|
By Mission Grey
Energy flows act as the lifeblood of both geopolitical strategies and global economic systems. Geopolitically, they define alliances, conflicts, and influence. Economically, they sustain industrial growth, trade, and innovation. Countries and businesses which can adapt to the shifting energy landscape — integrating renewables, diversifying supply chains, or investing in new technologies — will be best positioned to thrive in the global marketplace. Efficient, stable supply of energy is foundational for industrial operations, trade, and overall economic growth. However, changes or disruptions in energy flows can ripple across global markets, leading to price volatility, economic slowdowns, and even social unrest. For instance, the energy crisis in Europe over recent years resulting from the Ukraine war has driven up natural gas prices by 45% and imposed record-high electricity costs, destabilizing industries and cost-sensitive residential sectors. This has led to heavy investments in new energy sources like liquefied natural gas (LNG) infrastructure and renewable energy solutions. In this article, we examine two examples of how energy transit routes shape our geopolitical and geoeconomic future -- and, on the other hand, how geopolitics shapes these routes. The cases are more than topical: the first one from Europe and the second one from the Middle East. Estlink 2, the Baltic Sea Submarine Cables, and the European Energy Battle On December 25, 2024, Finland’s Estlink 2 submarine power cable — linking it with Estonia — suffered reductions in capacity due to suspected sabotage. The implicated vessel, the Eagle S, was tied to the so-called Russian shadow fleet. Finnish authorities detained the ship, citing possible deliberate acts, such as dragging anchors to sever cables. This marked another instance of hybrid operations suspected to be part of Russia’s conflict strategy. The incident strained regional energy security but did not result in immediate outages for Finland or Estonia. But what is this Russian shadow fleet and why should one be concerned about it? Shortly, it is a covert collection of aging tankers and cargo ships used to circumvent Western sanctions, particularly related to exporting Russian oil. Apart from economic implications — such as sustaining Russian oil revenues despite G7 price caps — the fleet demonstrates increasing strategic utility for military and geopolitical purposes. These ships operate without conventional insurance or oversight, raising risks of environmental hazards, and are suspected of enabling covert operations like smuggling weapons or materials necessary for Russia’s war efforts. Shadow fleet ships are also positioned as potential assets for logistical support in military endeavors, transporting fuel, equipment, and other supplies — a function critical to Russia's ability to operate beyond its immediate sphere of control. The fleet's utility as a dual-use tool for both war and trade is emblematic of Russia's adaptation to economic isolation by Western states. Moreover, ongoing environmental risks and sabotage incidents — such as oil spills and damage to critical infrastructure — underline their potential as instruments of hybrid warfare. The Baltic Sea plays a strategic role for Russian oil exports and serves as an operational route for these shadow fleet vessels. Recent NATO and EU measures, such as mandating insurance checks at transit chokepoints, could significantly constrain Russian logistical operations. If the Baltic is effectively closed to this fleet, Russia’s ability to sustain its off-the-books exports will be crippled, eliminating a key workaround for sanctions enforcement. The closure also carries broader geopolitical ramifications, including heightened military tension and escalation risks, as Russia could respond aggressively to perceived threats to its economic and naval freedom. The potential introduction of Russian naval escorts for such vessels raises the stakes further, risking incidents at sea involving NATO forces. The economic fallout — both in terms of sanctions circumvention for Russia and increasing costs for its partners — is palpable. At the same time, there is a wider energy battle going on in Europe. It is primarily tied to the expiration of Ukraine's gas transit agreement with Russia on December 31, 2024, and underscores the complexities of regional energy dependencies. Ukraine has refused to renew the agreement to transit Russian gas, disrupting its use as an intermediary hub to Europe. The move has angered Slovakia, heavily dependent on Russian gas, leading its Prime Minister Robert Fico to threaten cutting emergency electricity supplied to Ukraine, particularly during wartime grid outages. Poland has emerged as a key supporter of Ukraine, offering to compensate for any reduced Slovakian electricity supply. Meanwhile, Hungary has also demonstrated a pro-Russia stance, misaligned with broader EU trends aimed at curtailing Russian influence. These dynamics encapsulate the tension between domestic energy security priorities and the need for regional NATO unity. Slovakia and Hungary’s divergent approaches could weaken EU solidarity on sanctions and energy policy, creating openings for Russian leverage. It is not only about resources: also transition routes are used as bargaining chips by different actors as the geopolitical map of Europe is reframed on the eve of Donald Trump's inauguration. At the same time, the wider issue is far from simple: some European economies are still highly dependent on cheap energy for their long-term competitiveness, although may have been able to reject Russian gas and oil for now. For example, high energy costs have impacted Germany’s manufacturing sectors disproportionately due to their energy-intensive nature. These costs have driven some companies, especially electric steel plants, to halt operations altogether. The competitiveness of Germany's hallmark sectors, such as steel, chemicals, and automotive production, has dramatically declined as natural gas prices are now almost five times higher than comparable U.S. prices. This dislocation has implications beyond immediate costs — it reshapes global market balance by favoring regions with cheaper energy. Germany remains a bellwether for energy transition leadership. However, the financial and industrial pressures simultaneously expose its limited ability to buffer aggressive shifts in global competition while transitioning to carbon-neutral energy. Germany has implemented short-term solutions like advocating for capped grid costs and integrating hydrogen-based decarbonized industrial solutions, but experts argue these are insufficient without securing intensified “friendshoring” strategies with allied nations to increase renewable imports and stabilize supply. Longer-term industrial strategies, involving pipeline-based energy transfer from Southern and Eastern Europe, could present better efficacy instead of subsidizing non-viable domestic sectors – which takes us to the second example. Transition in Syria — a Geoeconomic Game Changer? The Qatar-Turkey pipeline project, sometimes referred to as the "New TurkStream," would connect Qatar’s massive natural gas reserves in the Persian Gulf to European markets through Turkey. This ambitious pipeline could have profound implications for global geopolitics and geoeconomics. This pipeline, if completed, might very well challenge the energy dominance of traditional power players like Russia and Iran. By diversifying Europe's natural gas supply sources, it reduces dependence on Russian energy, aligning with EU and NATO strategies. For Iran, the project represents a loss in influence, particularly as it disrupts its intended pipeline networks through neighboring territories. The pipeline cuts through existing political rivalries that might intensify, especially between the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states and Iran. If realized, the TurkStream 2 pipeline could achieve what decades of European energy policies and diversification strategies have aimed to ensure: reliable access to non-Russian gas sources. Russian responses, such as further exploitation of energy pricing or fostering closer ties with non-European markets, might mitigate some of these losses. However, the emergence of a Gulf-Europe energy corridor would mark a substantial shift in global energy diplomacy by weakening Russia's traditional influence in this sphere. The pipeline's route through war-torn Syria underscores Syria's strategic importance as a conduit for regional projects. However, geopolitical instability in Syria (post-Assad regime) remains a principal factor. The ability of a new government to control its territories and provide a secure environment for prospective investors will be critical. It is worth noting that the earlier rejection of this pipeline by Assad's government (linked to preserving Russian and Iranian interests) reflects how Syria aligns, which could shift fundamentally under a new administration. Hakan Fidan, Turkey's Foreign Minister, has played an instrumental role in engaging with the new leadership in Damascus. His meeting with Ahmed al-Sharaa underscored Turkey’s strategic focus on fostering stability in Syria and aiding the refugee repatriation process. In fact, Fidan's visit symbolizes Turkey's broader regional aspirations. By fostering ties with Syria’s new leadership, Ankara seeks to play a decisive role in the region's reconstruction and power rebalancing. It is hard to overstate the impact Turkish-Syrian relations have on the future plans in the field of energy infrastructure, and therefore, also wider geopolitical development not only in the Middle East, but also in Europe, and globally. (Image: Tony Webster - Black Hills Energy Gas Pipeline - Laramie - Wyoming, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=156599607)  By Jouko Ahvenainen
Asia is rapidly emerging as the global economic powerhouse. Yet, speaking about Asia as a singular entity can be misleading, given the region’s diversity in countries, regimes, and interests. At the recent Horasis Asia Meeting in Dubai, we explored this complexity in a session titled Asia’s Geocentric Future. One resounding conclusion? Geography and numbers still matter. But how will key players like China, India, and the US shape Asia’s future, and which other nations might step into pivotal roles? Let us examine these dynamics. The Rise of RCEP: A Game-Changer for Global Trade? The incorporation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) in 2022 brought together 14 Asian and Pacific nations, representing a staggering 30% of global GDP. This monumental trade pact, which eliminates 90% of internal tariffs, heralds a promising future. But what will the RCEP mean for global trade? How might its interregional trade and knowledge networks influence businesses in Africa, the Gulf, Europe, and the US? On paper, having China, Australia, South Korea, and Japan in the same trade alliance seems ambitious. But add to the mix the growing geopolitical tensions, the influence of Trump’s new administration, the rapid pace of technological and AI advancements, and India’s absence from the pact, and the complexities deepen. Not to mention the evolving role of Central Asia, which remains a wildcard in the region’s future. Is RCEP a Strategic Play by China? For years, the US and Europe have sought to mitigate risks associated with China. A prevailing view in our session was that RCEP might be China’s strategy to anchor Asia closer to itself—recovering business lost to the West and simultaneously making it harder for the West to sever ties. It’s a clever move, showcasing China's long-term thinking. However, skepticism also abounds. The participating RCEP countries are vastly different, with conflicting interests. Australia, for example, is a close ally of the US through agreements like the Five Eyes partnership, while South Korea and Japan often pursue priorities that diverge from China’s. The Trade vs. Security Dilemma One recurring theme was the inextricable link between trade and national security. The current geopolitical climate forces nations to prioritize one over the other. Geography and resources play a critical role. For smaller countries, survival strategies typically fall into one of three categories: 1. Maintaining strong relationships with neighbors, 2. Leveraging superior technology and military capabilities, or 3. Building reliable alliances for protection. This challenge becomes even more pronounced as the US redefines its global role. Under Trump’s administration, the US focus has shifted inward, leaving allies to reconsider their security arrangements — not just at the borders but also across supply chains, logistics routes, and data networks. RCEP’s Real Value: Supply Chains Over Tariffs? Some argue that RCEP is less about creating a true no-tariff economic zone and more about securing regional supply chains to maintain cost-effective production. For example, China heavily relies on components and raw materials from fellow RCEP nations. By solidifying supply chains, RCEP ensures a foundation for economic stability, even amid global disruptions. India’s Role: A Powerhouse in the Making? India holds immense potential as a powerhouse in Asia, though its relationship with China remains, at best, complex. Western nations increasingly view India as a safer and more reliable partner than China. Even Trump has expressed a willingness to collaborate with India and its Prime Minister, Narendra Modi. Still, questions linger about how India’s rising influence will interact with RCEP’s ambitions. Meanwhile, BRICS nations — and those aspiring to join — are exploring ways to reduce US dominance on the global stage. One notable effort involves creating alternatives to the US dollar for global payments. If successful, this could diminish the dollar's power and drastically alter the US’s ability to sustain its fiscal policies through debt. The Fragmented Future of Asia The signs are clear: Asia’s importance to global business is growing. Central Asia, in particular, is emerging as a key player, bolstered by initiatives like the Silk Road projects, which aim to secure safer logistics routes. Meanwhile, the Gulf nations are becoming significant investors in Asia and beyond. However, Asia is far from a unified front. Its fragmentation and internal conflicts make it a fast-changing and highly complex region. As one speaker at Horasis Asia put it, “It’s unwise to talk about Asia as if it shares a singular interest.” Navigating the Complexity For geopolitical experts, these dynamics are challenging enough to analyze. For companies, they’re even harder to navigate. Businesses must assess target markets, supply chains, logistics networks, and production locations, all while contending with local regulations, sanctions, political climates, currency risks, and reputational considerations. As the session highlighted, companies need robust data and predictive analytics tools to succeed in this intricate environment. In a world where the stakes are higher than ever, foresight and adaptability are the keys to thriving in Asia’s fragmented, fast-evolving landscape. Seán McLoughlin (B.Soc.Sc.) is specialized in transatlantic security. Ireland has established itself as a global hub for the ICT sector, serving as a gateway to Europe for many U.S. multinational tech corporations. Its location on the sheltered Western edge of Europe, its EU membership, its highly educated and English-speaking population, and particularly its 12,5% corporate tax rate (foreign multinationals pay a far lower percentage in practice) all make it an attractive location for multinational corporations. Because of these factors, Ireland hosts not only many headquarters of multinational tech corporations, such as Amazon, Alphabet, Apple, Intel, Meta, and Microsoft, but also many data centers serving the global ICT sector. This concentration of multinational tech corporations has spawned a business ecosystem that forms a central component of the Irish economy and makes Ireland a significant transatlantic economic hub. The digital sector is estimated to make up around 13% of Ireland’s GDP and generates significant tax windfalls for the Irish state. Despite its geography as an island on the far-western edge of Europe surrounded by allies, Ireland is not without geopolitical risks for the ICT sector. The Irish, European and transatlantic economies are heavily reliant on the data transferred and hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of digital trade annually conducted through undersea fiber-optic cables connecting the European and North American continents. These cables are vulnerable to sabotage and recent events have shown that hostile actors are not averse to resorting to such measures in their hybrid warfare against the West.  Security of Critical Undersea Infrastructure
Nearly 97% of global communications and internet traffic rely on undersea fiber-optic cables. An estimated 10 trillion dollars’ worth of financial transactions a day are carried out through these cables globally. Almost 75% of these cables in the northern hemisphere pass through or near Irish waters. The importance of these connections extends beyond data flow; they are fundamental to financial markets, international communication, and even national security operations worldwide. This gives Ireland a critical role in maintaining the continuity of global communications and commerce but also exposes it to the threat of sabotage. Disruptions could have devastating consequences, from economic upheaval to military communication breakdowns. Another cause for concern is Ireland’s relatively high energy import dependency. Particularly energy intensive data centers are reliant on a stable supply and price of electricity. In 2022 Ireland imported over 80% of its total primary energy requirement, while over 85% of its total primary energy requirement came from fossil fuels. Disruptions to Ireland’s energy importation, including pipeline gas from the UK, from damage to infrastructure or due to wider European supply issues would pose a serious threat to the country’s ICT sector. Recent years have seen increasing scrutiny of the threat posed by state-backed actors, particularly as Russia has shown a strategic interest in undersea cables. Vessels such as the Russian research ship Yantar, discovered to be loitering off the Irish coast in November 2024 and capable of deploying submersibles to tamper with or even sever cables, exemplify the physical risks. In February 2022 the Russian military proposed to hold major maritime exercises off the south- western coast of Ireland within Ireland’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), an area with a significant cluster of transatlantic telecommunications cables. Russia is known to favor “grey zone” warfare and cultivate capabilities to strike against the infrastructure, institutions and populations of its adversaries while maintaining “plausible deniability”. For example, the Balticconnector sabotage in 2023 and the incidents of sabotage against underwater telecommunications cables in the Baltic Sea in November 2024 by Chinese affiliated vessels highlight the kind of crude acts of hybrid warfare fiber-optic cables in the Irish EEZ could be subjected to. The 2022 Nord Stream 2 sabotage displays the potential for sabotage against undersea energy infrastructure. Undersea cables and other critical infrastructure are relatively easy to damage and risk of immediate detection is low, particularly when operating in Irish waters. Securing undersea cables is a complex task that requires coordination between governments, private industry, and international partners. The legal framework governing undersea infrastructure is ambiguous, particularly in international waters where multiple countries' EEZs intersect. The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) grants states’ rights to maintain infrastructure within their EEZs but does not explicitly address military activities or provide comprehensive protection against hybrid threats. To counter these vulnerabilities, international cooperation is essential. NATO’s establishment of the Critical Undersea Infrastructure Coordination Cell in 2023 aims to map vulnerabilities and enhance cooperation among allies, including public-private partnerships. Such initiatives are critical to developing the situational awareness and technological capabilities necessary to deter hybrid threats. The role of the private sector, which owns and operates much of this infrastructure, is vital in ensuring security standards are met. Ireland is not a member of NATO and, therefore, does not participate directly in NATO's Critical Undersea Infrastructure Coordination Cell. However, Ireland has engaged in initiatives to protect its undersea infrastructure. In May 2024, Ireland joined a European Union mission aimed at safeguarding underwater sea cables from potential threats. This mission involves collaboration with other EU member states to develop capabilities for surveillance, reconnaissance, and response in maritime environments, with completion expected by 2035. Additionally, Ireland has updated its partnership with NATO to include dialogue on undersea infrastructure protection, reflecting a commitment to enhancing the security of its critical maritime assets. Military Capabilities The security risks faced by the Irish ICT sector are accentuated by the fact that the Irish military has suffered decades of chronic underinvestment and the country’s ability to monitor and protect undersea infrastructure is questionable at best. With its outdated and insufficient equipment, a staff retention crisis and military non-alignment, it is not exaggeration to call Ireland Europe’s “soft underbelly” when it comes to national defence. Particularly acute is the personnel shortage in the Irish military, as the total strength of the defence forces has fallen to below 7,500 in 2024. Due to a combination of staffing shortages and technical issues the Irish Naval Service has at times over recent years only been able to deploy one patrol ship at a time in Irish waters. Consisting of only six patrol vessels, with two more being phased in this year, and lacking sonar capabilities, the Irish Naval Service is ill-equipped to police its vast marine territory consisting of hundreds of thousands of square kilometers. As a result, the British defence forces have often stepped in to support the policing of Irish territory, for example in late 2023 when the Royal Navy detected and deterred a Russian submarine near Irish waters. Apart from the Naval Service, the rest of the Irish defence forces also suffers from serious inadequacies. The Irish army has reached record-low personnel numbers this year and Ireland has consistently kept a negligible military budget of 0,2-0,3% GDP over recent years. A significant shortfall of Ireland’s ability to monitor its territory and detect threats is also its lack of a primary radar system. The Irish Air Corps has no combat aircraft and only two maritime patrol aircraft in service, leaving it with extremely limited air space control capacity. Indeed, recognizing these shortfalls and an increasingly hostile international security environment, the Irish government has announced a historic military budget of 1,35 billion euros for 2025. This is part of a larger target of increasing the country’s military spending by 50% by 2028. The Irish government’s plans include improving staff retention and increasing recruitment, purchasing new equipment such as a multi-role naval vessel and transport aircraft and acquiring a primary radar system and subsea monitoring systems. However, these improvements and procurements take time to be implemented and materialize and Ireland has a long way to catch up with most EU states. Other Threats Other geopolitical risks for the ICT sector in Ireland are potential cyber-attacks and espionage operations carried out against institutions or corporations in Ireland. For example, the 2021 cyberattack on Ireland’s Health Service Executive (HSE) by a Russian-linked group highlighted the potential for cybercrime to wreak havoc on critical national infrastructure. Due in part to its military neutrality, Ireland has also been known to be subject to Russian spying and influencing operations conducted primarily through its embassy in Dublin. Ireland’s location on the southern end of the so-called Greenland-Iceland-UK gap, which constitutes a major geostrategic chokepoint for Russian naval entry into the North Atlantic, is also something to be considered. These risks also tie into each other in many ways. Conclusion Particularly Ireland’s neglect of its defence forces’ capabilities and its traditional policy of military neutrality exacerbate the security risks facing the country. Regardless of the November 2024 general election results, political momentum to increase investment in Ireland's defence forces is expected to persist. The deteriorating international security landscape and the conclusions from fresh reports on the state of the Irish military are likely to maintain concern for the capabilities of the nation to monitor and defend its territory and vicinity. However, the traditional Irish policy of military neutrality and non-alignment is likely to remain in the foreseeable future, despite close partnerships with EU and NATO security structures. The developments in Irish security policy and its partnerships with European states and the US are of vital importance to mitigating hard security risks to the global ICT sector Ireland houses. The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this guest article and they do not necessarily reflect the views of the Mission Grey Inc. (Image: TeleGeography - https://www.submarinecablemap.com/, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=132139764) Mission Grey Chairman Jouko Ahvenainen attends the Horasis Asia Meeting 2024. The event is organized in connection with the Global Freight Summit on November 18-19, co-hosted by DP World in Dubai's Expo City, the United Arab Emirates.
Ahvenainen will moderate a panel discussion on Asia's Geocentric Future. The topics cover Asia's geopolitical future, its role in the global economy, regional digital transformation, and sustainability. The special focus will be on the Regional Economic Partnership (RCEP) which has eliminated 90% of internal tariffs between 14 Asian and Pacific nations, representing 30% of the world's GDP. GFS 2024 connects over 5,000 industry leaders from 155+ countries across diverse sectors, providing an opportunity to gain actionable insights on digitalisation, sustainability, and building resilient trade routes. Jouko Ahvenainen is the Chairman of Mission Grey Inc.
Global politics is rarely straightforward. It’s a constant balancing act, with many twists and turns. With Donald Trump’s return and the Republicans winning the Senate, speculation abounds about what lies ahead. While we can’t predict the future, we can consider some insights on what these developments might mean and how to navigate forward. Global politics today isn’t black and white; it’s filled with shades of gray. Understanding the underlying forces is essential. The Challenge of a Two-Party System After following politics for decades, I once believed the two-party system provided voters with clear choices. But in today’s polarized world, I’ve changed my mind. A two-party structure can push parties to extreme positions, even as the world needs more consensus and compromise. What’s surprising is that there isn’t a natural force driving both parties toward the center to appeal to a wider base. Instead, parties seem to retreat further into their corners. A similar trend is seen in the UK: Tony Blair’s centrist approach took advantage of a Conservative party that had shifted too far right. When David Cameron moved the Conservatives back toward the center, Labour drifted left, losing power in 2010. Labour then swung far left under Jeremy Corbyn, leading to a major Conservative win under Boris Johnson. It was only under Keir Starmer’s centrist approach that Labour regained traction, while the Conservatives once again moved to the right, experiencing historical losses. The U.S. has followed a similar pattern, with the Democrats potentially alienating centrist voters with ideological approaches. Analyzing the strategies and behavior of two-party systems could shed light on their impact on political shifts. At the very least, it’s clear that these systems can produce rapid shifts, requiring us to stay prepared for swift changes. Economic Perspectives: Short- and Long-Term Implications The short-term economic outlook may appear positive: the Republicans’ influence typically signals lower taxes, less regulation, and reduced additional costs, especially in the U.S. For other countries, trade wars and tariffs will likely shape their focus on competitiveness and international trade agreements. However, longer-term economic risks loom. Trade wars, protectionism, and geoeconomic instability pose threats to sustainable growth. National security concerns, and even the possibility of conflicts, add further complications. While these trends are not new, they’re certainly accelerating. The question is whether we can foster a positive shift globally or if things will worsen before they improve. In the evolving economy, AI and technology development are key. Countries that lag in these areas will face economic challenges, and it will also be a security risk, as technology increasingly underpins defense capabilities. Nations with outdated strategies might struggle, as technological competitiveness becomes crucial. Geopolitical Tensions: Ukraine, China, and Beyond Two major issues dominate the geopolitical landscape: the war in Ukraine and the ongoing U.S.-China tension. These aren’t just isolated conflicts; due to global alignments, they influence almost every country. And it’s not a simple division into two camps — many countries remain in the gray zone, particularly among the BRICS and Global South nations. Currently, the conflict in Ukraine is at a standstill. For Ukraine, support from allies is crucial, yet even with assistance, completely neutralizing the Russian threat is unlikely. Russia will remain a factor, and the challenge will be managing this persistent presence. Ukraine might eventually need to prioritize either further integration with the West or holding on to all its territories; a tough choice, yet common in international politics. Similarly, the U.S.-China relationship impacts global influence. Should the U.S. adopt a more isolationist stance, it leaves room for China to expand its influence in regions like Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In the Middle East, Israel continues to strengthen ties with certain Arab nations, including Saudi Arabia, in hopes of isolating Iran and perhaps advancing a regime change in Tehran. These complexities remind us there are no easy answers. Today’s political landscape demands careful navigation through countless variables. Strategies for Navigating a Complex World Governments and businesses alike need strategies to avoid risks, thrive, and make sound decisions in this intricate global landscape. There are no easy answers or straight paths. Success requires gathering the right information, understanding critical forces, and making informed choices in near real-time. Fortunately, more information is available than ever. The challenge now lies in pinpointing relevant data, analyzing it, and making actionable decisions. This is where artificial intelligence plays a pivotal role. In today’s environment, AI is no longer optional; it’s essential for success. AI helps gather and analyze large volumes of data quickly, enables better decision-making, and continuously monitors changes 24/7. Mission Grey offers an AI-driven solution that excels in understanding geoeconomics, geopolitics, and the business environment, all with unprecedented speed and accuracy. It’s a tool worth exploring for anyone looking to navigate today’s challenges. Juha Särestöniemi has over 30 years of experience in various roles in the ICT sector. He currently focuses on data management and Enterprise Resource Planning systems.  Artificial Intelligence (AI) has gained widespread attention due to its expanding applications. Many of those are highly useful and contribute to its growing popularity. The more information AI gets, the better it becomes.
However, AI is not only useful but, in some cases, may also be dangerous. This text will focus on real, everyday data concerns AI presents for users, not on extreme scenarios. What should the users be concerned about when using AI tools? There are at least seven risks to take into account. 1. Misinformation and Accuracy AI can sometimes provide inaccurate or misleading information, especially if it doesn’t fully understand the context or if the information it’s trained on is incomplete or outdated. Over-reliance on AI for critical decisions without verification can lead to mistakes. Applications like ChatGPT are extremely good in summarizing and simplifying many topics. That is done by feeding it data, from which it creates the summary. The accuracy of the summarized information depends mostly on the data fed to ChatGPT. However, when one asks questions to which the AI application searches for the data on its own, it relies solely on the data it finds and creates the summary of that. It believes the data to be accurate and, too often does not even give any indication of potential inaccuracies. It means the responsibility of the verification is on the user – who should be aware of it. Therefore, my recommendation is not to use general AI tools for topics in which the users have zero expertise. That is why we need domain specific AI tools. 2. Bias and fairness AI systems are trained on large datasets. If those datasets contain biased information (regarding race, gender, culture, etc.), the AI can perpetuate or even amplify those biases. This can result in unfair treatment or discrimination in areas like hiring, law enforcement, or healthcare. All publicly available AI systems are owned by large US corporations. Most likely some governments have systems of their own, but they are not widely available. How are the rules of the publicly available systems created and what limits are built in for data usage or output? This is mostly unknown. Thus, AI is not to be used for oversimplified questions and the answers given by it should be carefully considered. 3. Privacy and data security AI systems often require a large amount of data to function effectively. There is a risk that sensitive personal information could be misused, mishandled, or exposed through vulnerabilities. Users need to be cautious about what data they share with AI services. Companies providing AI applications are not doing that for the common good, but trying to make profit and find business models for AI usage. When using the systems for free (and perhaps even when paying for it), the users give their most valuable asset for improving the AI: their data. This should be considered before every query for any AI. Since it is often impossible to know how the data is processed and stored by the AI application provider, one should be extremely cautious in inserting any sensitive data into the system. Once the data is collected, the lines around who owns user data are often blurred. It is processed by AI in data lakes, especially since users often don’t fully understand the extent of the data they’re providing. This raises ethical questions about their rights and consent. 4. Unawareness of AI Sometimes users interact with AI without their knowledge or consent, like in the cases of… 1. Massive Data Aggregation: Tech companies like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook have extensive “data lakes” where they gather enormous volumes of user data, often in ways not entirely transparent. This data can include browsing habits, search queries, location history, and social interactions. AI algorithms then analyze the data to improve services or create targeted ads, often without the user realizing how their data is being used. 2. Predictive Profiling: Without clear user consent, AI algorithms may create detailed profiles of user preferences, habits, and even psychological characteristics. These profiles may be used to anticipate behavior, which can feel invasive and potentially manipulative. 3. Influencing User Behavior: AI can track and predict user behavior to create a highly personalized experience, such as tailoring content feeds, ads, and recommendations. However, it can also lead to nudging where AI subtly influences decision-making and behavior. For instance, AI-curated news feeds can amplify particular topics, reinforcing specific viewpoints or behaviors that align with the company’s goals. 5. Legal and ethical concerns AI can be used in ways that raise ethical issues, such as in surveillance, deep fakes, or even autonomous weapons. The lack of clear regulation or ethical guidelines in some areas means AI could be misused in ways that harm society or individuals. AI algorithms have been instrumental in distributing political content, often without users knowing the selection criteria. This can intensify political polarization by showing users content that aligns with their existing beliefs, often called the “echo chamber” effect. Many jurisdictions don’t address AI’s unique challenges, meaning there may not be a clear legal path to hold anyone accountable for AI’s actions. Without specific legislation, holding developers or companies responsible is complicated. Even if developers attempt to make their AI secure, it’s nearly impossible to account for all potential attacks. This means that, in practice, accountability is often not clear-cut, and harm can occur with no party being fully accountable. 6. Lack of accountability When AI systems make decisions (especially in high-stakes fields like law, healthcare, or finance), it can be difficult to hold anyone accountable if things go wrong. Determining who is responsible for an AI’s actions (the developers, the users, or the AI itself) is a complex issue that hasn’t been fully addressed. AI systems, despite their capabilities, are not moral agents. They don’t make decisions based on ethics or intentions but rather on patterns and algorithms. This complicates accountability because AI can’t be held morally responsible in the way humans can. There is an ongoing debate about whether AI should have any degree of legal “personhood,” but without that, accountability remains with the people and entities that create and deploy AI. 7. Loss of human connection could lead to decreased critical thinking As AI becomes more integrated into everyday tasks from customer service to social interactions, there is a risk of reducing human-to-human connections. Over-reliance on AI in these areas could lead to a loss of empathy, social skills, and personal touch in communication. AI can also create bubbles by curating information to match users’ preferences. While this keeps users engaged, it may also limit exposure to diverse viewpoints, discouraging critical thinking and nuanced understanding of complex issues. AI is increasingly integrated into services that make or heavily influence decisions, such as financial recommendations, credit evaluations, and hiring algorithms. Users may not be aware that AI has influenced or even made certain decisions on their behalf, which reduces their control over these outcomes. Conclusions Understanding the risks mentioned above allows us to use AI more responsibly. Developers and users need to approach AI with caution, ensuring transparency, fairness, and ethics in its use. Regulations and guidelines are also evolving to help manage these risks. When using AI systems, it should be kept in mind that the most important asset the users have is their data. Over a longer period, different data systems can gather information to create a profile of a person or a company. It may include all photos, texts, searches, etc. stored in cloud platforms, even sensitive and confidential ones. AI applications are extremely useful and powerful tools with huge potential, especially in handling exponentially growing amounts of data. By understanding the risks of AI, we are more capable of using AI safely and avoiding potential problems arising from the use. Despite the ever-growing amount of data users and companies have, it's good to remember its value. Don’t reveal everything. Although one can mitigate all the risks, in the end, there is no AI tool without at least some potential problems. But life, business, and entrepreneurship are about taking risks one can bear. By the way: can AI define a universally tolerable risk level? No. That is something you have to decide yourself. The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this guest article and they do not necessarily reflect the views of Mission Grey Inc. Mission Grey Inc. is committed to mitigating the problems mentioned in the text by relying on its team with strong interdisciplinary expertise in data science, programming, economics, international relations, and social sciences. (Image: David S. Soriano - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=125089281)  This year, Mission Grey participates in the Deutsche-Finnisches Business Forum.
The event, organized by AHK Finnland in Düsseldorf on October 30, 2024, is focused on energy transition and the prospect of an emerging post-fossil world. Mission Grey's AI tools help companies and decision-makers understand geoeconomic and geopolitical dimensions of energy production and global energy trade, enabling better business risk-management and more sustainable policies than ever before.  By Toni Stenström The author studied international relations, Slavic languages, and Russian and East European Studies at the University of Helsinki from 2012 to 2019. He has worked in diplomatic missions in Russia, Ukraine, and Poland. In 2024, his book about Belarusian history was published by German academic publishing house Ibidem. Józef Piłsudski, the Marshal of Poland from the early 20th century, had a dream of a Pan-European alliance spanning from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea. He believed only a strong block of nations, sandwiched between Germany and Russia, could guarantee peace and stability in a post-WWI Eastern Europe. His plan failed due to the Polish-Soviet War in 1919–1921, but a hundred years later, we are closer than ever to realizing a new Commonwealth of Nations, also known as Intermarium. With the accession of Finland and Sweden in NATO in 2023–2024, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization controls almost the entire Baltic Sea, excluding the coasts of the Russian Kaliningrad Oblast and St. Petersburg. The Black Sea states of Romania, Bulgaria, and Turkey are also members of the alliance, and an active war is being fought for the futures of Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, and Moldova. In the event of a Ukrainian victory and the country's successful integration into NATO, Pilsudski's dream might finally come true in the form of a modern Intermarium Alliance. During the full-scale war in Ukraine, Poland has become one of the most important logistical and strategic hubs of Europe's contemporary security architecture. In 2024, Poland spends over 4,12% of its GDP on national defense, making it NATO’s biggest defense spender as proportion of GDP.  Unlike in most of Europe, Poland's economic growth was uninterrupted even during the Great Recession of 2008, and its salary level is projected to reach Western European standards by the mid-2030s. Millions of Ukrainian refugees, as well as thousands of political dissidents from Belarus and Russia, have also found a new home in the country during the first half of the 2020s, turning Poland's demographic growth upwards.
In the 1920s, Piłsudski's Poland succeeded in forming a smaller alliance with France and Romania. During the War in Ukraine, the same countries have proven loyal allies to the Ukrainians, with Emmanuel Macron playing with the idea of sending French ground forces to Western Ukraine. Romania, on its part, has built a 450-kilometer-long Autostrada Moldovei from its capital city of Bucharest to the Ukrainian border in Bukovina. In the future, the highway could be linked to the Polish E40 highway via Western Ukraine, creating a new trade corridor from Central Europe to the Balkans. With the accession of Romania to the Schengen zone, much of Europe's maritime trade will also be diverted to its port of Constanța. If Moldova and Georgia manage to keep their orientation towards the West, and a regime change in Belarus detaches the country from its alliance with Russia, the long shadow of the old Soviet empire may finally disappear from the map of Eastern Europe. Yet, the greatest battles are being fought exactly where they were a hundred years ago – the Wild Fields of Ukraine. As Piłsudski allegedly said, “There is no free Ukraine without an independent Poland, and there is no free Poland without an independent Ukraine.” As we move towards 2025, we will see if Europe has learned its lesson from the past. The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this guest article and they do not necessarily reflect the views of the Mission Grey Inc. (Image: By GalaxMaps - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=91974044) By Bijan Rezai Jahromi
The author is a Persian-Finnish journalist and an expert on Middle East politics holding an MSSc (University of Helsinki). As the protests against theocracy in Iran continue, signs of civil disobedience are becoming clearer every day. The regime is struggling with legitimacy issues and fears a possible Israeli strike on Iran. The de facto leader of the Islamic Republic, Ali Khamenei, is trying to set his son, Mojtaba, to succeed him. Previously, Mojtaba played a significant role in suppressing the revolutions of 2009 and 2022. Today, one dollar is equivalent to about 66,000 local Iranian currency units – a stark contrast to the one-to-seven ratio of 1979. In a country ruled by one of the most corrupt political systems in the world, investing is not worthwhile, as there is no functioning market economy. A glaring example is that in today’s Iran, bankruptcy may give one a life sentence. At the same time, ayatollahs are exempt from paying taxes altogether. This resembles medieval Europe, where the clergy had privileges a common man – not to mention a woman – could only dream about. Let’s investigate another interesting figure. Mehdi Karroubi served as the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament (Majlis) from 1989 to 1992 and from 2000 to 2004. He ran for President in the 2009 election, after which he was placed under house arrest for not accepting President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's victory. The election was most likely fraudulent. At the time, Karroubi estimated that sixty percent of Iran's imports occurred on the black market, organized by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – and this evaluation comes from a person who was very much part of the official system, not real opposition. Iran's Potential On the other hand, Iran has a huge economic, political, and military potential. The country possesses the world’s second-largest gas and oil reserves and, after Chile, the second-largest lithium reserve. Additionally, Iran is more favorable for solar energy than Australia, where practically all energy comes from the sun. Of Iran's 90 million people, fifty percent are under the age of 32. Thus, there is enough working-age population for decades – even despite low birth rates and skyrocketing divorce rates caused by the current situation. As Iran is situated between East and West, the country can supply energy to both India and Europe, benefiting everyone – especially in the current situation as Vladimir Putin's Russia is hostile towards the West. A secular Iran would also, in all likelihood, engage in economic cooperation with Central Asian countries and Israel. It has even been suggested that in the future, Iran and Israel might form a defense pact. Jews and Persians could return to the old doctrine created by Cyrus the Great 2,500 years ago when he freed the Jews from the shackles of Babylon. Outstanding Opportunities It is important to remember that the 1979 revolution took a year before the Shah and his family left the country in January 1979. If successful, the new Iranian revolution will cause a domino-like fall of regimes in the Middle East, forcing countries like Saudi Arabia or Turkey to review their policies and make reforms as well. It is crucial that Western countries, led by the United States, do not dictate Iran's future form of government. There is currently a monarchist sentiment in Iran, and after all, Iran has 2,500 years of experience with monarchy. As Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi (Reza Shah II) has pointed out, a referendum must be held on the form of government. After 2001, the United States dictated that Afghanistan should become a republic with weak leaders and no traditions, which ultimately led to the rise of the Taliban. The future of the Middle East could lean heavily on constitutional monarchy and secularism, bringing global economic and societal benefits. Most importantly, the unholy alliance between China, Russia, and Iran's Islamic Republic would end. Russia and China would lose their influence in the Middle East, while the regional markets would open up to the Western countries. Of course, future Iran and the Middle East will not bow to the West, but the values will be similar if the mutual relationship is based on a healthy foundation. In Tehran, the world’s largest feminist revolution is underway, and many Western feminists are hesitant to support this movement enough, as they view the burning of headscarves as an Islamophobic act. The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this guest article and they do not necessarily reflect the views of the Mission Grey Inc. 10/18/2024 Staying Ahead of the Game: Essential Strategies for Global Supply Chains in a Tense Geopolitical LandscapeRead Now  Staying Ahead of the Game: Essential Strategies for Global Supply Chains in a Tense Geopolitical LandscapeThe global landscape is in constant flux, creating new opportunities and challenges for businesses with international supply chains. Geopolitical tensions, economic shifts, and unforeseen events can significantly impact operations, making it crucial for companies to adopt proactive strategies to ensure resilience and maintain a competitive edge. This requires a comprehensive approach that considers various factors and integrates risk mitigation into the core of supply chain management.
Understanding and Assessing the Risks A crucial first step is to thoroughly understand the specific risks your supply chain faces. This involves identifying potential disruptions stemming from political instability, trade wars, natural disasters, and other global events. Consider the geographical locations of your suppliers and manufacturing facilities. Are they located in politically volatile regions? Are they susceptible to extreme weather events? A comprehensive risk assessment should analyze these factors and evaluate their potential impact on your business. Diversification: Don't Put All Your Eggs in One Basket Over-reliance on a single supplier or region can create significant vulnerabilities. Diversifying your supplier base across multiple geographic locations can mitigate the impact of disruptions. If one region experiences political unrest or a natural disaster, you can rely on suppliers in other areas to maintain business continuity. This strategy requires careful planning and the development of strong relationships with a network of reliable suppliers. Building Strong Supplier Relationships: Collaboration is Key Open communication and collaboration with your suppliers are essential for effective risk management. Regularly engage with your suppliers to understand their challenges and assess their own risk mitigation strategies. Strong partnerships enable information sharing and joint problem-solving, fostering a more resilient and responsive supply chain. Consider implementing shared platforms and technologies to enhance communication and data visibility across your network. Scenario Planning: Preparing for the Unexpected While predicting the future is impossible, scenario planning can help you prepare for a range of potential disruptions. By modeling different scenarios, such as a sudden increase in tariffs or a major natural disaster, you can develop contingency plans to mitigate the impact on your operations. This proactive approach allows you to anticipate challenges and develop strategies to maintain business continuity in the face of uncertainty. Staying Informed: Keeping Your Finger on the Pulse In today's rapidly changing world, staying informed about global events and trends is crucial. Monitoring geopolitical developments, economic indicators, and industry news can provide early warning signs of potential disruptions. This allows you to proactively adjust your strategies and mitigate the impact on your supply chains. Leveraging Mission Grey for Enhanced Visibility and Agility Mission Grey's AI-native platform provides powerful tools to enhance visibility, improve decision-making, and increase agility within your supply chain, especially valuable in a volatile geopolitical environment. Here's how:
By leveraging Mission Grey's advanced analytics and real-time insights, you can gain a deeper understanding of the risks facing your supply chain and make informed decisions to ensure business continuity and maintain a competitive edge in today's dynamic global landscape. |
RSS Feed
|
Follow us on:
|
Mission Grey Application:
|
5.0 out of 5 stars in G2:
|
