinted a desire to mend long-strained ties. Yet, while significant, these efforts barely scratched the surface of the deep-seated issues plaguing the region.

The endurance of the détente, even amidst the recent violence, is a testament to its necessity. However, it also emphasizes a harsh reality: the Middle East is a mosaic of weak states, except the Gulf Co-operation Council's members. This weakness is political and economic, as evidenced by the struggling economies across the region.

Lebanon's Prime Minister, Najib Mikati, openly admitted his limited control over whether his nation would enter into conflict with Israel – a decision resting with Hizbullah. The Iran-backed militia's actions, along with the Houthis in Yemen, highlight the outsized influence of non-state actors capable of challenging even the most formidable military powers.

Yet, these actions did not deter Israel's military campaign in Gaza, nor did they compel America to shift its strategic interests. The cost of these conflicts is immense for the immediate parties involved and the civilian populations, who bore the brunt of poor governance and the specter of widening regional disputes.

The economic implications were equally dire. The war's ripple effect is felt from plummeting tourism in Egypt and Israel to disrupted flights in Lebanon and Jordan. The Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping lanes threaten not just the vital Suez Canal revenues for Egypt but also raised the specter of inflation for consumers across the Arab world.
The Gulf states, however, exist in a parallel universe. In places like Abu Dhabi or Dubai, life continues with an air of normalcy, almost oblivious to the chaos engulfing their neighbors. This stark contrast between the Gulf and the rest of the region is a poignant reminder of the uneven distribution of wealth and stability in the Middle East.

The Middle East is a region that continues to need attention from the United States. The deployment of military forces and the renewed diplomatic efforts are a reversion to a familiar role – that of a pivotal external power in the region. Despite the talk of a multipolar Middle East, the crisis reaffirms the traditional power dynamics, with Russia and China playing minimal roles beyond critiquing Western policies.

The hope for a transformative peace gives way to a set reality in the Holy Land. The war entrenched positions and polarized societies, with little appetite for compromise or a two-state solution. While not redrawing borders or toppling regimes, this conflict is stripping away any illusions of a new Middle East, exposing the ongoing, unresolved issues that continue to define the region's tumultuous landscape. 

As I prepare to continue my travels in the Middle East in 2024, I do so with a view shaped by the turbulent events of the past year. Despite witnessing the region's deep-seated conflicts and complexities, I remain an observer. With its tapestry of narratives and ongoing fights, the Middle East never stops to unveil new layers of understanding.

My journey and Middle Eastern roots have taught me to view each event as a moment in time and part of a larger historical and cultural context. The region, often portrayed through a lens of eternal conflict and turmoil, also possesses resilience and a capacity for change that defies simple explanations.

I have learned the importance of looking beyond the surface in this landscape of differences, where despair often mingles with hope. The stories I have encountered – of individuals, Israelis, Arabs, and Persians striving for peace amidst chaos, societies grappling with their identities, and nations trying to navigate a path forward – testify to the human spirit's endurance.

As I venture onward, I carry a sense of mindful optimism. The challenges are formidable, and the path to resolution is fraught with complexities. Yet, the people's dynamism and sheer will to seek a better future provide a glimmer of hope. 

The Middle East, with its myriad of voices and narratives, continues to be a region of profound significance to the world. Its history, culture, and people offer invaluable insights into regional dynamics and broader conflict, diplomacy, and peace. ​

​The rapid emergence of artificial intelligence has sparked a mix of excitement and concern. As we stand at this crossroads, it's clear that AI is ushering in a transformative era in human history. Our key challenge is to harness AI's potential benefits while safeguarding against its risks. Society is caught between admiration and apprehension, hoping for a predictable future grounded in reason.

I find comfort in likening AI's rise to past technological breakthroughs. This comparison helps ease our fears by framing these new challenges in a familiar context, allowing us to respond more traditionally. While this approach doesn't eliminate all concerns, it does help manage our fears, particularly about emerging technologies. For instance, understanding how we adapted to the evolution of photography and image manipulation can give us insights into dealing with deepfakes and other AI challenges. However, this comparison could be better; it can't guarantee that new forms of deception won't bring unique societal disruptions, but it offers hope.

Another way I consider managing AI-related concerns is by comparing machine errors to human mistakes. For example, when ChatGPT produces odd responses, it's akin to our mental slips. Similarly, errors in facial recognition software can be compared to mistakes by human witnesses. These comparisons are helpful but carry the risk of over-dependence on technology, which could lead to negative consequences, like decreased human skills due to reliance on automation.

Despite these risks, AI errors are not fundamentally different from human errors. The advantage of AI is its ability to improve continuously. Once we overcome our bias for human capabilities, I think we'll be more open to relying on technology, even accepting its occasional major mishaps over the more frequent minor errors of human-driven systems.

These methods of finding comfort through historical parallels or metaphors are based on the idea that history progresses subtly, often unnoticed by those living through it. They hinge on humanity's ability to adapt to new challenges, even if our success is mixed. While this perspective offers some security by redirecting us to familiar issues, it also risks underestimating the potential for entirely new and unprecedented situations.

At the heart of ongoing AI concerns is the alignment problem: the fear that a superintelligent AI might not share our human values, like the value of life or dignity. A superintelligent AI's indifference could be disastrous. For example, an AI designed to tidy a house might eliminate a pet as a source of disorder. Some believe that intelligence inherently includes moral values, but the existence of human sociopaths, who demonstrate a disconnect between intelligence and morality, challenges this optimism.

The danger of a superintelligent AI aligns with the fear of it pairing with a human sociopath, accessing unparalleled resources, and posing a unique, profound threat. Beyond the comfort of historical parallels, this scenario represents a potential existential risk unlike anything we've faced before.
Reflecting on Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan, depicted as a proto-robot, offers an interesting parallel. Hobbes saw the state as a machine, representing human characteristics but with far greater capabilities. This metaphor implies that as we improve in decision-making, so should our governing systems. However, the Leviathan also suggests that humans need a higher authority for peaceful coexistence, potentially leading us to lose control over our destiny.

Modern democracies have evolved, incorporating the principles of the Leviathan into governance. While usually hidden, these mechanisms become apparent in crises, showing that Leviathan's concept still influences us, evolved but unchanged. This doesn't exaggerate the state's algorithmic nature but acknowledges it as a structure that encapsulates human reasoning within a rules-based framework.

This perspective highlights the disconnect between human values and the operations of powerful entities like states and corporations, which often show signs of dysfunction. While calling for more democracy is expected, increasing participation in a flawed system isn't enough. The deeper issue is aligning human values with these powerful mechanisms.

Extending this viewpoint to AI alignment issues, states, and corporations illustrate the fears of machines escaping human control. These scenarios reflect our concerns about AI, where we risk becoming too reliant or unable to contain their proliferation.

We should recognize historical precedents in our interactions with powerful machines but also be aware that these precedents indicate only a temporary harmony. The misalignment of states and corporations with the interests of ordinary people mirrors the potential misalignment with a hypothetical superintelligence. The critical challenge is how we coexist with machines and manage the interactions between various machines, including state mechanisms, corporations, and AI, which raises concerns like automated weaponry and extensive surveillance.

In this era, we're not just facing a single complex alignment problem but multiple ones. Reflecting on historical events, like human judgment averting disasters during the Cold War, underscores the uncertainty of a future steered by machine guidance. I caution against the risks of "artificial persons gone wrong," where combining state mechanisms and AI could lead to catastrophic outcomes.

Considering the state as a machine challenges the certainty of our societal structures and suggests alternative forms of organization and governance. While states derive legitimacy from the people, their management often needs to respond more effectively to public needs. The more significant challenge, however, lies with the indifference of an unaligned AI to human concerns. While addressing AI-induced catastrophes, I also emphasize the compromised nature of human decision-making. Aligning the metaphorical machines in our societal and political systems is a more immediate concern than the speculative dangers of advanced AI.